View Poll Results: What format do you primarily shoot?

Voters
486. You may not vote on this poll
  • Film

    328 67.49%
  • Digital

    158 32.51%
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 204

Thread: Who here still shoots primarily film?

  1. #101
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    AMK
    Posts
    5,711

    Default

    Using film since primary 3 with Nikon / Canon SLRs until the Sony F828 which is sharper than all the films and slides(even the fuji velvia 50 had to be set aside) launch, then slow down on using film. And stop using film when bought EOS 10D this year.

    I can shoot digital at will, not like film. Even I have EOS 3 with PB-E2 (capable to shoot at 7 fps) but I had never use it more than twice on film or sildes as it is too expensive and waste to shoot it in this way. I can even try all sort of exposures to test which aperture is the best of my lens!

    My shooting urge had start it again ever since I start using DSLR. You can imagine during the 20 years of experiences of photography, there is a few years of low morale as it is so sian when all your friends are not interested in it until digital cam appear cheap in Singapore after the year 2000 when the Canon IXUS 2mega pixel sell at >$1k level!

  2. #102
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Tan
    Using film since primary 3 with Nikon / Canon SLRs until the Sony F828 which is sharper than all the films and slides(even the fuji velvia 50 had to be set aside) launch, then slow down on using film. And stop using film when bought EOS 10D this year.

    I can shoot digital at will, not like film. Even I have EOS 3 with PB-E2 (capable to shoot at 7 fps) but I had never use it more than twice on film or sildes as it is too expensive and waste to shoot it in this way. I can even try all sort of exposures to test which aperture is the best of my lens!

    My shooting urge had start it again ever since I start using DSLR. You can imagine during the 20 years of experiences of photography, there is a few years of low morale as it is so sian when all your friends are not interested in it until digital cam appear cheap in Singapore after the year 2000 when the Canon IXUS 2mega pixel sell at >$1k level!
    Are you sure tat a Sony F828 is sharper than any films and slides? First time I heard something like this. Then what are those pro DSLR that cost more than 5k for since your Sony F828 is so good?!
    I am not here to bash you but I am just listing the facts! And facts is facts, you can't escape from it, you just have to accept it!

  3. #103
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Guilin
    Posts
    1,060

    Default

    I started with film manual SLR unitl the digital age came. Of course for digital, we have the flexibility to check the pic taken and re-shoot if necessary.

    In my own opinion, film still works by experience as compare to digital as the camera "works" for you.

    I took great pics (my standard) with C5050 & C5060 since they have pre-program functions until I bought myslef a DSLR that I have to go back to basic.

    On my last trip overseas, I took pics with film SLR and my C5050 as backup. All pics in film turn out fine.

  4. #104
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Tan

    I can shoot digital at will, not like film. Even I have EOS 3 with PB-E2 (capable to shoot at 7 fps) but I had never use it more than twice on film or sildes as it is too expensive and waste to shoot it in this way. I can even try all sort of exposures to test which aperture is the best of my lens!
    Yes your camera is capable of that but that doesn't means you need to use it that way all the time. BTW, shooting at 7fps does not necessarily means wasting film if you know what you are doing.

  5. #105
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Tan
    Using film since primary 3 with Nikon / Canon SLRs until the Sony F828 which is sharper than all the films and slides(even the fuji velvia 50 had to be set aside) launch, then slow down on using film. And stop using film when bought EOS 10D this year.

    I can shoot digital at will, not like film. Even I have EOS 3 with PB-E2 (capable to shoot at 7 fps) but I had never use it more than twice on film or sildes as it is too expensive and waste to shoot it in this way. I can even try all sort of exposures to test which aperture is the best of my lens!

    My shooting urge had start it again ever since I start using DSLR. You can imagine during the 20 years of experiences of photography, there is a few years of low morale as it is so sian when all your friends are not interested in it until digital cam appear cheap in Singapore after the year 2000 when the Canon IXUS 2mega pixel sell at >$1k level!
    And also I have a question that I does not understand. What does you meant by best aperture for your lens?! If the best aperture for your lens is f8, does not means that you use f8 all the way???

  6. #106
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Woodlands
    Posts
    464

    Default Yes, I use film.

    Yes, will continue to use films for important events, digital point & shoot type for casual use only. Because a mid-ranged DSLR is way too expensive! With that kind of price, I can get a high-end SLR film camera! And DSLR value gets depreciate very quickly, within a few years it's almost vintage! Film is still the best medium now and I do not have to worry about what's the next highest megapixels resolution that will over take the current ones.

  7. #107
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    London, United Kingdom
    Posts
    596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX Boy
    And also I have a question that I does not understand. What does you meant by best aperture for your lens?! If the best aperture for your lens is f8, does not means that you use f8 all the way???
    I recently read a book about finding the best aperture by shooting at the same ev at the same subject for all different aperture settings and then using a high magnification loupe to see which one is the best, by paying particular attention to the corners of the slide. I'm pretty sure this was a book on Architectural Photography.

    In any case, the few lenses in my arsenal are sharp enough for me at all apertures; aperture is my control for DOF mainly.

    ----------

    To contribute to why I shoot mostly film, I'm not earning cash outta this; no clients or whatever needing digital copies, instant verificantion of results or needing post editing.

    Also, I shoot mostly slide film. It's an awesome feeling to see a properly exposed slide on a lightbox catching that moment in time. THAT's what I shot direct from my camera, no cropping or post

    Plus, its very expensive, IMO to get slides from digital cameras. Velvia 50 + Developing + Mounting = SGD 9.50 + 8? Each conversion from digital to slide is USD2.50 + shipping -> no thanks. Not sure if SG got ppl doing, not to mention the time doing post. yuck.

    Now on the other hand, if I were working full time as a career, if my clients need it, I will definitely venture into digital Yummy digital backs

    Alvin <- recent medium format convert

  8. #108
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Film vs Digital

    I still shoot in film, though occassionally now. Digital is the way to go (for work). Film is the way to go (for leisure). I do admit that my skill level in film has dropped. Whenever I shoot in film, there is always this urge to see the photo !! and realise, shucks... it's NOT there !!

    My primary film cam is the FM2. (Sold the F100, F90 and F70). Looking for a manual Nikkor 35-105 to accompany that cam. Don't like my AF lenses on it. Heard that it may spoil the AF on the lens if used on the FM2. (still wondering if there is any truth in this)

    Must admit that post processing on digital is VERY time consuming, so sometimes, film IS better. There will ALWAYS be a market for film, just as there is still a market for typewriters (small though it may be).

    Both have its advantages and limitations. Use them as the circumstances dictate.

  9. #109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamestan
    Film vs Digital

    I still shoot in film, though occassionally now. Digital is the way to go (for work). Film is the way to go (for leisure). I do admit that my skill level in film has dropped. Whenever I shoot in film, there is always this urge to see the photo !! and realise, shucks... it's NOT there !!

    My primary film cam is the FM2. (Sold the F100, F90 and F70). Looking for a manual Nikkor 35-105 to accompany that cam. Don't like my AF lenses on it. Heard that it may spoil the AF on the lens if used on the FM2. (still wondering if there is any truth in this)

    Must admit that post processing on digital is VERY time consuming, so sometimes, film IS better. There will ALWAYS be a market for film, just as there is still a market for typewriters (small though it may be).

    Both have its advantages and limitations. Use them as the circumstances dictate.
    Why is so much time spent on post processing? Is it cos digital still has that much to catch up with film, or you are just doing some additional stuff which you'll have to do in the traditional darkroom?

  10. #110
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamestan
    Film vs Digital
    ...
    My primary film cam is the FM2. (Sold the F100, F90 and F70). Looking for a manual Nikkor 35-105 to accompany that cam. Don't like my AF lenses on it. Heard that it may spoil the AF on the lens if used on the FM2. (still wondering if there is any truth in this)

    ...
    AF on the lens will spoiled if used on the FM2? huh? The "AF" on non AF-S Nikkors basically consists of a little screw for the AF motor in the camera to engage. If the camera is MF, the little screw isn't engaged. I don't see how this can lead to your lens spoiling.

    FYI, I do use AF lenses on my FM2 as well as MF lenses on my F100. Both are still fine. The only thing which might spoil the lens/camera, is if you attempt to manual focus an AF (but not AF-S) lens on an AF camera while still in AF mode. Trying to manual focus while the AF drive on the camera is still engaged to the lens might spoil the AF motor.

  11. #111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamestan
    Film vs Digital

    Must admit that post processing on digital is VERY time consuming, so sometimes, film IS better. There will ALWAYS be a market for film, just as there is still a market for typewriters (small though it may be).

    Both have its advantages and limitations. Use them as the circumstances dictate.
    This is interesting! Are you talking color when you just send the films for development?

    If you are talking about B&W, well there is A LOT of post-processing after you have taken the pictures, IF you want to have as much control as possible on the final product. Ansel Adams did not call himself a printer more than a photographer for no good reasons!

  12. #112
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    This is interesting! Are you talking color when you just send the films for development?

    If you are talking about B&W, well there is A LOT of post-processing after you have taken the pictures, IF you want to have as much control as possible on the final product. Ansel Adams did not call himself a printer more than a photographer for no good reasons!
    Thanks for the comment. I am talking about BW. My D100 shoots in colour. If I want prints in BW, then I will have to PS them. That's why its time-consuming.

    If I shoot film, I just add the desired colour filter and shoot! That's me. That's why I say film easier to process, as there are no post processing work from me.

    I am sure a lot of people will disagree, but that's the way I shoot. Anyway, my subjects are my 2 lovely children, so I keep the shooting simple.

    Cheers...

  13. #113
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justarius
    AF on the lens will spoiled if used on the FM2? huh? The "AF" on non AF-S Nikkors basically consists of a little screw for the AF motor in the camera to engage. If the camera is MF, the little screw isn't engaged. I don't see how this can lead to your lens spoiling.

    FYI, I do use AF lenses on my FM2 as well as MF lenses on my F100. Both are still fine. The only thing which might spoil the lens/camera, is if you attempt to manual focus an AF (but not AF-S) lens on an AF camera while still in AF mode. Trying to manual focus while the AF drive on the camera is still engaged to the lens might spoil the AF motor.
    Like I said, it's some "friendly advise" I got from someone. Being protective of my investment, I would rather err on the side of caution. You may have a point there, about the little screw. How about all the contacts on the lens? On MF cams there is nowhere for it to engage. Will this lead to the lens spoiling? I really am not sure if I can use AF lens on MF cam. If you or anyone have documented proof that it can, please share with the rest of us, especially me!! Of course I hope that it can, cos it will save me tons on $$.

    I know that MF lenses can be used on AF cams. That's stated in the brochure of every AF camera. That's what I call documented proof.

    Cheers...

  14. #114
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeocolin
    Why is so much time spent on post processing? Is it cos digital still has that much to catch up with film, or you are just doing some additional stuff which you'll have to do in the traditional darkroom?
    Well, I noticed that in digital, whites when over-exposed tends to lose its details. As a result, I shoot slightly under-exposed, to preserve the details on whites.

    If you have any other method to overcome this problem, please share it. I'll be most willing to learn and apply. Life is all about learning.

    Thanks... Cheers...

  15. #115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamestan
    Like I said, it's some "friendly advise" I got from someone. Being protective of my investment, I would rather err on the side of caution. You may have a point there, about the little screw. How about all the contacts on the lens? On MF cams there is nowhere for it to engage. Will this lead to the lens spoiling? I really am not sure if I can use AF lens on MF cam. If you or anyone have documented proof that it can, please share with the rest of us, especially me!! Of course I hope that it can, cos it will save me tons on $$.

    I know that MF lenses can be used on AF cams. That's stated in the brochure of every AF camera. That's what I call documented proof.

    Cheers...
    I am a Pentax user and their AF lens also have a screw at the lens mount for focusing plus various electrical contacts. I am used my AF Tamron 28-200 on MF and AF cameras without problems.

  16. #116

    Default

    35mm film can't compare to a DSLR quality, although the dynamic range is of course still abit better. I'm sure that'll be worked out soon enough. grain on 35mm film becomes very apparent by 11x14inches, DSLR pictures have no problem. I shoot medium format and 4x5 and I've to say that the dynamic range of digital is still not enough to match up to medium format, but that's ok, photoshop can do wonders.
    and it's kinda silly to be comparing the workflow of film to the workflow of digital files, they're totally different beasts. and if you scan your film you're still gonna have to use a digital workflow, so no diff there.

  17. #117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattlock
    35mm film can't compare to a DSLR quality, although the dynamic range is of course still abit better. I'm sure that'll be worked out soon enough. grain on 35mm film becomes very apparent by 11x14inches, DSLR pictures have no problem. I shoot medium format and 4x5 and I've to say that the dynamic range of digital is still not enough to match up to medium format, but that's ok, photoshop can do wonders.
    and it's kinda silly to be comparing the workflow of film to the workflow of digital files, they're totally different beasts. and if you scan your film you're still gonna have to use a digital workflow, so no diff there.
    I agree with your second paragraph. Because of the limitations of the capture medium (film or chips), a lot of post processing is often needed. Of course how much is needed depends on the personal "sophistication" of the photographers. There are different requirements.

    Personally I do not care a damn whether the dynamic range of film is better or vice versa. Grain gives pictures the sense of sharpness. That is why FP4 appears "sharper" than Techpan. I have seen stunning grainy pictures from 35 mm Delta 3200 (talk about grains) enlarged to 20x24. Of course the grains are there. But the silver prints! Such brilliance! So I use films (B&W) because I love the silver prints. I do not need to justify which is better. Period.

  18. #118
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Woodlands
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kit
    Yes your camera is capable of that but that doesn't means you need to use it that way all the time. BTW, shooting at 7fps does not necessarily means wasting film if you know what you are doing.
    Yes! I agree with Kit. Sometimes those "Once in a life time situation" is worth all the films that had been used. Like in Sport events, F1 race, every fast moving or actions situation require as much as 7fps to capture it but out of that 7fps, maybe only 1 pic or so is deemed acceptable so when you get that few pics than it worth more than you can imagine.

  19. #119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamestan
    Film vs Digital

    My primary film cam is the FM2. (Sold the F100, F90 and F70). Looking for a manual Nikkor 35-105 to accompany that cam. Don't like my AF lenses on it. Heard that it may spoil the AF on the lens if used on the FM2. (still wondering if there is any truth in this).
    I use a FE2, but I use both manual and auto focus lens on it. No, the AF lens will not be damaged because the "screw" as mentioned, is not in contact with the body. I like the feel of the manual lens on the camera instead though. Somewhat different "feel".

  20. #120

    Default

    Quoted from Mr Spielberg:
    "There's a magic about chemistry and film. Sure, a digital shot is steady. It doesn't have to ride through the gate of a projector. And, sure, it's as clean as the OR in a major hospital. That's exactly what's wrong with it. Film has a molecular structure called grain; even a still of just a flower in a vase has life because of the grain, because of the molecules in the film. Especially if you sit in the first five rows of any movie theater, you know what I'm talking about. The screen is alive. The screen is always alive with chaos and excitement, and that will certainly be gone when we convert to a digital camera and a digital projector. I was one of the first people to use digital technology to enhance my films, but I'm going to be the last person to use digital technology to shoot my movies."

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •