Digital vs. Film

Sample
I came across some desert bighorn sheep yesterday. I had to use early afternoon mid-fall sun. My camera is a Nikon D-70 with a Nikkor 70-300 mm lens set at 300mm.



Look in Lake Mojave album.



http://community.webshots.com/user/pahsimeroi

cost?
digital cameras that can keep up with the film cameras in recovery time and resolution are over $2000 .

Still rely on my Minolta Weathermatic 35
waterproof film camera for pictures on whitewater rivers. I’m not sure there is (as yet) a waterPROOF digital which will gather as much information per shot, and without annoying 2 second delays.



Minolta is said to have a 5MP waterproof marketed in Japan. Even so, and granting the less-than-perfect optics of my Weathermatic, I think my film will take away more detailed info than a 5MP.



I now have a Minolta Dimage IV scanner which, at 3800 bpi, is less than professional, but more than good enough for my 19" CRT screen.



So, I await a, say, 7MP truly WATERPROOF digital, reasonably light. I’m not interested in waterproof plastic cases, because they are rather bulky compared to the Weathermatic.



If you use film and don’t print yourself, find a developer that knows the color values of the scenery. When I got off the Dolores last summer, I had all five rolls developed and printed in Pennington Camera in Durango, and the color values and light values were EXACTLY on and consistent across three film types. Bringing film home to pretty good developers in the east has not brought results like that, and frankly, I am not yet good enough to get such consistent results using my film scanner, either.

Exactly!
Compared to the film version of the same camera that are a little over $200!



That right, one less zero!



Take your pick, a new fiberglass kayak or a digital SLR. This is an especially appropriate question for those who already have film SLR. ;o)

both.
Film will still be around for a long time. The number of choices you’ll have will really become limited and you’ll start seeing film from places like China - but you’ll still be able to get it. And you may have to get used to paying more for it and it’s processing. And I’ll bet a lot of one-hour places go away to be replaced by more centralized labs (like Walgreen’s, Walmart). They just won’t see enough volume to justify doing it at every store. That could be tomorrow; could be 10 years.



I shoot some film, but not as much as I used to. Probably 95% digital, but some things just don’t work with digital (classic look of B&W - I develop it myself, long exposures like star trails).

Yeah, well you know the shutter lag is
not the one to four second lag we are concerned about.

Both too!
On my last trip to Isle Royale I took both my Canon 20D digital and my 4x5 field camera. Made images with both. Now the 20D was replaced with the higher resolution 5D. 13 megapixels instead of 8!



Ken

http://www.kgcphoto.com

i gave up film
i used to teach b&w photography. my friend bob is a pro photojournalist, he gave up film several years ago. my daughters still like to shoot film, play with slr lenses, filters, etc but i doubt that i will again. digital for me please

Can’t go wrong with the digital Rebel
The latest model is supposed to eliminate the digital camera delay annoyance.

Damn! beautiful photographs.

Both, but mostly digital now
Particularly for photos that are going to be posted on the web or distributed in electronic form, digital is tha the way to go. It’s faster, cheaper and so much more convenient that it doesn’t make sense to shoot film for these appications. Resolution is not a limitation for pics to be viewed on a computer monitor. A cheapo 2 MP camera will do the job and anything more is gravy. Being able to shoot 75 or more high-res images without have to change media or batteries can be a big advantage on a long day on the water, particularly when you need to keep the camera in a waterproof housing.



OTOH, I still love the creativity and versatility of a 35mm SLR. There’s nothing like having a selection of lenses for specific jobs. I also like shooting black and white at times and film selection makes a big difference in that medium. Perhaps someday I’ll splurge for a digital SLR and a bunch of lenses, but that won’t be any time soon.

well
I use both but use more digital. I posted my entire web site via digital last summer. The photos posted on the trip updates were all done from my tent in remote locations and sent via satellite phone etc. Digital IS the future. Ive talked to pro photograhers and camera shops than they all say there will be NO MORE FILM IN 5 YEARS! Only for those speciatly photographys so it will be harder to get too etc.

Digital is really amazing when you come down to it.

AS far as posting on the web you can also use a scanner for both your SLIDES and prints. Scan them, edit them, and then send to your website etc. I recommend usuing compression software such as Quick-E pics which is AMAZING and cost only about 40 bucks to download. YOu can then take your 350k jpgs and turn them into 10-75k jpegs without reducing the quality of the photos. This allows you to post quickly, save space on your web site and also allows the viewer a quicker time in looking at your photos. Who want to wait for a 500k photo to appear? Not me!

NM

Wow!
I downloaded the trial…that program is great for it’s intended purpose! Never seen anything as simple to use!

BTW…it’s now just under 20 bucks!

Wrong thread title
Well, nothing wrong with the question. It’s the answers that were off-the-tengent, I just realized.



A lot of the response compare digital point-n-shoot photos with film photo shot by SLR camera. That’s not fair. “Idiot camera” can’t do what SLR’s can. It’s not comparing about the media (film vs digital). There’re two different kind of camera.



Digital is as good a media as film for “most” of the applications. Cost is pretty much the only thing that matters now.


  1. at the low end, casual shooting with point-and-shoot camera, both kind of cameras cost the same while memory is way cheaper than film. Needless to say, most casual shooters (should) go by digital!


  2. at the middle, “enthusiast” level, digital SLR is as good as film SLR but cost a huge premium that can’t be off-set by the film cost. So, most “enthusiast” stay with film SLR while awaiting the price of digital SLR to drop. In the meantime, most are getting digital point-n-shoots for casual shots and saving the film for those “special” occasion.


  3. at the high end, real professionals who shoot A LOT also went for digital because for them, their film cost is so high they’re better off paying the higher cost of digital SLR up front and recoup it with the saving on film and proof prints.



    With the Canon digital SLR dipping below the $1k mark, I think the day of digital SLR for the shutterbugs are finally here. All my lens are Nikon. So as soon as a Nikon SLR breaks the $1k mark, which I’m sure will be any day now, I’ll be ready for the plunge.

Hmmm?
I paid under 1k for my D70 last year, with the standard 18-70 (36-140)lens. My point and shoot coolpix 5400 was almost that much 3 years ago.

Take the jump…the coolpix takes pics almost as good as the D70…but the “instant” SLR function of the D70 just blows it away.

1 drawback for the D70…
…the lowest ISO setting is 200. Another drawback for digital SLR’s is dust…I’ve heard horror stories, so I only change lenses in areas that are as dust free as possible.

I have the D50 and love it plus
it is under $750.

Folks, remember you don’t document
trips if your expensive SLR (film or digital) spends most of the time packed away in a Pelican case.



I find I MUST have a camera which is ready ALL the time, while I am moving above, below, or even through rapids. This means a waterproof camera, and so far, my old Minolta Weathermatic 35 outperforms any waterPROOF digital I can buy. So, I’m waiting for Minolta to bring their waterproof 5 megapixel digital from Japan. I have read reviews about the Pentaxes, and I’m not that impressed. The latest Olympus Stylus digitals are better, but not waterPROOF. My old Weathermatic is pulling in much more quality information per shot than the Pentaxes, which makes a big difference for enlarging.

Do you have an online album?
Where we can see some of your pics?

Diving camera
The “weather proof” market for camera is never very strong. So it maybe quite a wait for a digital waterproof action camera. Maybe you’ll find a digital diving camera first.



Once you use a digital camera, you don’t want to go back to film. Instead, you just keep wishing they come out with a digital that has the same feature as you film camera.



As a media, digital has already won the battle. It’s only the cost (and sometimes lack) of the camera itself that’s still holding it back. In a few years, about the only film camera that I think will still have a nitch on the market are the full manual, no battery needed models.