Jump to content

Anyone still use good old film?


Downsview 108

Recommended Posts

It's probably more expensive now but I find I like owning actual prints than digital pictures (which, if you think about it, don't really exist). Slides and prints are more colectable and really can last you as long as you take care of them. 10,000 digital shots on a DVD can be lost if you get one scratch on the disc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I store my digital pics on my HD, and Film cameras are harder to take care of and then the pictures take forever to come out, sometimes, you don't even find out whether a certain shot you wanted came out right until you get your "film" developed... with a digital camera, there's a preview screen on most of them, so you'll know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still shoot film :P

Digital takes a lot of the challenge out, as you can click away then delete stuff afterward. With film you have a set number of shots with no deleting, plus you must pay to get them developed. Kinda forces you to be extra careful!

I do shoot mostly digital however, as it it simply more convenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still shoot film :(

Digital takes a lot of the challenge out, as you can click away then delete stuff afterward. With film you have a set number of shots with no deleting, plus you must pay to get them developed. Kinda forces you to be extra careful!

I do shoot mostly digital however, as it it simply more convenient.

I agree totally. It's more expensive to screw up with a film camera. Although I'd rather use a digital for everyday point and shoot general stuff that's disposable.

Film cameras aren't that hard to take care of. A lot of those made between 1967 or so and the early 80's are very robust. I am currently using a 1973 konica and it works perfectly. Winter cold though is a problem for mechanical cameras. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree totally. It's more expensive to screw up with a film camera. Although I'd rather use a digital for everyday point and shoot general stuff that's disposable.

Film cameras aren't that hard to take care of. A lot of those made between 1967 or so and the early 80's are very robust. I am currently using a 1973 konica and it works perfectly. Winter cold though is a problem for mechanical cameras. :(

I'm using a recently acquired 1994 Minolta, so I've yet to see it's winter performance. It should be ok as doesn't have a big color LCD to freeze up like on my DSLR :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm using a recently acquired 1994 Minolta, so I've yet to see it's winter performance. It should be ok as doesn't have a big color LCD to freeze up like on my DSLR :P

Later mechanical SLR's with the electonically controlled shutters (probably like yours, unless you use a rangefinder in which case they should stand up fine)aren't really affected by the cold. It's the 100% mechanical ones that can become dodgy because of condensation. A well insulated bag should deter this.

I like the idea of printing your own photos as long as the resolution is as good as low grain film. Right now I use Ilford 125 and 50 which are the lowest grain b&w film available. There are other subtle nuances to film that I don't think digital can capture. But I guess it's better now than a decade ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate film with a passion. It costs an arm and a leg to buy a one-time-use roll/camera and then it costs an arm and a leg to develop it (I am not spending more than $15 for 27 pictures that I never know will turn out HORRIBLE). With digital I can keep going forever with previews at my disposal. And I can always store photos on photo hosting sites, on flash drives, etc. I do not like using delicate equipment such as CDs and DVDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate film with a passion. It costs an arm and a leg to buy a one-time-use roll/camera and then it costs an arm and a leg to develop it (I am not spending more than $15 for 27 pictures that I never know will turn out HORRIBLE). With digital I can keep going forever with previews at my disposal. And I can always store photos on photo hosting sites, on flash drives, etc. I do not like using delicate equipment such as CDs and DVDs.

Digital does indeed have many advantages over film, but cost is not necessarily one of them. If you shop carefully, you can pick up 3-pack or 4-packs of film at many stores in the U.S. for $8 to $10 (I personally recommend CVS store-brand 200 speed film, which is actually made by Fuji), then send it out to a place such as York Photo to be developed for $3.85 per roll (for an additional $1, you can also have your images scanned). This works out to 22 cents per photo, which is competitive with the cost to have a digital photo printed at many stores.

I also have to respond to your comment about 'I never know will turn out HORRIBLE'. If a photographer learns how to use their camera, it does not matter whether it is film or digital. When I'm shooting bus or rail images, the vehicle is in motion the majority of the time, so I often have only one chance to get the optimum photo. Know how to 'read' a scene and make the necessary adjustments in aperture, shutter speed and (for digital) ISO. I came to digital after 30 years of using film cameras, and I still use a film mentality when I'm out taking pictures - I work on getting that one perfect shot. Yes, I review the image afterwards and make adjustments when necessary, but often these are minor adjustments which could be made post-processing even on film images.

Jim D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Digital does indeed have many advantages over film, but cost is not necessarily one of them. If you shop carefully, you can pick up 3-pack or 4-packs of film at many stores in the U.S. for $8 to $10 (I personally recommend CVS store-brand 200 speed film, which is actually made by Fuji), then send it out to a place such as York Photo to be developed for $3.85 per roll (for an additional $1, you can also have your images scanned). This works out to 22 cents per photo, which is competitive with the cost to have a digital photo printed at many stores.

I also have to respond to your comment about 'I never know will turn out HORRIBLE'. If a photographer learns how to use their camera, it does not matter whether it is film or digital. When I'm shooting bus or rail images, the vehicle is in motion the majority of the time, so I often have only one chance to get the optimum photo. Know how to 'read' a scene and make the necessary adjustments in aperture, shutter speed and (for digital) ISO. I came to digital after 30 years of using film cameras, and I still use a film mentality when I'm out taking pictures - I work on getting that one perfect shot. Yes, I review the image afterwards and make adjustments when necessary, but often these are minor adjustments which could be made post-processing even on film images.

Jim D.

Good points. You can't really point and shoot with a digital SLR either. I also hate the rising costs of developing film. I used to be able to get a roll done for 5 bucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can get film pretty cheap around here (about $10.00 for a five pack of 200 or 400), but it costs around $10.00 to get a roll developed (although it comes out to a bit less when you get a volume discount for taking in more than one roll).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can get film pretty cheap around here (about $10.00 for a five pack of 200 or 400), but it costs around $10.00 to get a roll developed (although it comes out to a bit less when you get a volume discount for taking in more than one roll).

That's less than the cost of developing alone (no prints) downtown. Prints are about 1.75 per 4x6 print at some stores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got back two set of prints I shot in the past month, a project I started while my 5D spent a couple of days in the shop getting serviced.

The verdict: I think from now on when I shoot airplanes, I will use film exclusively! Those shots turned out much, much better than my digital aviation photos.

Working on getting a couple of them scanned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me whatever you want but I am buying a filmy :D

Right now I've got two options being tossed up. I've got a Nikon F65 and battery grip for $60, or a Nikon F65 and 28-80mm lens for $140.

Here's my logic:

1) The F65 can use all new AF/AF-S/G ect. lenses. Which will be great because when I get my 24-120mm VR in a few months It will also work on the F65 (I own a D60)

2) I'm leaning towards the one with the lens because, it has a lens :lol: My 18-55mm VR would work on the camera, but the corners would be blacked out (DX lens)

3) Film is something I've never used, and something I've always wanted. Right now I've got some good deals on the table and the funds to use.

So?

Chris Cassidy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me whatever you want but I am buying a filmy :lol:

Right now I've got two options being tossed up. I've got a Nikon F65 and battery grip for $60, or a Nikon F65 and 28-80mm lens for $140.

Here's my logic:

1) The F65 can use all new AF/AF-S/G ect. lenses. Which will be great because when I get my 24-120mm VR in a few months It will also work on the F65 (I own a D60)

2) I'm leaning towards the one with the lens because, it has a lens :o My 18-55mm VR would work on the camera, but the corners would be blacked out (DX lens)

3) Film is something I've never used, and something I've always wanted. Right now I've got some good deals on the table and the funds to use.

So?

Chris Cassidy

Ask 120 for the one with the lens.

I personally use a Nikon EM.

Happy Shooting. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
I agree totally. It's more expensive to screw up with a film camera. Although I'd rather use a digital for everyday point and shoot general stuff that's disposable.

Film cameras aren't that hard to take care of. A lot of those made between 1967 or so and the early 80's are very robust. I am currently using a 1973 konica and it works perfectly. Winter cold though is a problem for mechanical cameras. :P

Nice! I shoot with a '73 Nikon FTn, plus I have an Argus C-3 "brick" for fun. I usually go digital for transit, though, since I do a lot more volume and don't want to pay for developing.

I agree about wintertime. The light meter on the Nikon gets really unpredictable below 40°F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...