Well, i feel shy or ashamed to say that i went to film only because of digital, how? Well, i started with digital SLR-like camera[point and shoot], then upgraded to DSLR, i was quit happy with DSLR until got some pro cameras then never looked back and my photography skill improved gradually.
Then by sudden, i bought digital medium format, this changed my view, because of it i was asking myself: If this is the quality or power of digital MF, how is it with film MF or LF then, from there i started to read more about film and then bought MF first then LF later only and no 35mm film at all.
To me, i can use both at high level of skill, i wasted many rolls as well trying to get used and understand film world, i am able to buy 100 rolls to just shoot for tests, but then i know that even with my digital i try not to shot over 200 shots for a scene, i only shoot over 200 in sports only because that is the field where the actions come as a factor, even with that i learnt about timings, but when i came to think about it, why in the HELL i buy a camera that expensive capable of 8-10+ fps and i must shoot at 1-2 fps? I bought it for sports mostly or mainly then i must use this feature, if i shoot landscape with digital i take long time to setup and settings and then shoot very minimal shots and move, people think if i have that camera to shoot 10fps then i must fire, not necessarily, i shoot 1-2 frames if i am all free and increase that if i am in very hurry, i am not that kind of photographer to shoot everything in slow time, even i know many PJs nowadays in my area who were shooting with film in the past told me they will never go back to film for their work, so what happened to that slowing down method then?