Originally posted by cometguy I have shot film from the early 80's onwards. Up until 2012,with the purchase of my first "proper" digital, a Fuji X100, I was never impressed with the quality of digital images. There was just something"off" about them. Since then I have continued to shoot both film and digital. what I have noticed however, is that whenever I have had a slide or negative digitised, it just does not come close to the resolution of the original. I have shot the same subject at the same time with a 35mm slide and an APSc camera an a few occasions, and when one looks at the projected slide at about about 48"X36" it looks fine and sharp, but when it is digitised the details become fuzzy. I have tried both professional scans and copying onto my K3 via a macro lens.
The quoted article part solves the problem as to why for me. That being said though, I no longer use film for my "serious" stuff, unless it is for travel* or I go the whole hog and do medium format, as the all round IQ of digital and its versatility, to say nothing of the escalating cost of quality slide film, and ease of which one can experiment or just snap away for fun, without running up a huge bill beats using film into a cocked hat!
*I love to use film for my travel photos as I find it has certain advantages over digital :-
1. I usually travel with my better half and she hates it if I am constantly fiddling with my camera, so for me film is more sociable.
2. Its great to have to wait to see one images. Its a chance to relive your holiday all over again.
3. I like the fact I have real hard copies of images of some of the best times of my life.