View Poll Results: Demographic Survey #2: SLR Users - Film or Digital

Voters
290. You may not vote on this poll
  • Shoot only with Digital SLR

    77 26.55%
  • Shoot only with Film SLR

    86 29.66%
  • Have both, mainly shoot Digital

    85 29.31%
  • Have both, mainly shoot Film

    42 14.48%
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 94

Thread: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

  1. #41

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    By right for film, the higher the ASA, the larger the grain is.
    Yes. To double the sensitivity, you have to double the area, therefore you get a larger grain, so your image has to dither with a larger grain which is why the picture looks grainy. For digital, it would be the same size, just the the recorded intensty value for each pixel is more plagued with electronic noise because of the high electrical gain involved. So in terms of resolution, digital would beat film at higher ASA.

  2. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West of S'pore
    Posts
    999

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    digital would beat film at higher ASA.
    why is that so?

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    Yes. To double the sensitivity, you have to double the area, therefore you get a larger grain, so your image has to dither with a larger grain which is why the picture looks grainy. For digital, it would be the same size, just the the recorded intensty value for each pixel is more plagued with electronic noise because of the high electrical gain involved. So in terms of resolution, digital would beat film at higher ASA.
    Digital beating film at higher ISO i'm not sure but there's one thing for sure is that film beats digital during bulb mode shots. I tried using my film SLR and exposing a shot in total darkness and the same was done with my senior's DSLR. The results are my shot was perfectly clear in print after exposing for 5 full mins and the digital one was grainy at 1min. Both are set to ISO 400.

    I usually use ASA400 for all my shots.
    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. #44

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    Digital beating film at higher ISO i'm not sure but there's one thing for sure is that film beats digital during bulb mode shots. I tried using my film SLR and exposing a shot in total darkness and the same was done with my senior's DSLR. The results are my shot was perfectly clear in print after exposing for 5 full mins and the digital one was grainy at 1min. Both are set to ISO 400.

    I usually use ASA400 for all my shots.
    Which camera model was that? The problem with CCD is that the longer the exposure, the warmer it gets and thermal noise will make it noisy. Although the Nikon D70s is also using CCD, it seems to be ok for up to 1 min exposure on ASA800 but I have not done a 5 minute exposure before.

    Plus, a 5 minute exposure on film would probably need less than 2 minute on digital because of reciprocity failure on the film.

    This was a 30s exposure at ISO400 on a D70s. Resized and sharpen.


    This was a 15min exposure done on Kodak ASA400 negative shot several years back, printed on 4R gloss paper scanned at 300dpi and now resampled to the same size as the image above and not sharpened because the grains would become very distinct. Can you notice the grains?

    The line across the centre of the picture is caused by the lab scratching the entire stretch of the film.
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 10th February 2006 at 10:02 AM.

  5. #45

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by doug3fflux
    why is that so?
    Because for higher ASA, the film grain needs to be larger but the digital sensor pixel remains the same size. The noise from the high gain can be reduced by averaging. For film, there are techniques to smooth out the grains also but it take quite some effort in the darkroom.

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    Which camera model was that? The problem with CCD is that the longer the exposure, the warmer it gets and thermal noise will make it noisy. Although the Nikon D70s is also using CCD, it seems to be ok for up to 1 min exposure on ASA800 but I have not done a 5 minute exposure before.

    Plus, a 5 minute exposure on film would probably need less than 2 minute on digital because of reciprocity failure on the film.

    This was a 30s exposure at ISO400 on a D70s. Resized and sharpen.


    This was a 15min exposure done on Kodak ASA400 negative shot several years back, printed on 4R gloss paper scanned at 300dpi and now resampled to the same size as the image above and not sharpened because the grains would become very distinct. Can you notice the grains?
    Yes i can see the grains from the star trails pic. I Exposed a group of trees with the night sky for 5mins and results are it seems like daylight after that. During that time i was using my previous EOS 500 and my senior was using the EOS D60.

    So does that mean i have to use a lower ASA film to do bulb shots in future to reduce the grains? Such as ASA100 or 200.
    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.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    Because for higher ASA, the film grain needs to be larger but the digital sensor pixel remains the same size. The noise from the high gain can be reduced by averaging. For film, there are techniques to smooth out the grains also but it take quite some effort in the darkroom.
    I suppose physically u cannot see these grains on the film, only when it's developed then can see.
    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.

  8. #48

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    I suppose physically u cannot see these grains on the film, only when it's developed then can see.
    If you're not going to develop your film then what's the use of it? The grains are actually light sensitive crystals which will change it's transparency and formulated to be sensitive to certain colours and coated on the film in 3 layers for each primary colour.

    Below is a useful link on film.
    http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technica...ilmbasics.html
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 10th February 2006 at 09:58 AM.

  9. #49

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    Yes i can see the grains from the star trails pic. I Exposed a group of trees with the night sky for 5mins and results are it seems like daylight after that. During that time i was using my previous EOS 500 and my senior was using the EOS D60.

    So does that mean i have to use a lower ASA film to do bulb shots in future to reduce the grains? Such as ASA100 or 200.
    Yes. It would seem like daylight after that. But the grains will be visible even on 4R for ASA400 and above. I cannot comment on the EOS D60 because I'm not familiar with it. If I don't remember wrongly, it may have been an older generation DSLR and at that time, noise control is probably still not as good.

    To reduce grain visibility, a slower speed film would be preferred but that will increase your exposure time. Which is why people like to shoot on ASA50 and below for slides. These are really superb.

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    If you're not going to develop your film then what's the use of it? The grains are actually light sensitive crystals which will change it's transparency and formulated to be sensitive to certain colours and coated on the film in 3 layers for each primary colour.

    Below is a useful link on film.
    http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technica...ilmbasics.html
    Ahhh...very useful info about film. The ones i use have a 4th colour layer.
    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.

  11. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    Yes. It would seem like daylight after that. But the grains will be visible even on 4R for ASA400 and above. I cannot comment on the EOS D60 because I'm not familiar with it. If I don't remember wrongly, it may have been an older generation DSLR and at that time, noise control is probably still not as good.

    To reduce grain visibility, a slower speed film would be preferred but that will increase your exposure time. Which is why people like to shoot on ASA50 and below for slides. These are really superb.
    But if shoot at low ASA, i don't mind exposing longer but i can't use the low ASA for indoor shoots. That time when i printed out my 5min exposure on paper, it was 8R and the grains are almost unseen.
    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.

  12. #52

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    Ahhh...very useful info about film. The ones i use have a 4th colour layer.
    Yeah.. modern colour films have more than 3 layers for grain control but I have only kept up with film technology until 2002. After that, I just buy what is available on the market. Sigh.. how time flies! I have been using Kodak Portra NC and VC, both 160 and 400.
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 10th February 2006 at 02:33 PM.

  13. #53

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    But if shoot at low ASA, i don't mind exposing longer but i can't use the low ASA for indoor shoots. That time when i printed out my 5min exposure on paper, it was 8R and the grains are almost unseen.
    For film, it is important to correctly expose or slightly overexpose to reduce the grain effects. You should be able to see a nice tonal range on the negative itself, then the grain would not be obvious. So that was probably what you have done.

    Think of it like on a inkjet printer, if you print light colours, the dots are obvious but if you print dark colours, you don't see much of the dots. It's the reverse on negative, so those exposed area becomes darker on the film and you don't really see the grains, those less exposed area are lighter and the grains are quite sparse so you see them.

    But sometimes there is no such luxury expecially when shooting astro shots and once reciprocity failure sets in, it becomes very difficult to predict exposure and bracketing for exposure in the region of 15-30mins is no laughing matter and especially in the Singapore/Malaysia region, clouds can suddenly come in and ruin your night.
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 10th February 2006 at 02:32 PM.

  14. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    Yeah.. modern colour films have more than 3 layers for grain control but I have only kept up with film technology until 2002. After that, I just buy what is available on the market. Sigh.. how time flies! I have been using Kodak Portra NC and VC, both 160 and 400.
    Now i'm only using fuji superia xtra 400. Those film models u stated i've not tried them out as i'm only using the consumer level types.
    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.

  15. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    For film, it is important to correctly expose or slightly overexpose to reduce the grain effects. You should be able to see a nice tonal range on the negative itself, then the grain would not be obvious. So that was probably what you have done.

    Think of it like on a inkjet printer, if you print light colours, the dots are obvious but if you print dark colours, you don't see much of the dots. It's the reverse on negative, so those exposed area becomes darker on the film and you don't really see the grains, those less exposed area are lighter and the grains are quite sparse so you see them.

    But sometimes there is no such luxury expecially when shooting astro shots and once reciprocity failure sets in, it becomes very difficult to predict exposure and bracketing for exposure in the region of 15-30mins is no laughing matter and especially in the Singapore/Malaysia region, clouds can suddenly come in and ruin your night.
    True...that's why i only bulb shoot on a clear night. So for slides does that mean the exposure part is the same for negatives or reverse?
    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.

  16. #56

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    True...that's why i only bulb shoot on a clear night. So for slides does that mean the exposure part is the same for negatives or reverse?
    When you shoot slides, you have to make sure you don't overexpose the highlights, very much like digital because you will no longer get information there. I don't really shoot slides so I don't know slides that well. When I switched to digital, I had to slightly change my habits of overexposing because that would cost me my highlight detail.

    Professional films are able to render a smoother tones than consumer film. Maybe you can give it a try. You won't want to shoot consumer films anymore. Of course you will also need a good lab to give you the advantage professional film can offer.

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    When you shoot slides, you have to make sure you don't overexpose the highlights, very much like digital because you will no longer get information there. I don't really shoot slides so I don't know slides that well. When I switched to digital, I had to slightly change my habits of overexposing because that would cost me my highlight detail.

    Professional films are able to render a smoother tones than consumer film. Maybe you can give it a try. You won't want to shoot consumer films anymore. Of course you will also need a good lab to give you the advantage professional film can offer.
    Yes i was at Ruby Photo this afternoon and i saw professional negatives like Fuji Reala, Fuji Pro and Kodak Ektachrome, haven't asked about the pricing but i did for Provia and Velvia. The slides are all over $10 per roll....so expensive.
    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.

  18. #58

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle
    Yes i was at Ruby Photo this afternoon and i saw professional negatives like Fuji Reala, Fuji Pro and Kodak Ektachrome, haven't asked about the pricing but i did for Provia and Velvia. The slides are all over $10 per roll....so expensive.
    Yeah.. They can be quite costly. Plus, don't forget that development will cost money too. Which is why when the DSLR prices dropped below the 2k mark with acceptable quality, I switched to DSLR and to date, I have clocked more shots on digital within 2 years compared to more than 10 years on film.

    Digital has also changed my shooting style a little. I'm more trigger happy with nature shots. I am able to get more pictures I want because:-
    1) I don't have to control my shots to conserve film.
    2) I get to preview so I know when a shot does not turn out too good, I can wait for the next moment to shoot again.


    I have tried during one outing to shoot birds, shot almost 5 rolls of film and none of them turn out to my satisfaction after development... Either the wings are not in the position I wanted or the position is wrong etc... Now I'm getting more useable pictures. So it all depends on what we are going for. Some people will always say that film is better than digital blah blah blah. All I would like to say is that digital is going to be here to stay, I don't think film will be phased out that soon also. It really depends on demand. Each media has its own merits and it is important to know where is the end result is going to end up in and choose the media appropriately.
    Last edited by lsisaxon; 12th February 2006 at 11:24 PM.

  19. #59
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West of S'pore
    Posts
    999

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    hmm what a wellwritten paragraph about film and digital. maybe those camera shops out there wanna make this deal for amateur users...to compliment both mediums..something like...

    Buy F5 and get d100 free!
    or
    Buy 300d and get 1v free!

  20. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Demographic Survey #2: SLR users - Film or Digital

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon
    Yeah.. They can be quite costly. Plus, don't forget that development will cost money too. Which is why when the DSLR prices dropped below the 2k mark with acceptable quality, I switched to DSLR and to date, I have clocked more shots on digital within 2 years compared to more than 10 years on film.

    Digital has also changed my shooting style a little. I'm more trigger happy with nature shots. I am able to get more pictures I want because:-
    1) I don't have to control my shots to conserve film.
    2) I get to preview so I know when a shot does not turn out too good, I can wait for the next moment to shoot again.


    I have tried during one outing to shoot birds, shot almost 5 rolls of film and none of them turn out to my satisfaction after development... Either the wings are not in the position I wanted or the position is wrong etc... Now I'm getting more useable pictures. So it all depends on what we are going for. Some people will always say that film is better than digital blah blah blah. All I would like to say is that digital is going to be here to stay, I don't think film will be phased out that soon also. It really depends on demand. Each media has its own merits and it is important to know where is the end result is going to end up in and choose the media appropriately.
    Yes so i've to save more money for slides before i can use them. Correct, digital can trigger happy while film can't. The reason why i didn't change to DSLR cos i prefer the quality of film but yet didn't have enough for digital. Was targetting the 20D but it's still very expensive.
    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.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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
  •