[Jonathan Mac]

On my last 2.5 week holiday with my digital camera I took 2.5k photos. Or maybe even more, it was 1.5 years ago so I can't remember exact numbers.
Anyway, it took me 3 months to go over the photos, select the keepers and come back with 50 photos that were good, but I wasn't 100% happy with their look.

Now with film, I went on 2.5week holiday a week ago and I came back with 234 photos. 114 x 35mm photos (3 rolls) and 10 rolls of 120 film.
I will keep 80 photos. That's pretty much 1 photo out of 3. I say it's a good keeper rate. Not to mention that I spent more time enjoying my holiday, instead of being what a friend of my described, behaving like a dog in heat.

I've been wondering recently how I'd do if I went on holiday with only film, and my suspicion is I'd enjoy myself more and get photos I'd like more. So far, I've only been brave enough to do that for day trips. I think it's a gradual process for someone like me, I'll admit to being afraid of losing out on images I could get on digital but not on film.

[Nuff]

I've been wondering recently how I'd do if I went on holiday with only film, and my suspicion is I'd enjoy myself more and get photos I'd like more. So far, I've only been brave enough to do that for day trips. I think it's a gradual process for someone like me, I'll admit to being afraid of losing out on images I could get on digital but not on film.

I actually get better photos than before. I don't think I lost any. I did take my K5 with me to Nepal and Japan, but it never left the hotel. You might want to try that at first.

[Dartmoor Dave]

There are two main reasons why I get a higher percentage of good shots with film.

First: I know that every time I trip the shutter I’m spending money, so I don’t even take the photo unless I’m sure it’s worth it.

Second, and most important: The huge bright film viewfinder lets me get the shot looking exactly right on the focusing screen before I take the picture. With film I’ll take one or two frames, know that I’ve got the shot, and move on. With digital I’ll still be there chimping and bracketing twenty frames later. And the clarity of my K1000’s viewfinder means that I almost never have to crop or straighten a shot. The murky little peephole of my DSLR viewfinder means I have to crop and/or straighten just about every shot I take.

[Beaugrand]

I still use an Argus C3 (they're cheap, I have several) when I decide to shoot film.

Talk about tiny viewfinders! The C3 has two, one for the rangefinder, one to compose the shot. Nearly every shot is a "keeper," because the C3 makes you THINK, before (did I advance the film?), during (aperture, shutter speed, ISO; set the focus with the [recently calibrated] rangefinder's split image, look in the other viewfinder to compose, did you cock the shutter?), and after (wind film immediately after the shot so you don't forget, check the frame counter and is it set right this time?).

I've never missed a shot with a C3 because the batteries were dead.

Timing is crucial, because I won't be able to get off another one for a few seconds (the C3 has a winding knob, not a fast advance lever, and winding is a two-hand operation; the shutter must be cocked manually for each and every shot. Accidental double exposures happen [and sometimes deliberate multiple exposures, so it's all good]).

I have some very sophisticated film SLR cameras, but I usually shoot in manual mode. I do enjoy how a simple manual SLR "student" camera handles, but I seem to have a slightly higher cull rate with the SLRs than I do with the C3; let's just say that I get about the same number of "acceptable" images from a 36 exposure roll in a film SLR that i do with a 24-exposure roll in a C3.

That's all great, I really enjoy film, but for making money I'm going to be using a digital camera of one kind or another. That's just business.

[johnha]

There are two main reasons why I get a higher percentage of good shots with film.

First: I know that every time I trip the shutter I’m spending money, so I don’t even take the photo unless I’m sure it’s worth it.

Second, and most important: The huge bright film viewfinder lets me get the shot looking exactly right on the focusing screen before I take the picture. With film I’ll take one or two frames, know that I’ve got the shot, and move on. With digital I’ll still be there chimping and bracketing twenty frames later. And the clarity of my K1000’s viewfinder means that I almost never have to crop or straighten a shot. The murky little peephole of my DSLR viewfinder means I have to crop and/or straighten just about every shot I take.

I agree completely with the above. It's not so much the cost, but the limited number of shots before I have to reload, but yes I find myself chimping till the cows come home with digital (I don't really know why). On film I very rarely take two shots with the same composition unless it's a once in a lifetime shot or I know I've messed the first one up.

Having stated the above, it's not really a fair fight, I've recently got my LX back from repair (last used a very long time ago) and it makes digital feel very hollow indeed.

John.

[Luppenko]

I'm looking forward to make my first experiences with my first SLR. Starting with a P+S, going to a DSLR I kind of take the opposite way of learning photography. I just shot my first roll of film and I'm pretty sure I messed up at least 90% of the film, mostly because I had no idea what I'm doing. Also because the camera has some issues and it seems that the camera hasn't been used in ages.
I think I like it. Wether I like it more than shooting with my K-x, I don't really know yet.

[Jonathan Mac]

I'm looking forward to make my first experiences with my first SLR. Starting with a P+S, going to a DSLR I kind of take the opposite way of learning photography. I just shot my first roll of film and I'm pretty sure I messed up at least 90% of the film, mostly because I had no idea what I'm doing. Also because the camera has some issues and it seems that the camera hasn't been used in ages.
I think I like it. Wether I like it more than shooting with my K-x, I don't really know yet.

Most people out there with DSLRs mess up a large proportion of their shots too, it's nothing to do with it being film or digital. They think an expensive camera will be foolproof.

Using film is a pleasant learning experience, far more enjoyable than the often frustrating learning experience from digital.

[Dartmoor Dave]

Using film is a pleasant learning experience, far more enjoyable than the often frustrating learning experience from digital.

If I ruled the world, DSLRs would be shipped with only fully manual features working out of the box. Users would have to pass tests showing their basic understanding of manual focus and exposure in order to unlock the camera’s automatic features one by one. I think this would improve the general world-wide standard of photography considerably, particularly since I would also make cameras deliver a painful electric shock to anyone trying to use HDR.

It’s probably a good thing I don’t rule the world. . .

[shampeon]

If I ruled the world, DSLRs would be shipped with only fully manual features working out of the box. Users would have to pass tests showing their basic understanding of manual focus and exposure in order to unlock the camera’s automatic features one by one. I think this would improve the general world-wide standard of photography considerably, particularly since I would also make cameras deliver a painful electric shock to anyone trying to use HDR.

It’s probably a good thing I don’t rule the world. . .

I feel like I learned more in the first month of owning a DSLR than I did in the years I spent with a film camera, because I could immediately see and identify my mistakes. You get instant feedback about exposure, focus, timing, composition, DOF, etc.. Now that I've got the basics down, shooting film is much more enjoyable.

[jtkratzer]

I feel like I learned more in the first month of owning a DSLR than I did in the years I spent with a film camera, because I could immediately see and identify my mistakes. You get instant feedback about exposure, focus, timing, composition, DOF, etc.. Now that I've got the basics down, shooting film is much more enjoyable.

I had a very similar experience. I'm just now picking the film back up and ready to see what these "older" cameras can do.

[pentaxian_tmb]

If I ruled the world, DSLRs would be shipped with only fully manual features working out of the box. Users would have to pass tests showing their basic understanding of manual focus and exposure in order to unlock the camera’s automatic features one by one. I think this would improve the general world-wide standard of photography considerably, particularly since I would also make cameras deliver a painful electric shock to anyone trying to use HDR.

It’s probably a good thing I don’t rule the world. . .

I will go one step further. I want to see a small-sized "student" DSLR with a great sensor but with only M, Av, Tv, and B modes, and as little menu options as possible; auto-focus spot only; and all main functions (iso, shutter, app) contolled with mechanical dials on the body. In other words, a simple, compact, easy to use DSLR that produces great images, but makes you work for them.

[fretlessdavis]

I will go one step further. I want to see a small-sized "student" DSLR with a great sensor but with only M, Av, Tv, and B modes, and as little menu options as possible; auto-focus spot only; and all main functions (iso, shutter, app) contolled with mechanical dials on the body. In other words, a simple, compact, easy to use DSLR that produces great images, but makes you work for them.

I will go one step further. I want to see a small-sized "student" DSLR with a great sensor but with only M, Av, Tv, and B modes, and as little menu options as possible; auto-focus spot only; and all main functions (iso, shutter, app) contolled with mechanical dials on the body. In other words, a simple, compact, easy to use DSLR that produces great images, but makes you work for them.

+1. No video, no review screen for instant review (just a plain small LCD with a histogram would be fine). Hopefully this will bump up the battery life significantly-- up enough that I can toss it in my backpack with fresh batteries and not worry about it for a 1-2 weeks backpacking or paddling trip.

[Blue]

Yep I sent my last batch to Dwayne's in October 2010, a few months before they shudown Kodachrome processing. Kodachrome still the best colour film ever made.

Phil.

I FedExed some rolls the last week.

[Nuff]

+1. No video, no review screen for instant review (just a plain small LCD with a histogram would be fine). Hopefully this will bump up the battery life significantly-- up enough that I can toss it in my backpack with fresh batteries and not worry about it for a 1-2 weeks backpacking or paddling trip.

Sounds like you want slr not dslr. For me the major reason for switching back to film was going through old photos and they looked better than anything I shot with dslr.

[fretlessdavis]

Sounds like you want slr not dslr. For me the major reason for switching back to film was going through old photos and they looked better than anything I shot with dslr.

That's why I shoot almost everything with a 645 SLR. I wish they could make a DSLR handle like a normal SLR.