[keyser]

Right now, Pentax cameras have an LCD screen on the back of all their cameras and produce an image quality on par with offerings from other companies but there is nothing in the product line up which holds prestige to the average guy in the street. (photography buffs excluded!)

Would it really cost more money to put a dSLR into a superprogram chassis? The basic electronics would be the same as an entry level mode dSLR, without the cost of a screen, auto-focus motor/sensor or a flash.

People liked autofocus because it was cool and new, so manual focus was dropped. The obvious manual focus model that remained - the k1000 - proved there was still a market for a well made MF model. Combine that with the ease of digital and you're on to a winner.

[Vertex Ninja]

Funny a thread like this should be started just around the time I've been thinking the same thing!

I've decided to shoot film exclusively after 3 years of digital(slr). It didn't happen over night. There were a number of things that led me to this decision. I was really getting sick of blown highlights in high contrast scenes, scenes that only an HDR could capture on digital. Then Ektar 100 came out. After shooting a few rolls with my dads F100 I realized I could get comparable to better quality than my K10D but with greater dynamic range.

It wasn't the highlight thing that tipped me over the edge though, it was the realization that if I had a film camera and film around I never wanted to shoot my K10D. There was just something about the film camera that did it for me. The slow process, the big viewfinder, the sounds of the film winding, and of all things... the smell of the film when you first pull it out of the canister. The process just does it for me. I'm not a professional, not by a long shot, and I don't shoot high quantities; just ~7000 clicks on my K10d in 3 years. The speed and convenience of digital aren't as important to me as it is for many and the cost really isn't a factor either.

I'm lucky to have a pro lab by me that develops my C-41 uncut for $2.49 and does same day E-6 for $8.99. Then after deciding which images are the keepers I scan them and print them. I'm only interested in the images I think are worth printing(unless I'm just testing). There is no sense cluttering my hard drive with images that rarely get looked at by anyone but me.

My scanners glass can fit 72 frames of 35mm in one go, so I queue the images and go do something else. The quality is great and matches or exceeds my k10D except for high iso. Then all the negative/positives get put in the fire proof safe. Pretty simple workflow. I work in graphics and spend a ridiculous amount of time in front of the computer, so it's nice to look at things on the light table or in hand for a change.

I'll be selling my K10D and I've just taken that beautiful Silver MZ-S off Frank's hands. I'll be spending a lot more time in the film forum from here on out.

Here's some measurebation to back up my claims about the quality, I'll be posting some good(up for debate ) shots later in the other forum.

color test of Ektar 100 @64:




Ektar 100% crops @3175 spi:





Ektar 100 +2 stops over exposed and still not a single blown highlight:



A few test scans comparing Astia 100F on old Coolscan V vs my Eversmart @2540 DPI
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l11/bmwolf/Crop1-1.jpg
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l11/bmwolf/Crop2-1.jpg


Man that turned out way more long winded than I intended, but it beats starting a new thread I guess .

[little laker]

Sorry, this one's a digital photo

I'm still experimenting with different films. At this time I like the results from Ektar, and Velvia the best., however I'd like to try them all someday.

I would really like to thank Chris Platt for selling me the Kodachrome once again
I'll probably shoot it in the next 2 or 3 weeks sometime.

I see that my digital's sensor is filthy. Another good reason to shoot film.

[raymeedc]

That's the beauty of the Pentax system..... it doesn't force you to make a permanent either/or decision. I have a slew of M42 screwmount & early K mount Pentax lenses that do double duty on my DSLRs & SLRs. I also have some 50s folders, rangefinders, & MF cameras. Depending on my mood & needs on any particular day, one or more will see action. Sometimes I take out a film camera & a digital on the same outing. Each camera & format has their particular advantages & disadvantages, & I try to match these individual qualities to the situation & my whims.

[Vertex Ninja]

That's the beauty of the Pentax system..... it doesn't force you to make a permanent either/or decision.

Yup my thoughts exactly, I'm gonna shoot film for the next few years and see what happens in digital. If Pentax/Samsung improve the exposure range 2 stops or so in the highlights and make the viewfinder 100% magnification and coverage, I'll definitely pick up a new one. A full format would be nice too, not for qaulity improvements, APS is already good enough for my needs, but a full frame viewfinder makes shooting so much nicer. For now a nice point and shoot works for snapshots at the zoo, birthdays, and such and 35mm for anything I want printed to 12x18-16x20. 4x5 for 24x30+.

[Jonson PL]

Although I still like digital better for somethings I've hardly touched my Sigma SD14 since I bought my up my PZ-20.

Since I can achieve the same, and often better results with the Sigma it isn't the Image Quality that's converted me.

It's the time I get to spend taking photographs, and not siting in front of the computer processing the RAW files.

After a days shooting it would usually take me a couple of hours processing the photographs, or up to a week of computer work after an event.
This is of course time that I'll never get back, and has ruined a good relationship with one good woman for me.

Now instead I just buy a roll of film for $8.00 - $15.00 Canadian, load it up and choose my subjects wisely.
A 36 exposure roll usually lasts me 2 or 3 photo shoots, and would cost the average person $12.00 for same day service at the lab I work in. (my costs are less, however my work only gets developed when the other work is done for the day)

Then I get to sit back, and enjoy the other thing I love. Sharing my work with others.

I'm even seriously thinking of buying a couple of PZ-1P bodies, and only shooting film at events, knowing that my time is more valuable than the price of film and developing.

The one place I still prefer digital is while experimenting with a new technique, which I rarely do now. It's always nice being able to check your results out right after the shoot.

A good read.
Processing a film that has been in the camera for a while, I’m also more detached from the photo. And can better see what works or not.
When I keep watching the pictures on the back of the DSLR, and have computer time shortly thereafter, I haven’t separated the event from the photo quality. The idea and thoughts from a fun outing, didn’t necessarily make it onto the image

Funny a thread like this should be started just around the time I've been thinking the same thing!

I've decided to shoot film exclusively after 3 years of digital(slr). It didn't happen over night. There were a number of things that led me to this decision. I was really getting sick of blown highlights in high contrast scenes, scenes that only an HDR could capture on digital. Then Ektar 100 came out. After shooting a few rolls with my dads F100 I realized I could get comparable to better quality than my K10D but with greater dynamic range.

It wasn't the highlight thing that tipped me over the edge though, it was the realization that if I had a film camera and film around I never wanted to shoot my K10D. There was just something about the film camera that did it for me. The slow process, the big viewfinder, the sounds of the film winding, and of all things... the smell of the film when you first pull it out of the canister. The process just does it for me. I'm not a professional, not by a long shot, and I don't shoot high quantities; just ~7000 clicks on my K10d in 3 years. The speed and convenience of digital aren't as important to me as it is for many and the cost really isn't a factor either.

I'm lucky to have a pro lab by me that develops my C-41 uncut for $2.49 and does same day E-6 for $8.99. Then after deciding which images are the keepers I scan them and print them. I'm only interested in the images I think are worth printing(unless I'm just testing). There is no sense cluttering my hard drive with images that rarely get looked at by anyone but me.

My scanners glass can fit 72 frames of 35mm in one go, so I queue the images and go do something else. The quality is great and matches or exceeds my k10D except for high iso. Then all the negative/positives get put in the fire proof safe. Pretty simple workflow. I work in graphics and spend a ridiculous amount of time in front of the computer, so it's nice to look at things on the light table or in hand for a change.

I'll be selling my K10D and I've just taken that beautiful Silver MZ-S off Frank's hands. I'll be spending a lot more time in the film forum from here on out.

Here's some measurebation to back up my claims about the quality, I'll be posting some good(up for debate ) shots later in the other forum.

color test of Ektar 100 @64:




Ektar 100% crops @3175 spi:





Ektar 100 +2 stops over exposed and still not a single blown highlight:



A few test scans comparing Astia 100F on old Coolscan V vs my Eversmart @2540 DPI
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l11/bmwolf/Crop1-1.jpg
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l11/bmwolf/Crop2-1.jpg


Man that turned out way more long winded than I intended, but it beats starting a new thread I guess .

Congrats on the MZ-S, good to hear that it will get a lot of use. Great story, and some food for thought for the rest of us.
Pretty impressed with your shots, didn't think colour photography was that good


I also think this is the funniest sub-forum, in a great forum to begin with. All discussions are real issues, and the ones responding, often have a lot of expertise for the rest of us.

[Michael Barker]

In terms of workflow, there is really no reason a person can't shoot digital in the same manner as film.

I recently turned off Instant Review on my K100D. Saves a lot of battery life, I spend more time looking around me instead of chimping, and I'm forced to commit to the first exposure instead of treating each shot as possibly a "trial shot".

[Vertex Ninja]

Congrats on the MZ-S, good to hear that it will get a lot of use. Great story, and some food for thought for the rest of us.
Pretty impressed with your shots, didn't think colour photography was that good


I also think this is the funniest sub-forum, in a great forum to begin with. All discussions are real issues, and the ones responding, often have a lot of expertise for the rest of us.

Thanks, and yes there are some very knowledgeable people here. Tots to soak up for a relative photography noob like myself. TDefinitely one of the friendliest forums I've ever visited.

I'd also like to say that my post was in no way trying to state the superiority of film vs digital, just that the results are comparable, and that's really all that matters. Both film and digital are good enough to meet most everyone's needs, and there is no point nitpicking over which has greater resolution or which one has less noise/grain. The only important thing is which one you like using. At this point, digital is fantastic! Film is fantastic! Everything else is just personal preference IMHO.

[frank]

...

I'll be selling my K10D and I've just taken that beautiful Silver MZ-S off Frank's hands. I'll be spending a lot more time in the film forum from here on out.

Here's some measurebation to back up my claims about the quality, I'll be posting some good(up for debate ) shots later in the other forum.
...

Those are great samples, much better than what I got from lab scan. Probably I should buy a good quality scanner too?

And congrats on the new MZ-S again, kinda miss it already. But it's better to make full use of it instead of resting it in my dry cabinet.

[Vertex Ninja]

Thanks Frank! That MZ-S is a beauty, now I have to acquire all those matching silver limiteds! I just sent my first test roll for processing today... but I'm worried I accidentally turned the date back on and tarnished all my test files with a date. Doh!

[Nando]

Me too. For me it would have to have an optical viewfinder and no LCD screen.

Chris

Me too but, in addition, I want a full-frame sensor so I can keep the focal lengths I like and I don't have to figure out where I should be positioning myself.

[Nando]

Here's some measurebation to back up my claims about the quality, I'll be posting some good(up for debate ) shots later in the other forum.

Ektar 100 is fabulous. I tested a roll a few months ago. I scanned the film with my Coolscan V and found it to be the finest grained film negative film I've ever seen. However, I do have some Adox CMS 20 in the freezer that I've yet to use.

I'm currently working through my stock of Fuji Reala but once it runs out, I intend on making Ektar 100 my regular lower-speed colour film.

[little laker]

I'm currently working through my stock of Fuji Reala but once it runs out, I intend on making Ektar 100 my regular lower-speed colour film.

I was just doing a google search, Reala vs Ektar.... wondering what film I should pack along tomorrow (I have 34 exposures left on a roll of Velvia so it's probably good for the day)
I really don't know what roll to bring along., to capture the autumn colours.
Since I've never shot a roll of Reala I don't know what to expect from it, and I don't want to take a chance with winter approaching so fast

I do have the Sigma packed along, and if the conditions are right might do a small digital vs film shootout.

[SteveM]

I keep hearing this, but I don't know WHY you would want a camera without a screen. Having a histogram handy is a huge help and none of us are so good as to make a perfect exposure every time. Just because your camera has an LCD doesn't mean you are forced to chimp every shot; but not wanting something so useful really has me wondering.

Is it just me but I sometimes find the histogram makes a mess of my photos. I'm little older...bought my ME Super new when I was 15.....so perhaps film seems more natural. I find I get more keepers from a 36 exposure role than I do from a morning of shooting digital.

Now if I could just get them to look as 3d after being scanned!

[ramair455]

I was just doing a google search, Reala vs Ektar.... wondering what film I should pack along tomorrow (I have 34 exposures left on a roll of Velvia so it's probably good for the day)
I really don't know what roll to bring along., to capture the autumn colours.
Since I've never shot a roll of Reala I don't know what to expect from it, and I don't want to take a chance with winter approaching so fast

I do have the Sigma packed along, and if the conditions are right might do a small digital vs film shootout.

I used Reala by the brickloads back in the day, and Ektar 25. I don't know if they have changed the color palette of Reala, but it had much better greens, yellows, reds, and greater exposure latidude than that Ektar 25.