What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Have not gone digital

L

Land Rover 94

Member
I am still using film,I can not get myself to go digital,I know I am behind the times(my wife tells me).I enjoy developing my own film,it gives me the many choices when using B&W.Anyone else feel the way I do?
 
First of all you are not "behind time".

Film still has a well deserved place of its own.
Under extreme cicumstances like severe cold digital cameras can not be operated.

For V series most digital backs will reduce the WA properties of lenses.
 
I shoot both film and digital on my Hasselbald (and 35mm cameras). I don't see this as an either/or decision. Each has advantages/disadvantages and I enjoy shooting with both and get good results either way. What has surprised me recently is the number of my friends who are moving back to film, especially medium format....maybe it's a nostalgia thing. They still shoot digital, but enjoy the slower pace of medium format film.

I wish I still had space for a darkroom at home......it would make shooting with my LF gear a lot easier, especially now that Fuji has discontinued 4x5 Quickload film packs.

Gary
 
bensonga said:
What has surprised me recently is the number of my friends who are moving back to film, especially medium format....maybe it's a nostalgia thing. They still shoot digital, but enjoy the slower pace of medium format film.
I wish I still had space for a darkroom at home......it would make shooting with my LF gear a lot easier, especially now that Fuji has discontinued 4x5 Quickload film packs.

Gary
Click to expand...

Gary

I think it is not a nostalgia thing .
I believe , shooting successfully in MF digital is not as easy as many believe . Especially regarding handheld shooting .
Let me point out a couple of things which might be a reason for still shooting film in MF or shooting with film again .
aaa) To get into MF digital is still a rather expensive thing , at least when you want to buy new equipment .
bbb) Proper focusing when shooting WA is not as easy and mostly requires shooting from a tripod .
ccc) LCC is required for many lenses and that is not a thing of seconds .
It needs a WB shot for your image and the LCC process in PHOCUS or C1.
ddd) Then think of noise reduction , luminance , color correction and lens correction .

This is just to name some of the things you have to do or at least to think of . The list is not complete of course .
All together I believe MF digital shooting is rather complex . DSLR shooting is much easier .
The above mentioned might be a reason , why some or many photographers go back to film in MF .

Jürgen
 
jotloob said:
Gary

I think it is not a nostalgia thing .
I believe , shooting successfully in MF digital is not as easy as many believe . Especially regarding handheld shooting .
Let me point out a couple of things which might be a reason for still shooting film in MF or shooting with film again .
aaa) To get into MF digital is still a rather expensive thing , at least when you want to buy new equipment .
bbb) Proper focusing when shooting WA is not as easy and mostly requires shooting from a tripod .
ccc) LCC is required for many lenses and that is not a thing of seconds .
It needs a WB shot for your image and the LCC process in PHOCUS or C1.
ddd) Then think of noise reduction , luminance , color correction and lens correction .

This is just to name some of the things you have to do or at least to think of . The list is not complete of course .
All together I believe MF digital shooting is rather complex . DSLR shooting is much easier .
The above mentioned might be a reason , why some or many photographers go back to film in MF .

Jürgen
Click to expand...

Hi Jurgen. I'm sure you are right re all of the above. I do know that the expense of even entry level medium format digital is beyond the reach of most of my friends. In fact, it's so expensive, they have not even considered that route....so they never even stopped to consider the other reasons you mentioned.

What's interesting to me is that despite the high quality of good DSLR images, my friends have opted to purchase (some for the first time ever) Hasselblad, Mamiya and Pentax medium format film cameras....while continuing to shoot with their Canon and Nikon DSLRs. Very few have gone back to 35mm film....but medium format film still offers both the image quality they expect (and which is perhaps different, though not necessarily "better" than their DSLR images)....but also the pleasure of a different shooting experience. That has also been one of my reasons for continuing to shoot medium format film (and to a much lesser extent, large format film).

I am so glad that we don't have to choose one or the other, of this or that, in this life. We can enjoy all aspects of the photographic experience.....perhaps even "Point and Shoot", when it suits our desires and needs. :)

Gary
 
Land Rover 94 said:
I am still using film,I can not get myself to go digital,I know I am behind the times(my wife tells me).I enjoy developing my own film,it gives me the many choices when using B&W.Anyone else feel the way I do?
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too. when I was using Blad and as it was too too expensive to move in to digital Medium format. But when I resently got my Digital M Leica, as I have to be on the curve of the evolution. I think it worth to be in the wind of evolutions though it not easy as usual tackaling to succee to get the better result from a finished digital image.
Analog photography stops halfway from the photographer and it can ended up on a master's hand to get best result providing you can efford the cost.
Conserning Digital Photo I don't feel it that way.
 
If you are enjoying your film photography why stop?

MF does give the best of both worlds, of course - I could get a film back for my H2 if I wanted one, and the V series allows film or digital capture now. So you can move to it if and when you feel ready, or stay with film.
 
To avoid any misunderstandings please do not confuse the "new" effect from digital imaging as a reason to think digital is superior to film capture.

For certain applications 8"X10" cameras are still ahead of any digital gear now available.
 
polypal said:
To avoid any misunderstandings please do not confuse the "new" effect from digital imaging as a reason to think digital is superior to film capture.

For certain applications 8"X10" cameras are still ahead of any digital gear now available.
Click to expand...

Hi Paul
Thanks, for your reply.
It dosen't confuse me in anyway. I know Digital is never superior to the film capture. Between the( Hasselblad itself) Film capture and digital there are advantages and disadvantages. Other than that all I can say is Digital capture make you more options to speedy prodution quick and fast editing. But the quality is always less superiorty to Negative, I guess when you compared to a best image captured on negative and finished on high end scanned on highest resolution image.
All I know is If I have a CFV back things are better and faster on my Photography. I can still comfromise to the quality I get from it. My photograpy is not going to be refuige in my archives always in negatives and diopos form.

Cyril.
 
polypal said:
To avoid any misunderstandings please do not confuse the "new" effect from digital imaging as a reason to think digital is superior to film capture.

For certain applications 8"X10" cameras are still ahead of any digital gear now available.
Click to expand...

I may have a different perspecitive from Cyril. For example...my own experience is that high end 35mm DSLR images are superior (to my eyes) to scanned 35mm film. So although I still use my Leica R8, Nikon F3HP and Canon EOS 1V with 35mm film.....I always do so knowing that the results will be less satisfactory than those from my Canon 5D, Nikon D2X, Canon 1D Mark II (and these are obviously NOT the latest DSLRs!).

Paul has now given me pause however. I thought I was covered re film quality with the six 4x5 view cameras I own (Sinar, Ebony, Cambo, Graphic etc). Now I'm thinking that I should "up my game" and go for a 8x10 camera.....or maybe even a ULF! :)

Is this a never ending search for image quality or perhaps, in my case, another excuse to buy just one more camera? Hard to say. :)

Gary
 
bensonga said:
I may have a different perspecitive from Cyril. For example...my own experience is that high end 35mm DSLR images are superior (to my eyes) to scanned 35mm film. So although I still use my Leica R8, Nikon F3HP and Canon EOS 1V with 35mm film.....I always do so knowing that the results will be less satisfactory than those from my Canon 5D, Nikon D2X, Canon 1D Mark II (and these are obviously NOT the latest DSLRs!).

Paul has now given me pause however. I thought I was covered re film quality with the six 4x5 view cameras I own (Sinar, Ebony, Cambo, Graphic etc). Now I'm thinking that I should "up my game" and go for a 8x10 camera.....or maybe even a ULF! :)

Is this a never ending search for image quality or perhaps, in my case, another excuse to buy just one more camera? Hard to say. :)

Gary
Click to expand...

I understand Gary, This is ofcourse Non-ending? But I thought 35mm negative capture was always superior to the 35mm Digital capture. Is it the Full frame senser which changed this prespective.
regards
Cyril
 
Cyril Jayant said:
I understand Gary, This is ofcourse Non-ending? But I thought 35mm negative capture was always superior to the 35mm Digital capture. Is it the Full frame senser which changed this prespective.
regards
Cyril
Click to expand...

I don't know Cyril......I can only speak from my own experience. Firstly, I am always comparing my DSLR image files to scanned 35mm color transparencies and B&W negatives.....I rarely shoot color negative film. Second, I scan 35mm film with a Nikon 5000ED, so perhaps if I had a Hasselblad/Imacon film scanner I would see better results compared with the DSLR images. There are just so many variables....it really is difficult to make hard and objective judgments one way or the other.

I only know that if I was forced to choose just one system: 35mm film SLR or 35mm DSLR....for myself, I would choose 35mm DSLR.

Now if you asked me to choose one of my 35mm DSLR systems or one of my Hasselblad systems.....I would definitely choose the Hasselblad. Not because I know for a fact that it's image quality is superior (although that is my impression), but I love to use the Hasselblad cameras and lenses, even though the 35mm DSLR is in many respects more convenient to use.
 
To a certain extent I agree with you and of course I love to learn from others as my knowledge on photography comes from selfdevelopment.

Yes I am self-taught serious amateur and Enjoy using the best general gear that is availabe for high end photography.
I have Some Leica ...naminig M6 and M8 and three Cron lenses. /And Blad 203FE and 2 lenses /Nikon F5 and some Lenses/ Blad Xpan 40mm / Nikon 5000ed scanner.
I enjoy using Film and and I don't want to give up negative.
I hear lot of thing about M9 and I believe what you say is and it is very true what .DSLR are being on it's evolution. That is why I bought my First ever (Digital RF camera) as I love the M RF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top