[Tonytee]

For me it's all about simplicity, i.e. fewer controls to set, all in a standard location, and with direct readouts.
I'm experienced enough to know how to achieve the desired effect adjusting those few simple variables.

I hate electronic buttons, dials, LCD panels, menus, 200 page manuals and the associated learning curve.

Chris

I know how you feel. In May of 2015 I crossed over to digital photography. I was so exhausted from everyone henpecking me to go digital, I succumbed to an awful lot of pressure. Honestly, I have never stopped kicking myself in the caboose for doing so. First I started out buying a Nikon digital camera, and got busy shooting. I could not understand why my photos were coming out overexposed, when this high tech., precision instrument was so perfect. I discovered that this Nikon digital camera suffers from Limited Dynamic Range. Meaning it cannot handle certain colors and light. (Wonderful) In addition I then discovered what NOISE is and how much it degrades my images. Of course there is no cure for NOISE except to purchase another very expensive Nikon digital camera. Also, I now needed to purchase a Post Photo Editing Software (My medical bag) to doctor up my own image. I could go on and on, in a nutshell, it has been nothing short of a nightmare, and a very expensive one at that.

Buyer's Remorse,

Tonytee

[Eyewanders]

I know how you feel. In May of 2015 I crossed over to digital photography. I was so exhausted from everyone henpecking me to go digital, I succumbed to an awful lot of pressure. Honestly, I have never stopped kicking myself in the caboose for doing so. First I started out buying a Nikon digital camera, and got busy shooting. I could not understand why my photos were coming out overexposed, when this high tech., precision instrument was so perfect. I discovered that this Nikon digital camera suffers from Limited Dynamic Range. Meaning it cannot handle certain colors and light. (Wonderful) In addition I then discovered what NOISE is and how much it degrades my images. Of course there is no cure for NOISE except to purchase another very expensive Nikon digital camera. Also, I now needed to purchase a Post Photo Editing Software (My medical bag) to doctor up my own image. I could go on and on, in a nutshell, it has been nothing short of a nightmare, and a very expensive one at that.

Buyer's Remorse,

Tonytee

It's quite true that in many respects the NET cost of shooting digitally is essentially comparable, even still, with film. If you're chasing the ever-evolving tech and "upgrading" frequently, digital costs can easily outpace traditional.

[TomB_tx]

I added two film SLRs in the last month: an Asahi Pentax K from 1957, and a Leica R8 from 1997. Quite opposite ends of the spectrum, but both can be a joy to use, and similar enough operation to move easily between them. In fact, using any of my manual focus, manual exposure film cameras from 1934 to 2004 is the same creative procedure: evaluate the light, decide and set aperture and shutter, compose and focus, and decide the instant to capture the image. For me that all is more direct than trying to tell an autofocus system where to focus, and a program algorithm how I want the exposure. The old way is simple, reliable, and satisfying, where every new dSLR seems to change the process to some new trick. I prefer to stay with what works for me.

[cooltouch]

I haven't experienced the upgrade drain that many digital photographers do. I've owned only two interchangeable lens digital cameras -- a Canon XS bought seven years ago and a Sony NEX 7 that I bought last year. Both are way behind the curve nowadays, but I don't care as long as they do what I want. Although I probably will upgrade to a full frame digital one of these days when I can afford it. In the mean time I still enjoy shooting with my film cameras. It's interesting -- what I find myself doing these days is I use my digitals for inconsequential things, mostly because of their convenience. Whereas with my film cameras, taking them out for a shoot is more of an event. A serious session with my film photo gear.

On the topic of film camera acquisitions, recently I've been busy. I've bought these:

Nikkormat FT3
Nikon EL2
Nikon FG
Canon T70
Pentax Super Program
Pentax MX
Fuji STX-1n
Minolta X-570

I don't plan to keep them all. I'll be selling 3 or 4 of them. The FG, T70, and Super Program are most likely eBay bound.


and on its way here (it will probably arrive tomorrow):

Zeis Super Ikonta BX

[Jimfear]

I recently did many hours of photography, over the course of three days, for - in total - nine photos, and it was very satisfying! The Fuji GX680 loaded with Ektar shooting in spring light outdoors, just walking around thinking about how to spend the nine frames that I had in the camera, a true pleasure. This is of course an extremely slow workflow, probably closer to therapy than photography, but that's what I like. I never feel as good shooting the K-5 as when shooting the KX or LX, not to mention the Fuji which is the most satisfying camera I have ever used (not that image quality is the most important thing but the results can put even today's full frame DLSRs to shame).

I use the camera that suits the situation best, and if many different cameras can do it equally good I pick the one that I feel like shooting with. Today I wouldn't dream about doing low light hand held photography on film if I needed to get reliable results. That said, I still like the look of my pre-K-5-age Tri-X pushed to 6400 more than the low light shots with the K-5, but that was a struggle to shoot and quite often the results were poor.

[redrockcoulee]

I found out shooting the free ESII I had that manual focus cameras without diopters on the viewfinder are not for me so it is the MZ5n and MZ7 for me but I do now have two manual lenses. Focusing is even harder for the Holga and Diana cameras, they show one person three people some trees and a mountian; I live in SE Alberta where am I supposed to find trees or mountians.

Spent the last two evenings developing film, two rolls 120 , four tanks of 4X5 and the test roll from the ESII that turned out perfectly exposed for all 25 images. So relaxing working in the darkroom. Just me, the darkroom and listening to The Film Photography Podcast. One roll was testing out my Rolleichord which I have not used for years as it has a broken shutter button thing but is still useable.

I enjoy the process of the fully manual cameras like the Holgas, Dianas , Hasselblads and large format cameras. I enjoy the process of developing the film and selecting and printing images. I enjoy it and that is the best reason to do so. I also shoot and enjoy my digital cameras too.

[ChrisPlatt]

I live in SE Alberta where am I supposed to find trees or mountians.

I live by the beach and have the exact same problem!

Chris

[monochrome]

I live at 732' above sea level - not the beach but not a Fourteener either. To get elevation so I can say shoot a sunrise without trees blocking the view I go downtown and shoot from the 9th level of a parking garage.

[45 Mike]

Most of my film cameras lack any automation whatsoever. I have 2 6x9 120 folders, I have 2 6x4.5 folders, 2 TLR yashica 6x6, a 4x5 speed graphic, a 2x3 press B&J, a 6.5x9 folding box camera. I likely missed some. With these, I almost always use sunny 16 metering, and that is a challenge to me, to read the light and force that light into a lasting image.

I have several Pentax SLR bodies with working meters. An MX, P30t, P3n. MX is my favorite.
I also have a few Ricoh SLR bodies, a Kr-5 Super II, XR-7, and an XR-P. The KR-5 is my favorite, now that I fixed that stupid shutter/meter lock, argghh what a frustrating bit of nonsense.

It's a challenge, to my ability to use simple tools, and create an image. Opposing the snapshot mentality of digital.
I have a pentax K-30, K-x, and an *ist-D

So often when I am out with a digital, and I see a scene or subject and I wonder why I did not bring the 4x5, or the 2x3 press or even a folder, to really capture that light to force that image to my will.

[Ranchu]

Fair enough. But if you think about it, shooting digitally would give better results, technically speaking. I seem to think it's the process that we manual film shooters like. The limitations inherent in old camera technology make us approach the craft in a completely different manner than a modern, digital camera. What do you think?

It has nothing to do with the 'process' for me, it's about the results. Digital is lousy looking compared to film...I think digital shooters like to hang their preference for digital on resolution figures and convenience, and pretend that means digital is better than film, and thus film shooters simply have some kind emotional or creative relation to film. Some do, some don't . Some shoot it because it looks better, because that's their primary consideration. None of these people are me, they sure made some fine pictures.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/lake-district-weekend-meet.605460/

[stevebrot]

Fair enough. But if you think about it, shooting digitally would give better results, technically speaking. I seem to think it's the process that we manual film shooters like. The limitations inherent in old camera technology make us approach the craft in a completely different manner than a modern, digital camera. What do you think?

Depends on the process and the subject and the intent. For color work, I generally agree that my K-3 is a much more flexible tool than any of my film cameras. That being said, for certain subjects and intent, film may be the easiest and most predictable route to the desired result.

Moving on to B&W photography, there is no contest. I am pretty good at doing monochrome conversion from 14-bit RAW, but a well-crafted B&W negative simply has more and better data regardless of the pixel count*. This is particularly true for an optical (wet) print, but also for scans from the same.

I do appreciate the difference in "craft", but to be honest, aside from the immediate feedback and endless number of exposures available with digital, I shoot both types of cameras the same, though I might admit that my 35mm film cameras are much easier and faster to work with.


Steve

* The exception might be the Leica monochrom or possibly some future implementation B&W implementation of Pentax pixel shift.

[Ranchu]

Digital vs Film 2012-2014: CAMERA VS. LOG - Testing Dynamic Range

[PGillin]

I do appreciate the difference in "craft", but to be honest, aside from the immediate feedback and endless number of exposures available with digital, I shoot both types of cameras the same, though I might admit that my 35mm film cameras are much easier and faster to work with.

You're definitely on to something there. Even very old cameras (such as the Spotmatic, with the inconveniences of screwmount, or the Nikon F, with a back that you have to juggle while changing film) are much simpler to work with. This simplicity translates into ease and speed of use. Although my digital (Fuji) camera comes close, the last generation of fully manual SLRs (and some with aperture priority, LX, F3, Super Program...) are faster and easier to use. For me that's why I still use 35mm slrs when shooting for pleasure, it honestly doesn't have much to do with digital/film differences but EVERYTHING to do with the experience of using the camera.
Removing the meter or going fully mechanical can also influence this, but not always positively.

[gaweidert]

In many ways, film still tops digital. No purple fringe. No moire. Better bokeh. Definitely better for archival storage.. Those old folding cameras that shot 120 film and use triplet 75mm lenses (usually 75 -85mm) take an image that simply cannot be duplicated any other way. If you look at the negative from one of the cameras with an 8x loupe, the image looks almost 3D. When lenses with 4 elements came out the "atmosphere" of the photo was gone because they produces sharper images.

The best digital camera that I have for B&W is my MX-1 which has a dedicated B&W mode. Many of the B&W photos I see on this forum that were captured digitally just seem to be sterile to me.

As stated above, getting you slides back from the processor was an awesome experience. And of you ever developed your own film, it is an experience that you will never forget the first time you do it. B&W darkroom work is a joy to do when you have the proper tools and you get it right.

[ChrisPlatt]

Chris