PDA

View Full Version : Do You Use Film Cameras



regomodo
February 8th, 2008, 01:38 AM
I just had a scary moment about 10minutes ago after ging out drinking. By Bronica Etrs Medium format camera fell 4 feet to the floor completely shattering a filter after the strap worked its way loose during the night. Just pulled the bits apart (viewfinder, winder, film holder, 85mm lens) andit apears to still function correctly without a scratch. I know for a fact my Nikon D70 would not survive such an impact(the Bronica is very heavy).

This brings me onto my question. Anybody still use film cameras instead of digital?

[mods] how do i go about creating a poll? can't see an option

fuscia
February 8th, 2008, 02:29 AM
i praise a non-existent god for digital. i was always a total slob in the darkroom. i loved it, though. i fantasize about owning a leica mp. i miss grain.

arigram
February 8th, 2008, 02:32 AM
I am an artist.
I put quality above all.
I use Hasselblad and film.

gn2
February 8th, 2008, 02:34 AM
No. I sold my 35mm SLR on eBay two years ago.

el_ricardo
February 8th, 2008, 02:34 AM
why on earth did you take a medium format out drinking?

LaRoza
February 8th, 2008, 02:37 AM
[mods] how do i go about creating a poll? can't see an option

It should have been an option under "Additional Options" (below the text box) when you posted the thread.

Added poll.

regomodo
February 8th, 2008, 02:53 AM
why on earth did you take a medium format out drinking?

Becuase we had a uni club social. I prefer to not take my Nikon which cost me twice the price of my Bronica. Plus, i can't stand compacts, although my Russian Fed 1G could be classed as one, perhaps.

jrusso2
February 8th, 2008, 02:56 AM
I am still using a film 35 mm SLR until I get enough to buy a digital SLR

johndc
February 8th, 2008, 03:19 AM
I am an artist.
I put quality above all.
I use Hasselblad and film.

priceless.


why on earth did you take a medium format out drinking?

I take my 4x5 out drinking all the time. Chicks dig it.

To answer your question: I use both. My MF and LF stuff is all film, and I still use my Leica and Minolta 35mm cameras. But for jobs where a quick turnover is necessary, like newspaper work, I use digital -- you kind of have to, since the editor expects to see the stuff within hours of the assignment.

LaRoza
February 8th, 2008, 03:55 AM
I would also like to state that one should always have a camera handy when others are drinking. You never know when something youtube worthy will happen.

johndc
February 8th, 2008, 04:25 AM
I would also like to state that one should always have a camera handy when others are drinking. You never know when something youtube worthy will happen.

absolutely.

RAV TUX
February 8th, 2008, 04:47 AM
I just had a scary moment about 10minutes ago after ging out drinking. By Bronica Etrs Medium format camera fell 4 feet to the floor completely shattering a filter after the strap worked its way loose during the night. Just pulled the bits apart (viewfinder, winder, film holder, 85mm lens) andit apears to still function correctly without a scratch. I know for a fact my Nikon D70 would not survive such an impact(the Bronica is very heavy).

This brings me onto my question. Anybody still use film cameras instead of digital?

[mods] how do i go about creating a poll? can't see an option

I used to primarily use a Digital cam but now I primarily use my Sony Camcorder, it also takes still images.

I still have a regular film camera but hardly use it, I do have a supply of black and white film that I need to use.

I need to have my wife show me how to build a Pin Hole Camera for fun. ;)

Chilli Bob
February 8th, 2008, 05:24 AM
Digital for anything going on the web. Film for anything I really want to keep. Oh how I miss Agfa Ultra.

johndc
February 8th, 2008, 05:28 AM
Oh how I miss Agfa Ultra.

How I miss Agfa anything... :(

red_Marvin
February 8th, 2008, 10:06 AM
I have a nikon fe slr for black and white photographing, but for color images I use a dslr.
I've recently joined the local uni photo club so now I can develop the five-ish rolls(?) that I've taken since I went to a photo course.


I need to have my wife show me how to build a Pin Hole Camera for fun. ;)
It's easy:
0) Make a lightproof 5x10x10cm box out of black thick paper. It should be openable on one of the 5x10 sides
1) Make a ~1cm hole in the middle of one of the 10x10 sides and cover it with aluminum foil.
2) Make really small hole with the tip of a needle in the aluminum foil. The smaller the hole is the sharper the image will be, but the exposure time will be longer.
3) Use black paint to make sure the corners in the box, and the border between the paper and the foil are light proof.
4) Darken the room (pitch black or red photo paper safe lights)
5) Cut out a fitting piece of photo paper (bw) and fasten it inside the box on the other 10x10 side.
6) Close the box and put a finger on the foil hole.
7) Go out and find something that does not move and a place to put the camera (It's impossible to hold the camera still during the exposure.)
8) Hold the camera against the surface and point it towards the target.
9) Remove the finger for ~1.5-4 minutes.
A) Put the finger back and go and develop the photo paper.

TeaSwigger
February 8th, 2008, 10:17 AM
Film is a magnificent medium, but is really at its best only in specific, usually high quality applications. For everything else, and casual use by most folks, the digital camera is a blessing and absolutely the way to go.

arigram
February 8th, 2008, 11:21 AM
... plus, save for coating film (which needs heavy machinery) and making emulsion from scratch, the rest is pretty open source: make your own chemicals, your own paper, your own camera.

MrClarke
February 8th, 2008, 01:31 PM
both.

Minolta 400 SI primarily.

Digital for posting shots only.

optics is better in the non-digital ones, resulting in truer results that are not distorted in any axis.

popch
February 8th, 2008, 02:43 PM
why on earth did you take a medium format out drinking?

How do you know it's 'medium' for the OP? Perhaps his normal format is 8x10? (Inches, not millimetres. That would be a Minox).

Both, for me. I still have the negatives made by my grandfather from about 1905 on, and I would like to leave at least a few of mine to my grandchildren, when and if.

Dragonbite
February 8th, 2008, 03:04 PM
My wife does most of the photography and it's with a Cannon Rebel on 35mm film.

I've talked about digital film with her but honestly she gets such good shots with it (esp. of the kids) I am hesitant to move her to something different! If the average person gets one or two great shots in a roll she gets closer to 25% great shots (and the rest are just Good shots with a sprinkling of "wha happened?" ;) )

Chances are what will happen is I get a pretty good digital camera for myself so she can get used to it (including the "developing" process) and then at some point "take the plunge"

One thing that is helping is her old camera died, and she bought a new one (I wasn't there at that opportunity to stear her to digital) but it isn't taking as good of pictures as it should.

JurB
February 8th, 2008, 04:42 PM
I am an artist.
I put quality above all.
I use Hasselblad and film.

Quality tools != quality art

arigram
February 8th, 2008, 05:20 PM
Quality tools != quality art
That's borderline on offensive if I take it personally, but you are right.
Quality tools do not equal quality art.
One can make art with an Holga, indeed.
My point was that one who cares about quality, uses the right tools.
I hope I am clear now.
How often I hear from professional photographers that their quality
is "good enough for their clients" thus, good enough for them.
In other words, when talking to another professional about cameras
and I mentioned my preference he replied with "we don't need that kind of quality".

Fast and convenient are that keywords of most.

tigerpants
February 8th, 2008, 05:28 PM
Both have their place, both are useful.

JurB
February 8th, 2008, 05:42 PM
That's borderline on offensive if I take it personally, but you are right.
Quality tools do not equal quality art.
One can make art with an Holga, indeed.
My point was that one who cares about quality, uses the right tools.
I hope I am clear now.
How often I hear from professional photographers that their quality
is "good enough for their clients" thus, good enough for them.
In other words, when talking to another professional about cameras
and I mentioned my preference he replied with "we don't need that kind of quality".

Fast and convenient are that keywords of most.

Not a personal attack, i've not seen your photos ;).

I'll not start an argument about which medium gives the best INITIAL quality (there are arguments both ways), but i think that digital post processing beats the dark room hands down. And i don't mean speed an easyness, but fine grain control.

arigram
February 8th, 2008, 05:51 PM
Both have their place, both are useful.
Indeed.
I use a cheap Nikon D70s for quick snapshots (for my digital artwork, my cat, etc) and the Hasselblad for photographs.



I'll not start an argument about which medium gives the best INITIAL quality (there are arguments both ways), but i think that digital post processing beats the dark room hands down. And i don't mean speed an easyness, but fine grained control.

I won't disagree there, but when touching up the presentation of a well captured photograph, one doesn't need very fine control and in the end is about skill. Very fine control you need with extreme manipulations or using the photograph as a base for original (digital) art, but then you are leaving the realm of photography which really is about shutter control.

But truth be told, I am not interested in joining another film vs digital debate. They are old and plentiful and banned on almost every photo forum online.

The bottom line is that there are plenty of photographers that still use film and I am talking about photographers, not camera-users.
For the rest, amateurs and snapshooters, the convenience of digital in unbeatable.

If I was a programmer, I would have loved to contribute to the Ubuntu community regarding film photographer tools.

johndc
February 9th, 2008, 01:54 AM
How do you know it's 'medium' for the OP?

"medium format" is the proper designation for any camera that uses 120/220 rollfilm, including the Bronica ETRS. he's not being subjective -- that's just what it's called.


My point was that one who cares about quality, uses the right tools..

what does "quality" mean, anyway?


snapshots (for my digital artwork, my cat, etc) and the Hasselblad for photographs.

snapshots are photographs. whether you like it or not. most of the time, snapshots contain more social, cultural, and personal context than most any ansel adams photo.


the realm of photography which really is about shutter control.

wow. no.


The bottom line is that there are plenty of photographers that still use film and I am talking about photographers, not camera-users. For the rest, amateurs and snapshooters, the convenience of digital in unbeatable.

photographers use cameras.

toupeiro
February 9th, 2008, 08:06 AM
I do not consider myself a professional photographer by any means, but I have some amateur experience in film developing, and working with different lighting and aperture combinations. I don't think I know enough to say with total certainty which is better, but I will say that I've not yet seen a digital camera (and I've used some pretty damn expensive ones) that can do as good as a film camera with night photography, even with some back lighting. In well lit environments I feel digital and film may be parallel with macro photography, and digital is certainly more convenient, and touching up digital is much easier. However, when professionally taken by someone who understands film, lighting and camera dynamics, more natural lighting and shading is captured by film, and thus film requires less touching up in general than digital in my opinion.

D-EJ915
February 10th, 2008, 06:42 AM
if I want to take a pic of some gear I use my digital, if I want to take a picture I use my film SLR.

yabbadabbadont
February 10th, 2008, 06:53 AM
Does a "KODAK Instamatic X-15" count? :D

I still have an unused box of 3 GE MagiCubes to go with it... but I doubt that I could still find film for it. (or anyone to develop it)

I voted digital by the way. Nikon Coolpix 4300. It's good enough for me.

erykroom
February 10th, 2008, 07:13 AM
I have an old film SLR (the optics are vey bad) and a digital SLR. I preffer the digital one because I can experiment more but the film camera gives better colors. I can achive the same (colors) on a digital camera with Gimp.

cartisdm
February 10th, 2008, 07:35 AM
Film? Is that the stuff....wait...no.....OH! it's that....no.....what's film again? Does it come on some sort of savy flash disk?

My camera doesn't say anything about this film stuff, only brightly colored buttons that allow me to adjust for basically any sort of function most of which I have no idea what they do

Chilli Bob
February 10th, 2008, 02:25 PM
Does a "KODAK Instamatic X-15" count? :D

I still have an unused box of 3 GE MagiCubes to go with it...


Cool! That takes me back to the seventies. I was looking for one of those on ebay just a few weeks ago. A c*** camera, but a classic none the less.

As well as my modern Pentax SLR, I still use a Voigtlander Vito CLR occasionally. A great camera, with retro cool to boot.

Incense
February 10th, 2008, 03:04 PM
Until I get more $$, nothing beats the quality of my film camera, and a decent scanner. It is so nice to just plug a card in to my lappy and not have to worry about film, but the image quality is so lacking on the P&S digital cameras.

The Crazy Parrot
March 31st, 2008, 05:49 AM
I use digital, but I'm no pro. I prefer the stamina of digital cameras, being able to to take multiple photos and select the best ones, without having to change film, and being able to see the pic's, make digital for me.

The Crazy Parrot
March 31st, 2008, 05:52 AM
P.S. nice avatar Incense, Tennant is one of the best Doctors:)

dat311
November 15th, 2008, 11:55 PM
Film all the way!

Pentax ME-Super SLR

Olympus XA rangefinder.

If someone can tell me of a digital camera that gives the speed, sharpness and control of an XA then I'd be tempted - I don't believe that an equivalent exists, though.

I certainly wouldn't mind a DSLR, but that's down the road, still.

Chilli Bob
November 16th, 2008, 12:26 AM
Olympus XA rangefinder.


I've never heard of that so I did a quick google (e.g. http://www.urban75.org/photos/olympus-xa.html) and gotta say, that's a heck of a cool camera. I'm going to keep an eye out on ebay for one of those.

mips
November 16th, 2008, 12:30 AM
There is absolutely nothing wrong with film!

billgoldberg
November 16th, 2008, 12:30 AM
For non-artists, a digital camera is obviously better.

No more waiting for the film to get developed, better quality for a lesser price and the ability to take hunderds of pictures witouth having to change films.

pbpersson
November 16th, 2008, 12:31 AM
What the heck is a film camera??? :lolflag:

Corfy
November 16th, 2008, 04:41 AM
My wife and I have a SLR film camera, but we haven't used it in years. It is a Pentax K1000 with three zoom lenses. We used to have a flash, but it broke, and we haven't replaced it. (We actually had matching Pentax K1000s for a long time, but we sold one a few years back.)

For the last few years, our primary camera has been a digital point and shoot. It is an Olympus Camedia C-700. It only shoots at 2.1 MP, but it had a 10x optical zoom, which is equivalent to a 300mm zoom lens with 35mm film. It wasn't the best of cameras, but it did the job.

Just over six months ago, I got a Pentax K200D DSLR camera for my birthday. It came with a small zoom lens, but our old Pentax lenses work on it as well.

dat311
November 16th, 2008, 05:56 AM
I've never heard of that so I did a quick google (e.g. http://www.urban75.org/photos/olympus-xa.html) and gotta say, that's a heck of a cool camera. I'm going to keep an eye out on ebay for one of those.

Have a look at www.cameraquest.com for more classic rangefinders - they become addictive. Be sure to get the XA - the XA2 or XA3 are dumbed down versions with no rangefinder and inferior optics. The XA4 is similar but with a wider lens - and hard to find. The XA is a little gem, however. :)

Cheers,
Steve

pp.
November 16th, 2008, 09:55 AM
For non-artists, a digital camera is obviously better.

No more waiting for the film to get developed, better quality for a lesser price and the ability to take hunderds of pictures witouth having to change films.

Also the feature that the pictures vanish or become unusable after some time. Relieves you from the task of pruning your collection.

Although I do own two digital cameras (besides the bycatch in phones and PDAs), the majority of my cameras use film, from 8x11mm (Minox) up to 60x60mm (Rolleiflex). Unfortunately, my granddad's 8x12cm glass plate camera (converted to cut sheet film) doesn't work any more.

Chilli Bob
November 16th, 2008, 10:49 PM
classic rangefinders - they become addictive.

I can imagine they do. I still use a Voigtlander Vito CLR occasionally (The same as picture below). It's a great camera. I'm trying to track down the colored filters for B+W work, then I'll probably use it more.

http://www.collectiblecameras.com/catalog/images/VitoCLRs.jpg

Dixon Bainbridge
November 16th, 2008, 11:59 PM
I've just bought an olympus trip. Its currently loaded with Provia 100 and will be off to the lab to be drum scanned tomorrow. I'm expecting uberness. I think its great that 5 compact can take shots equal to a 3000 DSLR. :)

chucky chuckaluck
November 17th, 2008, 02:49 AM
i'd like any one of these...

http://ldtomei2.googlepages.com/Contax-I-012.jpg/Contax-I-012-large.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/21/31142229_3b9aa4edf1.jpg?v=0

http://www.cameraquest.com/jpg3/m4mid1.jpg

Chilli Bob
November 17th, 2008, 03:14 AM
i'd like any one of these...

Sweet! All fine choices, but WAY out of my price range. This is what I'm watching ebay for....

http://www.tonylockerbie.com/img/classics/2006/06/23ad3a.jpg

dat311
November 18th, 2008, 04:44 AM
Ah, they're all nice!

For me, a Canon P is on the cards in about 6 months time, I hope. First, I have to finish some work on my car, then a scanner so I can share photos online, *then* an interchangeble lens rangefinder (I think the Canon is the best blend of cool and affordability and practical shooter, for me). I've often thought about a Kodak Retina, too...

Told you they were addictive!

Cheers,
Steve

pp.
December 20th, 2008, 09:23 PM
i'd like any one of these...

I just happened to find one of these, the Leica M4 to be exact, even a black one. Now it is mine, with a 90mm Elmarit-M.

A gorgeous piece of machinery.

It made me buy a Lunasix-3 which was the first exposure meter I ever owned. Another lovely piece of engineering.

Now as to the Noctilux lens...

Dragonbite
December 21st, 2008, 02:06 AM
Costco doesn't carry camera film anymore! That's where we usually got our film but now have to find another source.

bruce89
December 21st, 2008, 02:10 AM
I'm afraid I use a Canon EOS 450D.

andlinux21
February 17th, 2009, 12:53 AM
I have a Canon EOS ELAN II and a Digital Rebel XTi
The XTi i use to post pics to flickr and to play around with.
The Elan I use when I take pictures at family functions and vacations. I prefer my film camera but I had to learn that slide film is very unforgiving and I had to make sure I had the shot right.