[reeftool]

I grew up with film also but I do love digital. I like being able to upload my pictures, edit and print in a few minutes rather than waiting a couple of days or spending hours in a darkroom.

Autowinders were a wonderful thing for those of us who couldn't afford high end SLR's and the expensive motor drives you could buy for them.

The downsides are some of the things you mention. I have trashed camera bodies because the autowinder broke. While I have mostly manual lenses and the couple of AF lenses I own work fine, lots of good glass has ended up in the scrap pile because the autofocus broke. My eyesight isn't what it was so that is one benefit of AF that I like.

For all the hype the different camera manufacturers advertise about their metering and auto exposure, I think I got just as good results by centering the needle and adjusting the exposure manually. I still shoot manually a lot.

I did the film thing too but could never afford to set up my own darkroom and if I did I wanted to do color, and you know how complicated and expensive that was.
I revel in the digital age. No wasted pics, no storing negatives, no expensive film, no stressing over what speed film to buy.
My computer is my darkroom and I love it.
I think once you get your equipment and are happy with it use it! Don't stress over the latest or greatest.
I do agree that digital can make you forget the basics of photography. I find I have to slow myself down to think about composition, lighting and all the variables that go into taking a keeper. I think the temptation is to fire away and hope something turns out.
Perhaps I should shoot with a card that only allows 36 photos! That way you have to put in more thought to each and every photo.
But seriously how many would give up their DSLR and go back to film?

[rburgoss]

I think the temptation is to fire away and hope something turns out.

Perhaps I should shoot with a card that only allows 36 photos!

But seriously how many would give up their DSLR and go back to film?

Oh Boy, you have nailed it hard and dead on.

Exactly that. If we had only 36 pictures to shoot /per memory card, for sure we would be more careful shooting. With digital, pressing the shutter like a machine gun and hoping something turns out good, is one of the biggest reasons digital is making us lazy.

And about if I would give up my DSLR and go back to film.... I would of course, If I could find film, chemistry and darkroom supplies as easy as 20 yrs ago. Today, even slide film is a PITA, because even though I can find slide film, there's only but one lab that develops it (locally), and I have to wait till other 48 rolls stack up the line for development, because the lab will not keep the chemistry "sitting" around waiting weeks for more film to be developed.

Last time I sent a couple of rolls of Ektachrome for developing (about a year ago), I had to wait three weeks

[Venturi]

Oh Boy, you have nailed it hard and dead on.

Exactly that. If we had only 36 pictures to shoot /per memory card, for sure we would be more careful shooting.

Go buy a D3X and put a 4GB CF card in it.

I know I'm guilty of pretty much everything you mentioned in the OP - especially when I'm shooting candid snaps of my little boy.
I would also echo that I didn't/don't necessarily find digital any easier than film. There are aspects of shooting digital that took me quite a while to get my brain wrapped around - like variable ISO, white balance and dynamic range. Even having auto-focus was a change for me.
But it is true that we quickly get used to and take for granted technology to the point of laziness all too often.
I was 8yrs old when PONG was released in 1972. People balanced their checkbooks by hand and without a calculator. Nobody even fathomed a "personal computer" that you could lay in your lap. Some folks still had B&W televisions - and they probably only had one.

But the thing is with technology it just means that getting mediocre results is a bit easier. In the manual days you had to adjust everything yourself or you got all white or all black negatives. Today the onboard computers get you at least something that you can pass around to your family and friends. But to get a good photo - a really good photo - I think it takes even more "work" now with DSLR because the variables, limitations and expectations of the medium are much more broad.

Anyway, there's my 1st cup of coffee thoughts on the subject.

[Blue]

Can digital bodies do double exposure? I'm talking about "in camera" and not via PhotoShop etc. I remember when the coolest trick was to do a double exposure and make your girlfriend appear to be in a drinking glass!

[ChipB]

There's been several posts over the past couple of years that echo the sentiments of the OP. I think a lot of folks, me included, are finding that digital can lead to (for lack of a better term) laziness.

I grew up using an Argus C3 (the brick), then in the late 60's got my first Pentax - a Spotmatic with a 50mm 1.4 lens. Used various Pentax film camera's till the mid 90's and started "going digital" with some P&S's until getting my first DSLR (*ist DS) about 3 1/2 years ago.

After awhile, I was losing my "joy of photography" - didn't really care if I took any pictures or not, until I was only taking out the camera to take pics of my grandkids. Realized I was only taking snapshots - NOT pictures.

I thought about it for awhile - trying to decide if I was really interested in taking pictures - decided I was. So, what to do?? Decided to purchase some manual lenses - a variety of K's, M's and M42's - so I would have to think about what I was doing. My goal was to take pictures that required NO post processing (except for resizing to email).

Guess what - the "joy" is back!! I'm out all the time with my K200D (using a variety of lens - both old and new) taking pictures. I've crawled around on my belly (if you'd see me, you'd know this wasn't easy!!), been out in the rain, whatever!! Don't get me wrong, they aren't all "keepers", but they aren't all snapshots either!! And, I still do take the snapshots of the grandkids. But I like to think they're better snapshots now!!

Long winded - sorry. Gotta go - there's pictures to be taken.

[rburgoss]

I would also echo that I didn't/don't necessarily find digital any easier than film.

I never said digital was easier than film. My point is, that all the digital gizmos gives many people a false sense that good pictures can be produced solely from the hardware. You can notice this false sense on how many people complaint about not getting good results, blaming on camera, lens, shutter, exposure mode, metering mode, focus mode, low light, etc.... when 99% of the time, a bad picture is just that, a bad picture whose result is only to blame on who was behind the camera.

Many people still think the music comes from the piano, not the pianist.... or, like that old story about the photojournalist that got a prize and a columnist asked him what kind of camera was he using... the photographer refused to answer and one day, the same columnist got a prize... then he got a phone call from the photographer that asked him what kind of typewriter was used....

[Canada_Rockies]

Can digital bodies do double exposure? I'm talking about "in camera" and not via PhotoShop etc. I remember when the coolest trick was to do a double exposure and make your girlfriend appear to be in a drinking glass!

The K10D and K20D can. K10D manual page 166. I don't know about the rest of the line.

[Ratmagiclady]

I like to consider the film and digital a little like painting in different media. Mostly I'm in digital out of the necessity of the times. It's not the same, but I try to enjoy it.

I think the level of tech we're comfortable with is something that can be a bit personal: I figure automation can be another way of telling the camera what to be doing, if you use it that way... Always liked to have a winder, never much cared for a higher-speed drive, the vast majority of the time. But, I do like simple controls you can set by feel.

[Canada_Rockies]

I never said digital was easier than film. My point is, that all the digital gizmos gives many people a false sense that good pictures can be produced solely from the hardware. You can notice this false sense on how many people complaint about not getting good results, blaming on camera, lens, shutter, exposure mode, metering mode, focus mode, low light, etc.... when 99% of the time, a bad picture is just that, a bad picture whose result is only to blame on who was behind the camera.

Those of us who still use M, K and M42 lenses still have to use the manual exposure methods we used way back when. I don't know how many threads there are on how the K10D and K20D don't meter properly with lenses not on the A aperture position and how Av just doesn't work because the lenses (K and M) only work wide open.

Many people still think the music comes from the piano, not the pianist.... or, like that old story about the photojournalist that got a prize and a columnist asked him what kind of camera was he using... the photographer refused to answer and one day, the same columnist got a prize... then he got a phone call from the photographer that asked him what kind of typewriter was used....

Love that line! I'll have to remember it.

[Venturi]

I never said digital was easier than film.

You're right and I didn't state things very well in my reply.

I got lazy and the fact I have a "state of the art" computer system and the awesome world wide web backing me up did not overcome the fact that my post essentially sucked.

[tranq78]

What to you think?

What do I think? I think the irony is simply delicious that people are willing to spend their hard earned money on digital solutions to perceived digital problems. The following won't really apply to pro-photogs or people who have a very particular use for digital, but the majority of us are advanced hobbiests...

The big "need" I keep reading about is wanting full frame. That's a $2,000-$3,000 solution, plus another couple of thousand bucks every couple years to upgrade to the newest full frame body. This is not a treadmill I even want to get on to. I can buy a PZ-1P for <$200 and $2,000 every 2 years means an indefinite supply of film. Even if FF gets down to $1,000, that's still a lot of film.

The need for improved sensor resolution? The highest quality films can give you what, 18-25 megapixels of equivalent quality? Or you can simply go medium format and be done.

Shake reduction? Use a tripod. 1 million stops of shake reduction + vastly improved compositions. I use a lightweight 4 section carbon fiber tripod + high quality ballhead. If I'm going to be carrying a bag of camera gear, carrying a small tripod is worth the price to me. Sometimes if there isn't room I don't extend the legs fully and use the tripod as sort of a monopod.

But I still want digital to put on the 'net! Well, I recently bought a flatbed and slide scanner. So now I'm digital too.

Is digital really cheaper than film? The cost of the latest computers + expensive software + storage media, etc etc. Maybe digital isn't so cheap compared to film after all.

Of course the above is my own opinion and I dunno nuthin'. But I have learned the hard way that my best images require me to slow down. In my case, firing off hundreds of digital images simply because I can just means that I have hundreds of crappy snapshots that I don't like.

[rburgoss]

It seems most of us agree technology es making us a bit lazy. I see a good point about using M and K lenses (as m42) cause it forces you to manual settings.

But for God's sake, lets go back to our eyes for focusing.

Anyway, I have to sign off for the next 10 days, since my cab has arrived (to the airport) cause I'm going on vacation. Where, to NY and DC. If you are wondering which gear I am taking.. haha.. guess what. Its vacation time. I am not in the mood for taking care of my big stuff, so my Option Wpi will be our companion for the trip.

See you.

Keep those shutters clicking.

[pingflood]

Oh Boy, you have nailed it hard and dead on.

Exactly that. If we had only 36 pictures to shoot /per memory card, for sure we would be more careful shooting. With digital, pressing the shutter like a machine gun and hoping something turns out good, is one of the biggest reasons digital is making us lazy.

You guys are acting like if there was this fairyland of film and magic before evil digital arrived, but guess what, there were still people shotgunning at high FPS long before digital. And careful shooting? HAH! Check out the # of film rolls used for your average National Geographic article. Spray and pray, indeed.

If anything, digital has allowed the great unwashed masses (that'd be us) to afford the style of shooting many pros used in the days of film.

[Kerrowdown]

I think that you are saing the the truest thing I ever read.

I do exactly think the same as you. I am 20year old and shooting with film.

I bought a k20d last week and i like it, but it's not the same as taking film pics and go down to the darkroom.

I feel that digital makes the pictures less personal. I feel that everyone could do the picts tha I do with the same camera. (being on the same place at the same time)

Just like you said before you had to think a lot and got a lot of studies.

Today one 10 year old kid can take master-sports-pics on a game, with a D3 in his hands. He just have to press the button. All the time, and the autofokus and frame-rate do the rest.

It's a different thing. Sad but true. Digital have a lot of positive sides, but you lose the feeling for the hand-work and the real photography.

Maybe could you take the big critic with a little bit of salt, but still I say what I belive in. Digital makes you lazy

You are very right! good post!

Why did I bought a k20d? Well, first I have never shoot with digital before and I wanted to know how it is. and 2, It's very usefull in some cases, for example when you need a picture very quick.

I don't give critic to digital cameras, and I don't think this post is about that. I just agree with RBURGOSS in his statement that we care a lot too much about the gear these days.
I told it in my first post ever here in the forum, and I see that we are many people thinking the same.

The day film die, photography will die.

R.I.P.

Best
Regards Emil

I hope your ten year old wonder kid doesn't turn up on the same asignment as me and try to put me out of a job.

It's taken me years to get there, using film and now digital and there's me thinking being professional at ones craft still counts for something.