It seems like digital can be cheaper. Is there a way to turn this around? Is there a commercial demand for prints? Could we DIY some kind of high iso film at a lower price? Aside from large format, when does film have an advantage over digital? What are the best cameras for arctic winters, rainy days, and operating underwater?
Digital makes more sense for underwater photography because one does not need to come out of the water at the end of the roll.
For Arctic and Antarctic or other cold weather photograph the film cameras should have a CLA [Clean Lubrication Adjust] with the colder weather lubricants.
There are many advantages of film over digital but this website discourages film versus digital discussions as they cause discord. I prefer film because I like the process and results much better. For me my film cameras and lenses cost a lot less than the top of the NIkon or Canon digital cameras. I do my serious work with Hasselblad cameras, medium format, and 4"x5" cameras.
It seems like digital can be cheaper. Is there a way to turn this around?
Is there a commercial demand for prints?
Could we DIY some kind of high iso film at a lower price?
when does film have an advantage over digital?
Noted. I'll try not to stir up any wars.
Thanks for the tips.
My dad's old film camera was broken by the time I got my hands on it and he barely ever used it. I once owned a point and shoot film camera, but it broke. I had some antique cameras that I got cheap before I could afford to buy film for them. Unfortunatrly they were effectively stolen from me by a poorly managed storage facility. I happen to have bought a used 35mm camera off ebay recently, but I got what I paid for because ... it's broken. You're probably on to something with medium format. At least they are still being made.
What kind of work do you do with yours?
Anybody check the price of Velvia or Provia 8x10 film recently?
I hardly think that can be taken into the equation because for every large format user there will be a whole lot more 35mm. Yes it is expensive but a niche market that hardly bears any comparison with 35mm.
When you consider that every ROLL of 135-36 is equivalent to one SHEET of 8x10 film, how's the comparison fare?
Darkroom wet prints are still made and sold. Some collectors prefer them.Yes, absolutely. Virtually all of them are made from digital files, so there's no advantage to film in that area.
Pieter, we all know there's lots of compulsion among camera users. This is just another variant of the old digital vs film story.....& we're in our own corners. I could care less what the relative costs are. My personal photography choices are not made by some bottom line arithmetic.
Yes I use digital for convenience, but for choice I still use a manual, in all senses of the word, 35mm camera that makes me think (not fiddle) before I press the button. It is an extension of the best camera for photography I ever used which taught me to look, see and consider a second or two before pressing the shutter. That camera was Pentax SV with a clip on meter and a few prime lenses, todays equivalent is my Nikon F2a.
If it wasn't the 'compulsion' then the virtual avalanche of new Digital cameras would have tailed off . It is them, the buyers who are keeping the manufacturers in business, - actually taking them for what they are - suckers!
There are many who MUST have the latest singing and dancing kit with all the bells and whistles as a form of 'one up-man ship' As we say in England 'Keeping up with the joneses'. Buying a new camera for the sake of having the newest up to date camera only very rarely improved a persons photography, they still cut heads of in group shots or have lamp posts sticking out of the top of someones head!
How many of us who use digital get around to using all the little tweaks and tricks that are programmed into the software that comes with each camera. There will be the geeks who revel in the use of them but in comparison I bet hardly ever take a decent picture. They will be too busy fiddling with the controls to get the best out of the equipment. On the other had there will be some who buy the camera and set it on programme and point and shoot and are quite happy with what the camera produces.
Yes I use digital for convenience, but for choice I still use a manual, in all senses of the word, 35mm camera that makes me think (not fiddle) before I press the button. It is an extension of the best camera for photography I ever used which taught me to look, see and consider a second or two before pressing the shutter. That camera was Pentax SV with a clip on meter and a few prime lenses, todays equivalent is my Nikon F2a.
wait until AI is incorporated into the next generation of digital cameras. No more poles coming out of heads, no more cut-off heads, the ability to make multiple exposures of group shots and combine the best expressions into one shot...the list goes on...and there will be buyers.
Darkroom wet prints are still made and sold. Some collectors prefer them.
Darkroom wet prints are still made and sold. Some collectors prefer them.
Many digital cameras today already have wi-fi, connection to a network is not far behind.Much more likely and readily available for cell phone cameras (AI is not going to be something that exists without a network) - but it will surely come. People will get it whether they want it or not.
Absolutely. By volume, it's probably around 0.000000001% of the prints being made. Might be a little less. That doesn't make them any less interesting, worthwhile or valuable. It does mean that film isn't ever going to displace digital even to a small extent.
If it wasn't the 'compulsion' then the virtual avalanche of new Digital cameras would have tailed off . It is them, the buyers who are keeping the manufacturers in business, - actually taking them for what they are - suckers!
There are many who MUST have the latest singing and dancing kit with all the bells and whistles as a form of 'one up-man ship' As we say in England 'Keeping up with the joneses'. Buying a new camera for the sake of having the newest up to date camera only very rarely improved a persons photography, they still cut heads of in group shots or have lamp posts sticking out of the top of someones head!
How many of us who do use digital get around to using all the little tweaks and tricks that are programmed into the software that comes with each camera. There will be the geeks who revel in the use of them but in comparison I bet hardly ever take a decent picture. They will be too busy fiddling with the controls to get the best out of the equipment. On the other had there will be some who buy the camera and set it on programme and point and shoot and are quite happy with what the camera produces. My Digi of choice is a Nikon D300s, when was that introduced? Pre 2010 if I remember correctly. I can still print, if I wanted to do so, an A3 image How many of the digital owning fraternity with far newer cameras ever print anything! It is set on Aperture Priority has one set focus point and away I go.
I have two printers. One a Canon Pro 300 which is exceptionally good, about a year old. I was forced to change from my elderly Epson because the inks became exceptionally difficult to source. My other is my even older LPL 7700 enlarger which apart from a bulb change every now and again a few scratches here and there still works as it did in 1990 when I bought it new.
Yes I use digital for convenience, but for choice I still use a manual, in all senses of the word, 35mm camera that make me think (not fiddle with buttons) before I press the button afre is an extension of the best camera for photography I ever used which taught me to look, see and consider a second or two before pressing the shutter. That camera was Pentax SV with a clip on meter and a few prime lenses, todays equivalent is my very late model Nikon F2a.
Why the angry criticism of people who do not think and do as you do?
Much more likely and readily available for cell phone cameras (AI is not going to be something that exists without a network) - but it will surely come. People will get it whether they want it or not.
Why the angry criticism of people who do not think and do as you do?
Maybe in a perfect world. A simple CLA can extend the useful life of a camera and keep it from developing more serious problems. However, the number of trained, qualified technicians is slowly dwindling and the ones with a reputation for their work can have months- and year-long waiting lists. Parts are becoming NLA, donor cameras can be difficult to find especially if the part in question is subject to failure on a large number of cameras. Some cameras can be quite expensive to repair, too. It really depends on the camera in question and the repair or maintenance required.On the point of "Broken" cameras, most film cameras are old enough that they are already overdue for an overhaul. (often refered to as a CLA) their is a sub group here for Camera repairs, and many repair people are out their, some who only work with given brands or Models. one of the advantages of film Cameras is that they often will happily give 60 years of service with a CLA every Decade or so. (the manufacturers used to say every 3 years, But most keep working well past that time)
and of Course film is always the best it has ever been, so many film Cameras produce better images now then when they left the factory.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?