There's a lot of emotion in this thread, and much I can relate to.
But there's a lot of concrete reasons why film kicks ass. I can go on eBay with $100 or $200 and come back with a damn treasure trove of 35mm rangefinders with faster-than-f/2 lenses, Mamiya TLRs, and tack-sharp Minolta Rokkor-X lenses. The rangefinder is quieter, quicker, and shoots in lower light than any compact digi (load up Neopan 1600 in it and, if you can see it, you can shoot it), the Mamiya TLR gives better quality than any DSLR, and the Rokkor-X lenses give L glass a run for its money. Plus, I don't have to worry about my sensor being shit, or having poor dynamic range, or lots of noise... I can just buy a different film and see what suits me.
Film is just more fun, especially if you enjoy the process at ALL. I'm way more excited carrying Neopan 1600, Tri-X, Efke 25, Ektar 100 and Superia 400 than a digital because there's just so many possibilities there. Don't even get me started on doing your own developing and the flexibility there!
Last month I was in England for a week. My wife and son had digital p&s cameras. I had a Konica FT-1 with six lenses. I shot nine rolls of slide film and about five rolls of print film. The whole time I was there the only other person I saw with a film camera was someone with a disposable camera at Windsor Castle. What about Stonehenge, the London Eye, Big Ben, the Gherkin building, a boat ride on the Thames, Picadilly Circus, Trafalgar Square, the Tower Of London, the Royal Gardens at Kew, the Tower Bridge, St. Paul's church, Winchester Cathedral, Buckingham Palace? No film cameras in sight.
This week I got the following in for repair: (2) OM-1, OM-1N, OM-3, (2) OM-4Ti, 35sp. People still love their OMs. John
Originally Posted by dynachrome
Could be mixing with tourists...eh
But I don't see many people with film cameras anymore.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by clayne
Good morning, Clayne;
It is nice to see that someone still thinks that cars are repairable. I can agree with you to a degree or limit.
In my experience in recent years, the automobile mechanics seem to be favoring "modular replacement" rather than "repair." If the field brushes in your alternator wear down, they replace the entire alternator; they do not repair the problem.
I admit that being an automobile "mechanic" is really not truly accurate with the modern cars. Now it seems that you must find an electronics technician with mechanical aptitude to keep the modern electronic whiz-bang carriages operational.
This concept of modular replacement is not limited to cars. In the traffic signal maintenance community, the trend seems to have become to favor modular replacement also, up to the point where entire repairable controllers using plug-in printed circuit boards are being thrown out, due in part to the recent technician's lack of understanding of why the controller works. I would have thought that they would at least try plugging in a spare printed circuit board, but the concept of "maintenance" seems to have achieved an unfathomable nadir.
Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington
When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."
What it feels like to me is a war on the "craftsman." Big business knows it costs money to employ people who have to use a brain to resolve issues. Rather than employ craftspeople and REAL technicians/engineers, they'd much rather pay cut-rate prices for robots to go out and swap things out. The heap of trash following it costs less to deal with than repairing things the "old" way.
Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.
Clayne, I would agree with you there. I believe we could all point out these instances in our line of work. Since I deal with health - did you see the latest in the news about Americans and Anti-depressants? We're up to 27million folks buying 194 million prescriptions for this crap to the tune of $9 billion every year! That's 1 out of every 10 people you see driving by...on anti-depressant drugs. Why fix up their (apparently lacking) life when they can just pop a pill? This quick-fix mentality drives me crazy.
It's only when the pills "quit working" that they realize they need to look at CAUSE and EFFECT and that's when I see them.
It seems so similar in every aspect of our modern society. I remember a few years back, I had a lovely Maxxum 7. It had an incident and needed a rear control wheel servicing. Would have cost more to fix it than buy a new camera! I believe it was at that point that I remembered the simplicity and wonderful feel of the old manual Minolta bodies. I now shoot with an XD-11 & Rokkor glass again, and I'm loving it. :-)
I was down Portsmouth Historic Naval Dockyard last weekend and saw two other people using film cameras. Everyone else was digital with around a 70/30 split between compacts & DSLR's. I didn't get any strange looks walking around with my Nikon F3 & bag of primes. If anyone had came up to me extolling the superiority of digital, my answer would have been something along the lines of "It gets worse, not only am I using film, I am shooting Kodachrome 64 which is going to have to be sent to the other side of the World to get developed" and see what the answer to that would have been
Am planning to go into London soon with my Nikon F and Eyelevel finder and invite some strange looks whilst I am taking readings with my lightmeter
It's my hobby & I can do it the way I want. I do have a digital compact and it serves a purpose, but for fun, film & an old manual focus camera is my choice.
I'm not sure if I already said this (9 pages of thread is a lot). I did do some night photography, long exposures of 20mins plus, all because digital cameras cannot do it, at least the Sony / Minolta's cannot, and I assume the same with Nikons; they get a pink haze in one corner of the image form, and I have no idea why. It happens at iso3200 and even at iso100. So, I went shooting fireflies, and found a guy with his Nikon film (not sure which model) doing the same thing. Apparently he said that digital couldn't do what he wanted, either. Since my Japanese isn't that good, that's all I understood.
The other day I saw a 5mp scanner for 14,000 yen (about USD$150). The mega pixel count isn't high, but for showing on places like Photo.Net it's plenty. But, if you did get your negetives scanned for professional online delivery (say, via PhotoShelter), what would be the maximum file sizes you might expect?