Do you mean operating "virtually" rather than in the tangible world?
Originally Posted by keithwms
Wow,that's a bit of a tough one. I had to think about it!
Let's look at the EOS-1V. I have one, and I have a few DSLRs. The true advantage of buying a 1V today, assuming you buy used, is price-performance. For $400 you get a full-frame camera that can use all of Canon's EF lenses and EOS flashes. You can certainly equal the image quality of a 1V with even low-end DSLRs so it's not that, assuming you could live with a crop-sensored camera, but you'd not get a robust body that can take punishment and still keep working. To get the equivalent build quality in a DSLR you'd spend 12x as much, minimum.
Any argument about "film" fails in that you can buy a much less expensive camera than a 1V and record superb images. You asked why one would buy a 1V or F6, not why one would chose film.
In life you only get one great dog, one great car, and one great woman. Pet the dog. Drive the car. Make love to the woman. Don't mix them up.
Unfortunately, that isn't my experience. There is a scary level of faith that the computer and the web can answer anything. If Apollo 13 had happened to this generation....
Originally Posted by mr rusty
Sure there are exceptions, but on the whole, virtual education has taken away many necessary hands-on experiences, because computerized education is a lot less expensive. There is growing objection to computer/web-only instruction, but I'm afraid it'll take a long time for people to realize what their kids are missing. Maybe when we start buying our spacecraft and nuclear reactors from China.... in ten years or so....
My main fear is that the virtual world lacks many of the complexities and nuances of reality and thus students simply aren't prepared for them. Intuition is something that can really atrophy if it isn't exercised daily!
Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw
Folks, the OP explicitly wasn't asking "why film rather than digital", but "why a spiffy bell-and-whistleful film SLR rather than some other film camera". I assume we all agree that there are lots of reasons to shoot film!
Last edited by ntenny; 06-08-2010 at 03:09 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: misstatement of original question (ironically enough)
San Diego, CA, USA
The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
-The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Maybe I didn't make myself clear earlier:
I choose to use my F5 specifically because it uses film. It also has features that I desire in a hand camera, the combination of which, I cannot find in any other model in the Nikon line, save maybe the F6, which is a bit out of my price range. The F100 might also be an option, but it too, is a "bell-and-whistleful" SLR.
My question (again) is, why not use one? If you desire a camera that will use all of Nikon's current lenses (even the G-series), then you're pretty much stuck with all the bells and whistles. The same (to a degree) is true of Canon's lineup. Considering you can get a 1N for $200 and a 1V for $500, why not spring for something rugged and responsive?
You can destroy negatives in a fire or with scissors
you can destroy image files with data corruption or deletion
Last edited by TheSohnly; 06-08-2010 at 09:11 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: sandbags are useful for stopping flooding
Toledo Camera Trader and photojournalist
The OP certainly did ask "Why a film SLR over a DSLR?"
Specifically: "But what advantages, if any, would one choose to shoot a late-model full-featured film SLR over the d-word equivalent?"
Hence my answer: "Film. It gives me a physical image, not a computer file comprised of 1s and 0s."
You can't ask why someone chooses a film SLR over a DSLR and demand that the principal differentiating feature be excluded from the conversation.
Ok, I gotcha this time :-)
Originally Posted by ntenny
I love most of the advanced features of my EOS 1v SLR and my DSLR's too...making the switching from one body to the other easy.
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.
Yes! That's what I was asking. Shooting film goes without saying. It's the reasons for shooting the particular sub-category of camera I'm curious about. I'm trying to imagine a digital-born-and-raised photographer who says "hmm, film…I want to try it." There are so many reasons to shoot film, and different cameras fit those different needs. I was having trouble (less so now, after lots of good replies) imagining that newbie selecting a modern SLR as his/her "film exposing device". I had been thinking the leap from digital to film must be based on a rejection of the entire digital experience, which in many ways is super-automated. This of course was due to my limited thinking.
Originally Posted by ntenny
OT but worth a mention: free film giveaway here. http://www.camerasandfilm.com/archives/169