Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 162

Thread: Film SLR dying.... sad...

  1. #81

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Yes, film processing is far more expensive then digital, but the startup costs are much lower for film then digital (especially for MF). So the break even if anyone really cares to work it out is probably measured in years - unless your shooting 5 rolls a day.

    As for shutter count, of course digital shutter have to be stronger then film, by it's nature you shoot a hell of a lot more with digital - for every film frame, you probably shoot 5-10 digital, simply because it doesn't cost anymore (as long as you have a big enough memory card).

    The big companies are switching from analogue to digital production for two reasons - one consumer demand is moving in that direction (although not as fast as the companies would have us believe) and secondly it's infinitely more profitable for them to sell digital then film. Digital has a finite life (max 3 year cycle), whereas many people kept and used film cameras for 5-10+ years (I still have a 16 year old fully functioning film SLR)
    sk.images, ex - cyber_m0nkey

  2. #82

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by _espn_
    I hope film production doesn't stop...been a long time since I've seen Astia around... Sigh.
    If you cannot find Astia, you sure can look for Astin...kekeke Oops! Sorry for OT.

  3. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Wai
    Well...DSLR has a higher rated shutter cycle than film body of the same range. Furthermore, the shutter of DSLR will not expose to the air every 36 frames, thus less likely to be damage by dust, moisture or mishandling during film changing.

    FYI, their rated shutter cycle (actual life may be few times higher depends on luck and usage)

    100K - EOS 5D, 30D and EOS 3 (film), 1N (film)
    150K - EOS 1V (film)
    200K - EOS 1DMKII, 1DsMKII

    Source: http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/camera...a5=eos1dmarkii

    can't find any info for consumer/prosumer film body, but it is expected to be lower than 100K
    Then what abt the shutter count of 10D?
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  4. #84
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Ang
    You need to be armed with both the machine gun and the sniper gun. For different uses.
    Well... true.... agree....

    Talking about both SLR...

    For me, my digital PnS is useful when I just use it for casual shoot....

    Digital PnS I do not mind, but when seriously shooting, I prefer film, and those positive.... films... fuji....

    Just shot a sport event on Sunday, and boy... many shots will not be possible with Pns digital.... And I was wondering is a 1.6crop DSLR will help me in shooting the event, since 300mm was still short at times... lol.........

    Just a quick question... if 200mm is on a 1.6 crop cam, when is the rule of shutter speed if you shoot at 200mm (crop is 320mm)??

    Minimum shutter should be 1/350 right?
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  5. #85
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Maltese
    People who shoot films alot usually encounter 3 very disturbing considerations. One is shooting at the correct film ISO, second consideration is when packing the extra load while travelling and if the airport doesn't have film safe X-ray machines (dun trust that even if they say so) and lastly where to store the negs or slides after post processing.

    Film to me is like bullets, so shiok to load and shoot and the feeling of choosing the right film for the right situation...kinda makes u busy and feels important because it becomes very critical to make the correct decision at the right time or it will be totally gone.

    I agree with Halfmoon that it takes a combination of confident, skills and style to snap the "once in a life time" shot and it never turns out better other than slides.

    Velvia and Astia are not currently well stocked in SG that's why u can't find them a lot. My previous overseas trip makes me stock up about 40 rolls as I heard they come in only 200 and won't be coming in for quite sometimes. I told them it should be very good selling as I often see them sold out so why they don't stock more. Cathay says they are cutting down on all films supplies so cannot comment much also.

    I only get about 40-60 rolls for personal tours and If u meet pros one time stock 100-200 for a few assignments then of course if shops don't bring in more often, casual shooters who come at the wrong time will definitely not get them in stock. Some more now cannot get from Fuji direct because films assignments are not the standard requirement anymore so bo pian cannot stock too many but have to buy from stores and preferable at the same place, same time in order to get all of them from the same batch.

    Come to think about it, film quite lei che but itchy backside still like them lei
    I agree... with digital, what film to use?? Just PUMP it UP (ISO)!!!

    Seems like a lot of shop all have kodak now... just tried kodak 200 (-ve) after a while, and find that I really love the FUJI now.... color, etc... all not as shiok as Fuji Superia....

    Maybe that is the fun with shooting film... a bit leu chey, but it is fun!!!
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  6. #86
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Wai
    i think you should worry more about film production and development instead of the body itself, cos film are the expendable. I still have some working film bodies but their film are not available anymore.

    unlike DSLR, the film body that you use wont make much different to the final image, you can't tell if the pic was taken with EOS-1V or EOS 300 right? I am not sure what you cant capture with the F6 and 1V nor what other improvement you still want to see on the next film body.

    Probably even faster AF and even more accurate metering? You can't expect film body to have noise reduction, high speed crop, anti-shake or auto WB right?
    With the recent case of shortage of films... I agree with your opionion... if they stop film production now and we all die with our film body STANDING!!!

    For me, I am looking for ETTL 2 on Canon 30V/X series, as ETTL 2 Flash is much better than ETTL.... through my experience.... hoping for 30X model, as wanted to have a prosumer body instead of consumer body..... 300X is a value for money camera... almost perfect for most... until the consumer quality is exposed.... sigh......

    Faster AF is important.... and how much faster can it really get???

    Well, film do have the anti dust system.... one where the sensor is always moved and no dust residue!! (Film winding) lol... save money on cleaning sensor......

    Also, no worry about digital batteries running out with too many review of shots....
    Last edited by Halfmoon; 1st August 2006 at 02:25 AM.
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  7. #87
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Wai
    i kinda disagree, if you can't get it with digital body, you can't get it with film body too.

    Whether you are using film or digital body, everyone also have to learn from trail and error. And whether you can learn from the mistake will depends on individual, not the body that you use.

    To me, using DSLR is like doing assignment using computer, you get instant feedback and it helps me to remember better because I know the settings that I used and I can make correction on the spot until I get it right. While using film SLR is like submitting your assignment to the teacher, and you get back the marked script one week later. Even if you bother to go thru the marked script, you may not remember why you used those settings for that particular situation, and you may not able to go back to the same spot for another try because the lighting will be different.

    BTW, given a film and digital body to shoot an event, I still think that digital body will be less likely to miss the shot because I dont need to change film for different ISO or missed the shots when the 36 frames is up
    Mmm... you are right... also depend on the level of the photog..... some say digital can learn faster.... that is one thing.. instant feedback...

    Digital weakness is eating too much batteries... film running low.. depend on the skills and estimation of the photoger....

    That is why some pro photog is so good.. now, anyone can be a photoger, cos they can review on the spot.... you do not need a lot of skills, and just press the trigger.... (ok, a bit too much in some sense)
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  8. #88
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by cyber_m0nkey
    Digital has a finite life (max 3 year cycle), whereas many people kept and used film cameras for 5-10+ years (I still have a 16 year old fully functioning film SLR)
    Some 20+ yrs cam is also functional.. problem.. film no longer in production.. sad....
    Last edited by Halfmoon; 1st August 2006 at 02:33 AM.
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  9. #89
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by David
    Ahh, a dedicated film user!

    OT a bit...

    Halfmoon, u interested in getting my Elan 7 (EOS 33)? I have one for sale. Selling it cheap. Excellent condition. Ok will PM u.
    Hey David,

    Thanks for your help...

    I managed to shot some nice shots, and did bursting shots, panning shots.... some missed shots, but not easy to cover sports, but good experience.....

    Just feel that the bulit in flash is a bit weak when tried some indoor shots.....

    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  10. #90

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    A 200mm lens is still a 200mm lens regardless of the crop factor. If the crop is 1.6x then your angle of view is equivalent to a 320mm, but you don't get the same magnification as a true 320mm lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Halfmoon
    Well... true.... agree....

    Talking about both SLR...

    For me, my digital PnS is useful when I just use it for casual shoot....

    Digital PnS I do not mind, but when seriously shooting, I prefer film, and those positive.... films... fuji....

    Just shot a sport event on Sunday, and boy... many shots will not be possible with Pns digital.... And I was wondering is a 1.6crop DSLR will help me in shooting the event, since 300mm was still short at times... lol.........

    Just a quick question... if 200mm is on a 1.6 crop cam, when is the rule of shutter speed if you shoot at 200mm (crop is 320mm)??

    Minimum shutter should be 1/350 right?
    sk.images, ex - cyber_m0nkey

  11. #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dreamy Nikon Land
    Posts
    2,874

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Halfmoon
    Well... true.... agree....

    Talking about both SLR...

    For me, my digital PnS is useful when I just use it for casual shoot....
    Oh ya, PnS is your revolver.


    Quote Originally Posted by Halfmoon
    Just a quick question... if 200mm is on a 1.6 crop cam, when is the rule of shutter speed if you shoot at 200mm (crop is 320mm)??

    Minimum shutter should be 1/350 right?
    Emm, 1/200 still threoratical.
    The "shaking" still is using at 200mm. It is a crop factor of 1.6x (I assumed you are using canon) is there as not all the light falls onto the sensors (Normal, non-digital lens) but only around 63% of it. so when you enlarge the sensor size compared to the 35mm size, it gives you a 100% / 63% = 1.59x Crop factor.
    Andy Ang :lovegrin: - "A Photo speaks a thousand words. Have you spoken today?"
    APAD | Blog

  12. #92
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by cyber_m0nkey
    A 200mm lens is still a 200mm lens regardless of the crop factor. If the crop is 1.6x then your angle of view is equivalent to a 320mm, but you don't get the same magnification as a true 320mm lens.
    So If I use a shutter of 1/250, should not have hand shake though it is a 200mm, on a 1.6 crop with a view of 320mm???

    Sound interesting for thous who shoot LONG!!!
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  13. #93
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Ang
    Oh ya, PnS is your revolver.
    Yap.... my Big guns are my film SLR... not very big either since I do not have any big lens or L...


    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Ang
    Emm, 1/200 still threoratical.
    The "shaking" still is using at 200mm. It is a crop factor of 1.6x (I assumed you are using canon) is there as not all the light falls onto the sensors (Normal, non-digital lens) but only around 63% of it. so when you enlarge the sensor size compared to the 35mm size, it gives you a 100% / 63% = 1.59x Crop factor.
    Thanks for your explanation.... I am a film user, and just thought about this question recently, and I thought was 1/350 for 300mm lens.....

    No wonder people love shooting DSLR.. esp those who shoot tele... a lot of reach.... and no need to hold firm at the 1/lens focal point rule....
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  14. #94
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Saw a few threads here... one on CF error, and one on CD image lost....

    Any photographer BIGGEST nightmare I suppose.....

    I just wondering if you keep image in CF, and etc... what will be the cost of keeping an image/CF or memory hardisk?? You can keep the image, and making a lot of back ups on optical drive?

    If so, in the end, will not the cost of shooting digital far exceed the cost of films? If you end up buying more hardware to store your images???

    I believe film is more lasting and easiler to maintain right?

    So long term wise, the Digital images is much more at RISK from losing than films right???

    We have had System discussion... N vs C vs F vs S, etc....

    Now, this is Format discussion.... I think it is getting more interesting with more perspective coming in....
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  15. #95

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Depends on how much your hands shake


    Quote Originally Posted by Halfmoon
    So If I use a shutter of 1/250, should not have hand shake though it is a 200mm, on a 1.6 crop with a view of 320mm???

    Sound interesting for thous who shoot LONG!!!
    sk.images, ex - cyber_m0nkey

  16. #96

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Many interesting points of view seen, all valid. There really is no right or wrong answers.

    Me? A bit of a dinasour, been around since the time where electronic cameras were starting to become popular.

    The same sentiments echoed... auto mode makes you lazy, where is your litmus test, etc...

    I had, on one camping trip, shot with a Canon FTbN (bet most of you haven't heard of this beast), grabbed from a friend, without camera batteries for 4 days. One of those mechanical beast, rain or shine, battery or no battery, goes on forever. Hmm... that looks like 125 f/8, focus, shot. Flash? Focus on your subject, take the GN and divide by distance. Presto, f/4, shot.

    Results? Though I proudly declared I shot 4 days without meter, about half the shots were slightly off in exposure. Rescued by film latitude, so useable shots (for camping purposes) almost 95%. Excellent stuff, maybe 35%.

    Even free lanced for a studio once with a Nikkormat FT2 that has its meter busted.

    I once read in a old magazine about a certain pro who refused to use meters, said they were evil. The contact sheets shown about 35% success rate in exposure, don't count on other aspects yet.

    So I happily gone onto electronic SLR, so convenient... set aperture and let camera set shutter speed. Wah, got TTL flash one....

    Then came the monumental SLR, Canon A-1, auto everything, can put on programme mode one you know. Idiot also can use (now I am showing my age).

    The same complaints - make you lazy, no more concentration, where is your litmus test?

    Fast forward a bit, autofocus SLR - right, you said it, make you lazy, where is the fun?

    Wah, now not only program but got little picture to tell you how to shot portrait....

    And the digital age..... No need to process film one, can see immediately! Oh made a mistake, re-shot....

    Where is your litmus test?

    That depends on whethere you were brought up using mechanical SLR, electronic SLR, AF SLR, auto everything SLR, digital SLR.

    Maybe, just maybe, the ultimate litmus test is that of a mechanical SLR, no meter, no auto flash, just film and shot. How confident are you? Someone from an earlier era will say, you need to have the plate, coat it with the chemical, put into view camera, shot and process....

    Been there, done that. But I gladly adopt new technology as time goes. I used to type on a Royal typewriter, you know. Oh yes, there was a time when IBM type writers were standard issue in an office.

    I have several dry cabinets with SLR from the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and a lonely D70. Mechanical, eletronic, AF, digital, all there. Guess what I shot with?

    Fun to play with the marvels of the old days, but when my kids jump around, or when I try to capture that nudi (nudibranch, ha, not what you think, ok), instant review is what I do. Post process? Yes. I made my church friend 10 years younger when he got married last year.

    What I don't do - alter reality (like plug the fish from another photo and put it next to the coral).

    Film last longer ... ha, ask me. Been trying to digitized 20 years of courting photo (you know that moonlit shot, silhoutte that took a whole roll to get (lucky got patient girl friend, now wife)), those baby first walk shots. Damn those fungus, damn the colour has faded, damn there is a scratch, damn there is dust. The negative is still there, but recoverable images is anyone's guess, unless you have the diligence to store them properly from day one. Oh yes, try finding that cute shot of the little girl beside the church yard, now which role is it on....

    Oh my slides, strange colours....

    Oh don't ask me about the camping shots.... No idea where the negatives are right now.

    What I do now .... at least 2 copies on 2 different hard drives, 1 copy on DVD-R, recopy every 3 to 4 years. When new, bigger better harddrive comes out, recopy them from old hard drive to new hard drive, at least 2 copies. One copy put at mother-in-law's place, in case house burn down (kidding).

    Litmus tests? The shot you can hang on the wall. Or the baby shot that brings you back to the day when the kiddo is born. Oh whatever priced possession you have. Not "I shot film one you know".

    Quit whinning - just shot, whatever the medium.

    If film is your medium, buy loads and double or triple zip lock them and refrigerate. Buy lots of camera that will work when your eyes won't. Oh, you need to get that enlarger too. And while you are there, buy the chemicals and paper to stock. No kidding, been there, done that (except the stock pile part) - do you know how I smell every Saturday when I reached home?

    Que sera sera .... Life goes on....
    Last edited by diediealsomustdive; 1st August 2006 at 04:56 PM.

  17. #97
    Senior Member Halfmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Singapore.
    Posts
    4,590

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by cyber_m0nkey
    Depends on how much your hands shake
    Hand shake... rather, how steady one's hands are.......

    I tried lowest shot was 1/4 or 1/6... but forget the lens I used.... rather the focal length.....

    Should be my 28-105mm f3.5-4.5....
    Last edited by Halfmoon; 1st August 2006 at 07:53 PM.
    Art is perception; Perception is art.

  18. #98
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Get an IS lens. but cost quite ridicolously more expensive than the non IS.

  19. #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    South Pole with Penguin
    Posts
    5,270

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Quote Originally Posted by stjhie
    Get an IS lens. but cost quite ridicolously more expensive than the non IS.
    unless u are shooting a dead stationary object, no IS/VR/AS will be able to prevent motion blur. so what if you can handhold at 1/4 when your model cannot keep still?

    and if you are going to shoot a stationary object and able to take your time to shoot, might as well use a tripod and you can lower the shutter speed even further
    We are HDD of PC & FT are MB add to storage;
    so PC never hangs with enormous storage capacity - LKY

  20. #100

    Default Re: Film SLR dying.... sad...

    Frankly I think the 35mm format holds little advantage over modern DSLRs, which is why recently I went fully digital. Through appropriate processing I've gotten digital images to look the same any of my favourite film that I previously liked to use.

    Perhaps you could argue about resolution. Negs don't have much resolution anyway so it's pointless to use them. Transparencies do have quite a bit of resolution and tend to look better at 100% when scanned because you're looking at true RGB pixels rather than Bayer-interpolated ones. I don't find that prints at 8"x12" look any different though, perhaps if you print larger you might. Personally for me, after comparing the output from the two different media, I realised that I put myself through the unnecessary hassle of buying the film, processing and subsequently scanning to get a 99% similar result to 5s of uploading my CF card onto my harddrive.

    I don't shoot my film or digital any differently, but I think that digital has gotten to a point where shooting 35mm film is senseless. It still makes terrific sense to shoot MF or LF film though. Those will probably take quite a while more to become as obsolete as 35mm film is today.
    Last edited by Stoned; 1st August 2006 at 07:49 PM.
    My Personal Folio (of random events and things)

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •