Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
09-19-2010, 11:31 PM
|
|
There are legitimate reasons many people pointed already (film's increased dynamic range, less dependent on batteries, a certain look and feel from your preferred film or process ithat's hard to replicate).
But there's also a lot of bragging about not relying on electronics, LCDs or more options. Kinda of a "macho" thing.
To me, this is kinda stupid, as current DSLR are meant to mimic almost if not all behaviour from film cameras - the hardest being the particularities of film vs. sensor. But if you want to just rely on exposure meter, manual controls and viewfinder, you *can*.
Saying that you are unable to use because "it got a frigging LCD" even if you don't use it, then you're entering bragging land, IMO.
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
09-19-2010, 12:56 AM
|
|
One big advantage of film is dynamic range. Real life is analogic, as such you can over- or underexpose film while developing by some points and still retain details. Digital sensors have to compress data to 8 (JPG) or 14-16 bits (RAW), so it clips more information. For most purposes though, some extra bits of a well exposed shot are enough room to catch up with film on this aspect. It's a good trade-off considering the amount of flexibility and comfort you get with digitals.
|