[goddo31]

I shoot film to feel superior to those people that spend $3000 on a camera/lens combo, but still can't get a decent shot! No doubt they just think I'm poor... but I know I have dSLR equipment I choose not to use on a walkabout.

Horses for courses really.... digital cameras are great for flash photography... birding... all of that kind of stuff. I just think that film is best for when you're strolling and relaxing!

I agree with what you're saying and I find that it relaxes me too. Well said.
The effect you get from various films is pretty awesome, and I love using the equipment, and the sound and feel of a loud shutter.

I have also recievd a couple of "REAL" camera comments, puts a smile on my face. And when you get the dev done at a lab, it can be nice to not really do any PP.

It's just fun

[fearview]

.. She told me he even had a setup of "that really quiet one....the one that starts with an L..." We traded phone numbers, and sometime in the very near future I'm going over to her garage. None of the photographers with digital cameras got this offer.. .

i might be little bit OOT. but this phrase really interesting. genev. im waiting for the story. either here. or in lens forum.

..

now back to topic.


keep posting guys. i like reading it.

[stevebrot]

IMO it's simple; film is more fun.

Chris

Or more frustrating, depending on the camera and one's skill! I am still working out the kinks of using my 4x5 view camera. The double-exposure demon is yanking on one of my ears while the dark-slide demon is plucking my beard hairs one-by-one. I am reduced to working from a detailed check-list for every shot. We won't even talk about what the preview-lever-open demon is doing to me.


Steve

[GeneV]

Or more frustrating, depending on the camera and one's skill! I am still working out the kinks of using my 4x5 view camera. The double-exposure demon is yanking on one of my ears while the dark-slide demon is plucking my beard hairs one-by-one. I am reduced to working from a detailed check-list for every shot. We won't even talk about what the preview-lever-open demon is doing to me.


Steve

Those are the demons I referred to in my earlier post about my Speedgraphic. Beware, young Skywalker, of the power of the dark slide....

On the roll film back, I still seem to miss a frame or two because I am trying to avoid the double exposure.

[stevebrot]

Look on the bright side, Steve. Once you master LF, anything smaller will be a piece of cake!

Chris

The smaller stuff is already a piece of cake, that is why the big stuff is so frustrating! That being said, I am making progress. I think I only ruined three frames on my last roll of 120 on the 4x5...



Steve

(Current mantra: open preview...open aperture...compose and focus...adjust camera (iterative)...set aperture...recheck focus...close preview...insert film holder...pull dark slide (careful to not let light leak!)...meter...set shutter speed and fine-tune aperture...cock shutter...make exposure...replace dark slide (careful to not let light leak!)...remove film holder...(optional for roll film back: wind film)...repeat...)

[stevebrot]

...Beware, young Skywalker, of the power of the dark slide...

Very good!

Steve

[ragamuffin1171]

Okay. I'm still waiting on light seal kit, but in the meanwhile, I was playing with my spotmatic f and trying to focus manually. Even with full aperture, I had hard time focusing (especially indoor) and sure miss my AF function on my dslr (or more advanced film camera). Would I just need a lot more practice or is there something that will help me, like a magnifying eyecup or different types of focus screens or some other trick? I'm specially having a hard time focusing a distant object.

[Blue]

The smaller stuff is already a piece of cake, that is why the big stuff is so frustrating! That being said, I am making progress. I think I only ruined three frames on my last roll of 120 on the 4x5...

. . .

At least you are shooting 120 for now. Maybe you need 220 for practice!

[ziggy7]

Take a look at the distance scale on your lens. I'm looking at a 40MM prime, and infinity is about 60 feet. So if your distance is far enough all you have to do is crank the focus ring all the way to infinity.

[stevebrot]

Okay. I'm still waiting on light seal kit, but in the meanwhile, I was playing with my spotmatic f and trying to focus manually. Even with full aperture, I had hard time focusing (especially indoor) and sure miss my AF function on my dslr (or more advanced film camera). Would I just need a lot more practice or is there something that will help me, like a magnifying eyecup or different types of focus screens or some other trick? I'm specially having a hard time focusing a distant object.

How is your vision? You need to be able to see the focus screen clearly in order focus with it. At the very least, you need to be able to see the microprism focus aid at the center of the viewfinder. If you normally need glasses (even if only for reading), you may need to wear them when using the camera. Pentax made a series of eyepiece diopters that act as glasses for your camera. You can sometimes find them at older camera shops or on eBay.


Steve

(My daughter uses a supplemental diopter on her K10D IN ADDITION to the built-in adjustment...)

[ragamuffin1171]

Okay. I finally got the light seal kit, fixed it up, and it looks really nice.
I had some films laying around, so I put one in and took some pictures of my daughters. I just love the sound of shutter clicks. As much as I want to finish up the film and develop and see how it turned out, I'll be taking my time composing each picture. I need to suppress my dslr happy trigger.

[Lowell Goudge]

WHen I look at the responses, and have to agree with a lot of them, in terms of film vs digital etc, I think that when I look at shooting film, and I have not done it for a year or so now, there is one big benefit that I see, especially whe not considering telephoto shots.

FIlm does give us full frame, and a wider FOV than digital.

Granted, most of the really wide lenses are now developed for the smaller ASP-C sensors, and are specifically for the Crippeled K mount, what I will call KAF-J mount, since the lenses began as SMC-FA-J lenses.

You can get film bodies that will let you use these lenses starting with the pentax program plus I believe.

Even if intended for ASP-C sensors, many lenses cover full frame. Even my sigma APO 10-20mm EX-DC covers full frame from about 13mm and that is really wide for a rectalinear lens.

I have yet to try my samyang 8mm fisheye, but I am sure it would be interesting also even if it does present a partially cropped / circular image.

Film can be fun. I used to go out with my KX at night loaded with TriX 400 pushed to 3200ISO. You don't need to get a darkroom and print from negative, but you can develop the negative and scan it. Afterall, most of what is intreguing about film especially pushing B&W can be easily resolved by a 10MP scanner.

The other thing about film, if you consider your entire kit as a system, is that the film bodies do act as back up to the digital ones.

My KX for example only needs the battery for metering, and I have 2 hand held meters. Except for my SMC-FAJ-18-35, I can use every lens I own on this body, and I can use my AF540FGZ flash in auto mode for flash shots.

My PZ1 handles just like a DSLR, can do 1/250th flash sync, and makes a great film back up to my digitals, even with AF lenses. In fact all my lenses work on this body, as well as all my flashes. So i really loose nothing by using it.

WHat I have is a system, built up over 30 years, the only thing I don't have is a spotmatic, to use my M42 lenses with (I passed a while back on an ESII with F1.4 50mm lens for $25, which I should have bought, just to have even though I already have 2 50mm F1.4 lenses)

[GeneV]

FIlm does give us full frame, and a wider FOV than digital.

***

Even if intended for ASP-C sensors, many lenses cover full frame. Even my sigma APO 10-20mm EX-DC covers full frame from about 13mm and that is really wide for a rectalinear lens.

***

The other thing about film, if you consider your entire kit as a system, is that the film bodies do act as back up to the digital ones.

Those are good reasons that I am including film in my travel kit. I don't have the 10-20mm Sigma, but the 17-35 (designed for FF) can be breathtaking on film. As an ultrawide option, a ZX-L body with an M 20mm attached takes up no more volume than a DA12-24, weighs about the same, and it offers a backup usable with every DA lens.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Time was when I shot professionally with just one or two camera bodies (Pentax LXs); I had clients who would hand me a check when I handed off exposed but undeveloped film at the end of a shoot. Those days aren't coming back-- but film reminds me of my craft once being simpler but also more exacting, too.

Now I have an array of cameras from 35mm film to APS-C DSLRs to a P645N to 4x5 view cameras. The past year eighteen months I am shooting more film than ever. Just sent off 36 frames for developing (but that's not a roll of 135, I'm talking 36 sheets of 4x5 film).

Film has not stood still since the digital revolution. My feeling is that there are emulsions available today that are better than anything that's gone before (Ektar 100 in 120 and 4x5 are my latest crushes, Astia 100F and Pro 160S are rather wonderful as well). Dynamic range is expansive or restrictive depending on your film choice. Less is more sometimes, shadows going deep black is terrific with low key work. Low key and high key are areas where film still rules.

But I do find myself using film in 135 format less and less. For one, I used to burn through a fair amount of it at 5 or 8 frames per second, and frankly digital does photojournalism and action based sports and wildlife better because these were low-percentage-of-keepers situations with film and swapping out rolls ever 36 frames gets tedious and expensive and you miss shots that way. Too, not being able to switch ISO's mid roll is problematic with the slow films I tend to always use when I'm shooting film. High ISO work is all digital for me.

35mm film is becoming a small niche market, from what was once an almost inconceivably huge market. But 35mm can be sublime, nevertheless. There's something particularly gratifying about the mechanics of loading a camera, manually focusing, manually rewinding-- probably has something to do with the process being engaging more of my brain and being contemplative than just mindlessly banging away with an automated camera.

I've also enjoyed the process of souping my own films and transparencies themselves are really special (there's an indefinable something about seeing for the first time a pristine transparency that's just been washed and dried on the light table under a loupe).

When I have time to shoot a landscape off a tripod, the natural choice is film, because it's capable of results that exceed all but most expensive DSLR sensors (and, in larger than 645 film easily blows them away). Provided the subject matter is film-worthy, it's use permits more flexibility in how the final image is presented (for instance, you can't make a direct Ilfochrome print on an enlarger from a digital file, but you can scan a slide to make a digital file).

[magkelly]

I still like both, though mostly I'm a digital person now, but owning a film camera does still have it's advantages that I can see, particularly when you're a student trying to learn.

1. Film costs money so it makes me really think a lot more about my settings before I shoot. Shooting digital all the time I think it can make you a bit lazy particularly when you are learning. When I can just keep on shooting and just delete any bad shot sometimes I don't put as much effort into thinking about it as I tend to do using my film camera. Bad, yes, but also very true, sometimes. Using something I have to pay extra for and be careful with makes me work not take things for granted sometimes the way I do with my digital.

2. Two, there is the batteries issue. If you have a film camera handy that doesn't need any to shoot, or only needs one now and again for the light meter you're always ready to shoot anytime. I can always have a film camera handy, but with my digital I am constantly leaving my camera empty of batteries and my memory card because with my digital you pretty much have to otherwise the camera will drain any battery you put into it dry fairly quickly and I can't afford to keep buying a million alkaline ones all the time.

It seems with my digital I'm always charging batteries or buying disposable alkaline ones when I happen to run out of juice on my rechargeable ones over the course of a long day of shooting. With a film camera so long as my meter battery isn't ancient I basically just need to swap out a roll of film several times that same day, and that's usually it. I don't have to think too hard about whether or not I brought enough batteries for the whole day. If my plans change and I need more time to shoot I've got it and I don't have to spend even more money than I planned for the day to go there. With my digital, on a long day walking all over it can come down to spending my transit money or quitting for the day. I just hate that idea. Losing some potentially great shots just so I can still afford to get on the bus and go home? Not fun.

3. Going retro is a lot safer in some places. I'm not a big person and more than once I've taken my non-DSLR digital, which looks like a far more expensive DSLR even though it isn't, out of my bag to shoot only to have someone eye me a little bit too closely to see what I have got in terms of gear. Nice looking digital cameras attract attention, attention that sometimes you don't want.

If I am carting around an old film camera 99% of the time I can walk into the most iffy places, places where thieves will usually do their best to scope you out and steal your gear and no one really bugs me. It's just not something they see as worth their effort. In some places I still might not be able to take out an expensive and showy zoom lens but most of the time I can get away with carrying gear that's old in places that I could probably never carry my best digital safely in.

4. As much as I love digital cameras I find I can afford more gear with still using film sometimes. Lenses are a lot cheaper for the old cameras than they are for the DSLR's. Fact is I want a Pentax DSLR very badly, but right now I'm pretty much settling for the old SLR's because I need a better camera than my upscale point and shoot to learn more, but I can't really afford to just go out and buy the DSLR I'd like to have yet. It does cost me to buy film and have the film developed and the pics thrown onto a disc, but right now that's possible so long as I don't go too crazy, whereas owning a DSLR just isn't. If it wasn't for the very old gear I've just acquired probably I'd be completely stalled at this point and not learning very much about serious photography for another year or two at least.

Fact is in terms of gear and photography I've got very big caviar dreams but a very low peanut butter budget for making them come true. Old equipment may not be nearly as sophisticated or as trendy, but it will still get you there properly if you use it right. By the time I can afford a semi-professional DSLR I'll probably be doing some professional work. I'll have the money to buy my first K-DSLR but right now? I can barely afford to go on Ebay and look at the cameras and lenses I dream of owning let alone actually acquire them.

I'm grateful for any photography gear I can get my hands on. I don't care if it's old or not. If I can still learn to do photography with it, I will. I figure that's a whole lot better than me not studying at all because I just can't afford anything better in a digital right now.


My nickel anyway....