Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,712   Posts: 1,483,010   Online: 771
      
Page 13 of 21 FirstFirst ... 378910111213141516171819 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 205

Thread: 35mm SLR - why?

  1. #121
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,458
    Hmmm... rippo..rippo..... weren't you one of those other Marx Brothers?
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  2. #122

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    142
    Yes, I was the one who got told he had 'a face for radio'.

  3. #123

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Tasmania, Australia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    94
    I got my Canon EOS RT for $80.
    I can't get a DSLR for that money that comes anywhere near the image quality that I can get out of the RT with decent slide film.
    If (probably when) I get a DSLR I want full frame sensor and I want it to be as durable mechanically as a film camera, so for me that pretty much means I will be saving up for a EOS 5D or similar.
    Unless I blow the money on a Hasselblad or a Mamiya RB67 or something like that first...

    I use the RT a lot, usually loaded with slide. At the same time it just cannot give the tactile feel and satisfaction of use that I get out of my older manual focus stuff, but it brings home the results film after film after film, so I can't argue with it.
    If I had a DSLR I would use it for sure, but I love burning film so I would still use my film cameras, all of them, on a regular basis.

  4. #124
    Andrew Horodysky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    If you're asking specifically about late-model, auto-everything, bells-and-whistles SLRs, I agree that they're more similar to DSLRs than different---the main difference is in the recording medium rather than the user experience.

    More generally, I think the answer is just that some outstanding cameras have been made in the 35mm SLR format; no wonder considering its popularity. I find myself shooting my AE-1 a lot simply because it's an elegant camera in use, not because it's an SLR per se.

    -NT
    Exactly. My AE-1 finally reached it's end-of-life in the beginning of this year (I bought it with money I earned from a summer job in 1978). I now use an F-1N.

  5. #125

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    128
    I like both actually, using digital and film, but to me they're often very different experiences. First off I don't have a very good digital. My Fuji it's okay, upscale for a point and shoot but I have more in terms of lenses with my traditional gear at this point than I do the digital. That means as a learning tool my traditional gear is actually better. When I can afford a DSLR that will level out a lot and I will likely be shooting more with the DSLR and using some of my older lenses on that camera, but for right now I still need the fully manual settings and the good lenses to learn. Also, I just plain enjoy using film now and again. I'm a Pentax fan and my old Spottie is my favorite camera, period. There's something about the feel of that camera and using those lenses that actually feels better to me than my digital.

    I tend to like old things in general. When it comes to film SLR's most of my gear is from the 50's through the 70's. I like old cars. I also sew on a sewing machine that's from the 1940's so maybe it's just that too, liking old things. I'm not really a huge fan of plastic cameras. I tend like the weight and quality of something a bit older.

  6. #126
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California & Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,635
    Quote Originally Posted by derwent View Post
    Unless I blow the money on a Hasselblad or a Mamiya RB67 or something like that first...

    For less than the price of the top of the line Nikon or Canon digi-snapper and lens [~$8k] I purchased:
    • Nikon N-75
    • Nikon F-100
    • Nikon AF 28mm - 200m zoom
    • Nikon AF 20mm - 25mm zoom
    • Tamron AF 28mm - 300mm zoom
    • Nikon SB-800 strobe
    • Voightlander Vito II [35mm folder]
    • Certo Dolly SuperSport 120 folder with a Zeiss lens
    • Hasselblad 503 CX
    • Hasselblad CF 50mm lens
    • Hasselblad CF 80mm lens
    • Hasselblad CF 150mm lens
    • Hasselblad CF 250mm lens
    • Four Hasselblad extension tubes
    • A collection of Hasselblad filters
    • Hasselblad 2x extender
    • Hasselblad 903 SWC
    • 1919 Rotation Back Auto Graflex with 7 inch lens
    • Omega Chromega 5D-XL enlarger
    • Rodenstock 50mm enlarging lens
    • Rodenstock 80mm enlarging lens
    • 135mm enlarging lens
    • Arkey 26" wide drum print dryer
    • Various pieces of darkroom equipment
    and I still have money left over!

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  7. #127
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Naples View Post
    No.

    But I can see the images on my film negatives and transparencies. They're there.

    And I can't see any images on or in my RAW, jpg, or tif computer files. They're not there.

    NM.
    Your argumments are a tempest in a teapot....you are a rebel without a cause ;-)

    You write what you write, yet there are thousands of old timer film shooters that have successfully added digital photography to their toolbox and are making awesome images that way.

    Go ahead, fight your windmills Don Quixote.... :-)
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  8. #128
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,458
    Quote Originally Posted by magkelly View Post
    I tend like the weight and quality of something a bit older.
    Now if I can get some of the women around where I live to think the same way...except the quality part...
    Last edited by lxdude; 06-15-2010 at 08:52 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  9. #129
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    We obviously have different criteria for judging our images, and different ideas of what looks good.

    It is as simple as this: I have my criteria for what I want from an "imaging system. Right now, digital is nowhere close to meeting my criteria," while film meets them (because it has, in fact defined them). When digital meets them, and does it affordably and enjoyably, I will switch.

    ...and any gallery owner or publisher I want to deal with will feel exactly the same way, or I won't deal with them. I am not going to be a slave to what gallery owners or publishers want. It should go the other way, in fact. They pick you because they want to sell your pictures; because they fit in to their gallery, and they believe they can make money. You don't change your work to be what they want. They represent/publish you because they think your work as it is can make them money. At the very least, most will understand and respect my views, even if they do not hold them.

    I am not interested in having anything better than the results I get from film, in the photo rag definition of better. I am interested in having these film results, exactly. In fact, these results are what causes me to shoot film. Most people in this day and age just do not get this point of view. They feel that the technology available should constantly redefine what one wants. Certainly, technology available can have a huge impact on what one wants, as it did with me, learning on film. I'd probably want different things if I was born and bred on digital. However, I cannot so easily redefine my aesthetic preferences when new technology comes along, nor should I be expected or forced to. So, I like what I get from film. It is perfect for me and for my work. SO, when digital can give me exactly what I get from film, and the equipment is as affordable as is film equipment, and the equipment will last me 20 to 30 years after I buy it (I refuse to treat cameras - or anything, for that matter - as disposable consumer electronics as apposed to high-quality, long-lasting, serviceable tools.), and all of my old cameras are broken and all the people who know how to repair them are dead, and film stops being made, then digital will be my primary way of taking pix. Till then, I will not be holding my breath. I will just shoot what I have until I feel that there is something that exceeds it in all respects.

    In the commercial world, what clients want is almost totally defined by the technology that is available, as opposed to actual aesthetics. Therefore, it is no surprise that film is all but gone from the commercial world. The sad thing is that artists don't spend enough money alone to support the market, so a whole bunch of great materials went out the door when commercial work went digital. The only way to keep film alive, IMHO, is for it to have a BIG resurgence in commercial work. Artists have always largely been forced to use the materials that the commercial world makes available, and it is no different with photography.
    You have somehow lost your way, friend. You think it's about the medium.

    It's about the picture!

    It's the composition, and if the comp is heart moving, who cares what the medium is?

    It's the Picture.

    Pick Ture!
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  10. #130
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,921
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverGlow View Post
    You have somehow lost your way, friend. You think it's about the medium.

    It's about the picture!

    It's the composition, and if the comp is heart moving, who cares what the medium is?

    It's the Picture.

    Pick Ture!

    Did you even read what he wrote?



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin