Film slr's

[JM Tran]

i use four to five cameras for a wedding JM. i do process my own film as well, and also scan and edit, just not weddings.

AH so which brings me back to your original post about 'no computers, no back ups' - since you DO scan and edit, that involves a computer, a scanner and processing on the computer.

not really that 'convenient' when you think about the process involved, and no Im not talking about just weddings im talking about photography as a whole here.

and 4 to 5 cameras per wedding, I keep seeing that C word coming up!

[TOM]

ha, four of my cameras weight less than one slr with a thumping big zoom lens on. load film before wedding, go to wedding, shoot wedding, take film out, post, get back from lab, done. as a whole JM, i do all sorts. i shoot digital, 135 film, 120 film, scan, develop, upload, email, load film, charge batteries.... it's a hobby, and i enjoy all of that. if it was 'convenient' as you put it, there would be only half the joy. you are trying to nail me down here JM on something that i don't disagree with (if we are talking as a whole). as i am posting here on AP, it should be evident that i do indeed have a computer, I do commercial work which involves digital and editing.

i think Chad might be digging a hole in his back yard as we speak preparing to bury his Dad's SLR. Don't do it Chad, it's not as bad as they make it sound.

[nisstrust]

Dose anyone out there still use film slr's.
I was thinking of getting my dad's out and having a play...

Yep still use a film SLR occasionally. Canon EOS 3, only use it for travel and landscape shots and usually with a roll of you beaut Velvia, however its been sitting in the cupboard collecting dust unfortunately.

[Analog6]

I have kept my T90 but only for long astronomical work, I'm talking 45mins+. I don't use it often, but it's worth so little now there is no point selling it, so it lives in its case in the corner.

Digital wins every time, and the savings on film development costs have let me buy lots of extrra goodies I could never afford. I would not go back to film for quids.

[pirate59]

I still use film. And i enjoy it!

I agree with the arguments about digi being easier and more convenient.

I mostly only use my film back for B&W and staged shots (usually colour 100ISO situations).

I took both bodies to the Sydney Light Walk and comparatively the film edged out it the end. Well in my opinion.

To me when i use film, its be cause i feel a bit more creative juices flowing then.

In the end i have fun shooting in film. BUT i also enjoy shooting digital as well. Both have a different feel for me in the end...

[MTV]

Man, that was an unexpected slag-fest...

As for film, I love it.

Have to agree that it isn't for convenience sake, although I do LOVE how light they are. And cheap too! I own a Nikon F75 and just stick my 50 prime on it and it is so light that even with the glass on it weighs less than 50g more than the body of my D40x with no lens, which is not exactly a heavy bit of kit. You can pick up a used F70, which sits towards the bottom end of the 'newer' FSLRs for less than $50. Sometimes they include a lens for that price!

I also love the quality of film. Granted, if you are shooting with a top of the range DSLR you are unlikely to notice the difference. But once again, you are talking about a heavy and VERY expensive piece of kit, without even taking glass into account.

Don't get me wrong, if I could only have one or the other I wouldn't even hesitate to go digital. But given that entering the film market nowadays is so cheap and easy (although those F6's are still pricey) I would recommend getting a FSLR, or if you have one like the OP at your disposal, if only to learn a bit more about photography.

There is just something so fun about film.

[smallfooties]

I've been shooting film for quite some time now - i use the holga and my fisheye 2. And just a few days ago i bought a film slr and have started to use that too. My 400D is collecting dust at the moment because i am having so much fun with film - i like being surprised even though they have been lousy results. But that is ok because i am starting to learn about exposure etc.
Use your dad's film slr and have lots of fun with it. If you want to get one for yourself, they come really cheap now i think.

[jim]

Just to back up a bit here is one way that film is generally more convenient than digital photography.

Digital: my camera lasts about one day of shooting before I need to recharge the battery (less if using the built-in flash, or leaving it connected to the computer).

Film: I can generally get a year's shooting on one set of batteries. Maybe a bit more or a bit less, who cares?

[Krzys]

I practice film photography for fun not convenience. If convenience is needed then you are kidding yourself and at a steep disadvantage shooting film...but so what? I like a challenge.

[heartyfisher]

Hello Chad,

There are a number of advantages of using film instead of digital.

You need to think a few more steps before you snap.
I double check and triple check the composition.
Make sure you have the exposture correct..
make sure the DOF is correct.. You do this by pressing the DOF button.
Lens choice.

All in all it can take some 10mins or more just to take one shot. Slows down the whole
process. and makes it more of a craft. You get to think and feel the creation
of the image.

Once you have your crafted image. Its all done .. no more PP.
Just Print directly from the negative. You can print much bigger from film
than you can print from any DSLR. Scanning neg to digital and then printing
from the scan just looses details.

Biggest advantage of Film is the High DR and lots of highlight and shadow detail.. Sunsets are great! because the bright sun does not Bleed light into the other pixels the sun actually looks small and well defined and not a big blob. Night shots are good too with the point lights being points.. and no digital bleed at all! You will find that many of the best landscape photographers still use film.

Now for sports DSLR just is much more convenient.. However shooting with Film has its place still.

Oh and the battery of my film camera has not been changed for 7 years...

[Krzys]

The best film camera is one with no battery

Once you have your crafted image. Its all done .. no more PP.
Just Print directly from the negative.

If you are doing this then you are really cutting short of an image's potential. Dodging, burning and using contrast filters is essential.

The most important thing about film photography is 4x5 and above - a whole new world of composition with the infinite moments of a rail cam and technical photography at its rawest.

[mongo]

If you want you dad to have a play with film, Mongo still has many film cameras and used one only this week with a big digital lens just to see what happens.

F3 or f4 would be good but Mongo still likes to use his trusty nikon 801. Light , inexpensive and has given Mongo all the slide film results he has posted on this site and continues to so so when he uses film.

otherwise let him use your digital for a day out with him while you use something else and you may get him interested in digital when he can see the results.

[jev]

There are a number of advantages of using film instead of digital.

You need to think a few more steps before you snap.
I double check and triple check the composition.
Make sure you have the exposture correct..
make sure the DOF is correct.. You do this by pressing the DOF button.
Lens choice.

And these are things you cannot do using a digital SLR?

You can print much bigger from film
than you can print from any DSLR. Scanning neg to digital and then printing
from the scan just looses details.

Click!

Oh and the battery of my film camera has not been changed for 7 years...

Not on my camera. Ow, wait, it doesn't have a battery at all

Now, there's a place for analog photography, even these days. But not on the merits you described... it has a different feel and analog B/W is nicer IMHO than any digital I've seen so far. But quantifiable qualitywise analog has no advantage anymore over digital except in a very few cases.

[TOM]

But quantifiable qualitywise analog has no advantage anymore over digital except in a very few cases.

I agree with everything you have said jev, except this. film has a big advantage in dynamic range, resolution, and a look that is different to digital. it is more organic, and you have different levels of contrast. digital, doesn't discriminate, and everything is rendered with the same contrast and sharpness over the entire image - hence it is not as natural looking as digital. now whether you think this is an advantage or a disadvantage is personal taste or simply a matter of it being a unique and different look.

i have shot for commercial clients who demand digital (most do), and they want to see the images almost immediately as they are shot. i gladly use digital for these situations, and as i am not taking these pictures for myself, i don't mind the loss of quality that i get shooting with digital and zoom lenses. but when i shoot weddings, i don't have the same time constraints, so i use film and really nice glass. for own use, digital is easy and fast and convenient, but for a lot of proffesional applications, and i have said this before here and got howled down, film provides me with a work flow that requires A LOT less work (hence convenience??) than digital.

btw, i shot a wedding in january where i used about 50/50 film to digital. i used a nikon d3 and also shot with a coulple of film cameras. when i presented the images to the client (she was unaware of digital/film), the images that she chose consisted of around 90 percent of the film images, apart from her family shots which i only shot in digital. she consciously did not know why she chose those particular images.

and jev......'the gadget shot' ?????

[jev]

Tom, the only quantifyable thing where negative film wins from digital is DR. Slight. The usual slide film just offers 5 stops dynamic range, a color negative maybe 8 and B/W up to 11 or so? According to DxOMark, the new D3X has a DR of up to a mind boggling 13.7 stops (at 80 ISO). You can't print them at more than 8 stops anyway. Resolution? 21 MPixel, only some slide films are believed to offer more.

Having said that, the other merits are not quantifyable; you cannot capture it in numbers. I already agreed with you: the feel of analog is different.

The gadget show, yes . I don't watch it often but this movie snippet was spammed on a lot of forums . It's funny, I don't know how well informed these guys are but it was interesting to see how big they printed and how well digital stood up to analog. One of the presenters, BTW, knows a bit more about technology than he leads you to believe.

[Krzys]

I am holding a hasselblad. I am invincible to any remarks.

[GlennSan]

Whew! Need a cold beer after reading all these posts. So much passion about one versus the other.

As for the OP...

YES. Some here still shoot film and enjoy it a lot. We are in the minority these days though.
Take your dad's camera out, shoot some film and see if you enjoy it. If you do, continue. If you don't, stay with digital.

Krzys, beware, it's still just a camera, although beautifully made. I still take lots of crap pictures on my Blad, despite it's quality

[GlennSan]

F3 or f4 would be good but Mongo still likes to use his trusty nikon 801. Light , inexpensive and has given Mongo all the slide film results he has posted on this site and continues to so so when he uses film.

I love using my F4 Mongo, it's a simple pleasure to hold such a beautifully engineered machine in my hands. And the scene through the viewfinder is glorious.

However, I also have a faithful old F801 that was with me on much of my early outings along the photographc journey. It's not quite F4 class but I do have a very soft spot and much fondness for it, despite the fact that the body-integrated focus drive system now screeches just a little more than it used to.

In the end though, they are all just light-tight boxes...

[Krzys]

Krzys, beware, it's still just a camera, although beautifully made. I still take lots of crap pictures on my Blad, despite it's quality

What? Pictures?...I just thought that it would make a great weapon

In the end though, they are all just light-tight boxes...

Do not say that to a lecia user, some act asif narnia is held inside.

[TOM]

Do not say that to a lecia user, some act asif narnia is held inside.

Krzys, ever looked inside a Leica? You'd be suprised!