Do you neglect your film camera when you own a Digital?


Status
Not open for further replies.

MatthewSCL

New Member
Apr 22, 2002
761
0
0
Central
Just to see if anyone is neglecting his or her film based camera after getting a digital one...:D
 

Originally posted by MatthewSCL
Just to see if anyone is neglecting his or her film based camera after getting a digital one...:D

For me, no.
Cos i get the digital before i get the film. Both is for different usage.
 

actually it's the other way round for me... i still prefer my fee-lum camera... been neglecting the digital. :D
 

Originally posted by ckiang
For those with mid to high end film SLR, and a D100/S2/D60 class DSLR, they will usually prefer the film one. :)

Regards
CK
is there any specific reason there? :eek: so far i only got chance to touch SLR, and really like it, thought DSLR should be better?
 

Originally posted by chenwei
is there any specific reason there? :eek: so far i only got chance to touch SLR, and really like it, thought DSLR should be better?
to illustrate ckiang's statement, personally i find the handling and results of my F100 better than the D100, although those F80 users should find the experience similar, if not better for the D100/S2 Pro. can't speak for Canon though, cos i never used a Canon fee-lum cam in my life... :D
 

Originally posted by chenwei

is there any specific reason there? :eek: so far i only got chance to touch SLR, and really like it, thought DSLR should be better?

The semipro DSLRs are better than any con/prosumer DCs, but not better than the pro and semi pro SLRs like the F100, F5, EOS 3, EOS 1V, etc. Of coz, if you have something like a D1x/D1h, Canon 1D/1Ds, etc, then it's a different story. The price is also a different story. :)

Regards
CK
 

still hanging on tightly to film for the simple reason that it's more exciting. ;)
 

I shoot more with my DSLR more often than my fee-lum camera. But fee-lum camera is indispensable, I still prever provia/velvia colour compared to my DSLR's colour reproduction. I use my fee-lum camera when I have extra money to burn for printing and/or processing of fee-lum.
 

In the begining I though the DSLR is the best in seeing the result after you shoot. After numbers of roll film I shoot and the result I print. I start to like film more then digital now.

As I see there is an improvement. I like the color in hard copy. What I need now is a good pro film scanner. Nevertheless, I still want to have one DSLR for seek of shooting picture when feel of pressing shutter!!!!! :D
 

Originally posted by ckiang

The semipro DSLRs are better than any con/prosumer DCs, but not better than the pro and semi pro SLRs like the F100, F5, EOS 3, EOS 1V, etc. Of coz, if you have something like a D1x/D1h, Canon 1D/1Ds, etc, then it's a different story. The price is also a different story. :)

Regards
CK
i c i c... er... i always have a stupid question, since the film is so small, how come it can develop 4R, 8R+ photos without any degrade of quality huh? :confused:

and also, are u guys with film SLR all got ur own darkroom? :eek: post-processing of film easy or not?
 

Originally posted by chenwei

i c i c... er... i always have a stupid question, since the film is so small, how come it can develop 4R, 8R+ photos without any degrade of quality huh? :confused:

and also, are u guys with film SLR all got ur own darkroom? :eek: post-processing of film easy or not?

Film is not 'so small'. In fact, most digital camera's sensors are smaller still. An 8R+ print is only an approx. 8x enlargement. Film grain is rather fine, so that's not much of a problem.

You watch movies in the cinema right? That's also 35mm film. And the area projected onto the big screen is even smaller than our 35mm film cameras. Quality still pretty good right? Even from the front row.

I don't have a darkroom, you don't really need a darkroom to develop film anyway (but you need one to print). Processing B&W is rather easy, colour is another matter altogether.

Regards
CK
 

Originally posted by ckiang

Film is not 'so small'. In fact, most digital camera's sensors are smaller still. An 8R+ print is only an approx. 8x enlargement. Film grain is rather fine, so that's not much of a problem.

You watch movies in the cinema right? That's also 35mm film. And the area projected onto the big screen is even smaller than our 35mm film cameras. Quality still pretty good right? Even from the front row.

I don't have a darkroom, you don't really need a darkroom to develop film anyway (but you need one to print). Processing B&W is rather easy, colour is another matter altogether.

Regards
CK
i c... :) u mean when we take out the film from camera, we "develop" it into those one row one row film, where in this case darkroom not really needed (then how huh? won't exposed meh?).

and to "print" it out, we need a darkroom right?

erm... a bit confused.... :confused:
 

Originally posted by chenwei

i c... :) u mean when we take out the film from camera, we "develop" it into those one row one row film, where in this case darkroom not really needed (then how huh? won't exposed meh?).

and to "print" it out, we need a darkroom right?

erm... a bit confused.... :confused:

Whats "those one row one row film"? :dunno:

There's something called a "changing bag", which is light tight. You load the film into a developing tank inside the bag. Once loaded, the tank can be taken out of the bag without any danger to the film. From there, you can pour chemicals into the tank for the developing process.

To print it yourself, you'll need a darkroom and enlarger (a bit like a projector) on a stand, but projecting downwards. Check out those B&W developing/printing books in the library, it will be clearer as they have illustrations and photos. :)

Regards
CK
 

Status
Not open for further replies.