DSLRUsers.com

Morning all
On the other forum I frequent there’s a thread going for people looking at buying a digital cam wanting to ask a few question about the model they are looking at getting.
This was posted up last night I’ve answered with my opinion & I was just thinking how the d70 forum members would handle the same question????

Have a read & see what you think??

Cheers
Ray


"AAAAH, there ya go digital cameras breaking down 2 months after warranty expires, fstop problems overexposing the lightning (fstop and apertures are no different with film or digital it still only doubles or halves the light reaching the film/sensor).

All this is easier to deal with when shooting with film I find

But here is a suggestion guys, you can buy a fully manual SLR say a pentax k1000 for 50 bucks and load it with slide or print film and expose with a cable release and get beautiful lightning photos and if camera gets a bit wet, who cares! its full manual you dont need a meter at night!
"Oh! but! but! the cost to develop the film is high!" PISH POSH!
Figure it out, next time you are photographing a storm and you take a pic and say "dont like that" fiddle with the menu to delete it, fuss with the menu again to change your aperture and exposure time you probably missed some of the best flangs;)

Then finally after two hrs of digital madness you get home patting yourself on the back cos you have a hundred shots, download said hundred shots to computer, then sort through going delete, keep, delete.
"AAAh now I have sorted those I can process em" you think to yourself.
Now its time to colour correct, sharpen,unsharpen, change the sky because it does not look as nice as you thought it should have.

Ok try this, time yourself with your digital darkroom and determine how long it took you to do all your processing, work out a cost figure say based on what you would have been doing had you not been photoshopping or whatever, put a dollar figure on it if you wish based on I dunno say ten bucks an hour ( min wage)
Add it all up and then compare that with the ten bucks (less for film) it cost me to get some one else to process my slides.
I get them back I cut the strips 20 min job and put em into sleeves and then in my folder.

You can always ask the lab to do 10x15 scans to CD when you have said film or slides processed its only 12 bucks extra and one less job you need to do to "go digital"
So come into the light my sons and daughters, throw away your devil toys! and become a "Photographer" and not a "digital image taker"

MMMMMM fiiiiiiiiillllmmm aurrrrghghhh as homer would say "

My short answer.

"ignorance is obviously bliss - go the film!"

My answer is:
Let them go their way, wasting of our time to convince and explaining.
They want everything for nothing and still whingeing, one day they will come back self confess.
I ignore them as part my life, cos I haven't get lot of fun in telling them.

Shoot important stuff on both types of cameras. Geeze.

I read - I listen - I absorb - I learn

I do my own bloody thing

Chris

Yes you get home from taking the shots.

You get the film developed say 36 exposures, trundle home to check
and....

damn not one keeper amongst them. Must have done something wrong, now I will have to wait till the next lightnig storm to try again.



Whish I had the 200 digital shots to shift through


MATT

MATT wrote:Yes you get home from taking the shots.

You get the film developed say 36 exposures, trundle home to check
and....

damn not one keeper amongst them. Must have done something wrong, now I will have to wait till the next lightnig storm to try again.



Whish I had the 200 digital shots to shift through


MATT

Well said, that about sums up what I said

Cheers
Ray

Let's see ...

I can shoot ten (or more) times the number of exposures on digital than I would on film. Each exposure on film needs to be costed, many on digital can be passed over and ignored - no time spent = no time expended, therefore the cost remains at zero despiite the poster's calculations.

By (incorrectly) suggesting that each digital exposure will be processed, this is a very important point that your correspondent has completely ignored. Much PP work can also be assigned to actions and batch processing. Start the batch and go and grab a cappuccino!

Many who use film might also prefer to do their own pp in a wet darkroom, and the cost for setup, plus time expended may well be greater than it is for simple digital pp on a pc that you could do ... on the bus on the way to work, given a suitable laptop!

Try that in a wet lab!

How does your correspondent address that scenario?


By resorting to a minilab for film pp, you're relaying upon the technical capabilities and QA of the lab staff. In some instances this can be very good, but in most cases, it will be about the same quality as that of the typical HN camera salesperson.

To get quality work you need to search high and low for a quality lab, and the cost of processing at a quality lab will not be of the low order suggested by your correspondent.

Try taking your undeveloped rolls of exposed silver halide technology through a few airport x-ray machines, and see what your valuable images look like after that?

How many thousand images from an intensive day's shooting at the car/bike racing, or the wildlife refuge, or wherever, can you fit into your trouser pocket?

There are certainly some great reasons to shoot film, but your correspondent has completely and utterly failed to identify any of them.

MATT wrote:Yes you get home from taking the shots.

You get the film developed say 36 exposures, trundle home to check
and....

damn not one keeper amongst them. Must have done something wrong, now I will have to wait till the next lightnig storm to try again.



Whish I had the 200 digital shots to shift through


MATT

MATT,
You're exactly right, but there are many people still try to flame and bash, coz they did not understand what they're doing? at the end of the day they proud themselves a PRO-SHOOTERS.
Forget them, just carry on what we are doing and never look back

Why doesn't he take it to the nth degree and eliminate the problem altogether. Just buy the lightning shots from one of us and then there's no time wasted, no money wasted and everybody's happy.

phillipb wrote:Why doesn't he take it to the nth degree and eliminate the problem altogether. Just buy the lightning shots from one of us and then there's no time wasted, no money wasted and everybody's happy.

Sorry phillipB, he doesn't have monies to buy anything just want everything for free.

Birddog114 wrote:

phillipb wrote:Why doesn't he take it to the nth degree and eliminate the problem altogether. Just buy the lightning shots from one of us and then there's no time wasted, no money wasted and everybody's happy.

Sorry phillipB, he doesn't have monies to buy anything just want everything for free.

That sounds about right to me to Birdy!!!
He is yet to return a post so I'm waiting to see what he comes up with???

Thanks for your input Garry that is a good read I'd like to stick that at him as well

The bloke is a goose!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers
Ray

This is how I responded to his post!!!

Have you ever used or look at a digital SLR????
& if you are scanning all you film images you are turning them to digital with an out come that's no were near the quality that comes from a digital SLR unless you spend $2000 on a nikon Coolscan or something similar.
With the fiddling around with the menu deleting bad images there is one button on my cam that dose it with two hits & you can take an image while doing it .
So what's the prob???
I have set up a batch for my images to put a small amount of sharpen to the hole folder.
So all I do its run that & walk away & go doing something ells.
This can be done with any PP that is repetitive.
Most of the PP you have to do would be done before you would get your film back from the lab, you save a heap of time there having them strait away there’s a saving of 1 hour to a day.
Can I make a friendly suggestion????
See if you can find some one, a friend or college that has either a Canon 300D 10D or a Nikon D something & have a play before you go putting all!!!! Digital cams down.
I know you will be pleasantly surprised in how easy they are to handle.
& the quality that comes from what ever model you choose to play with.
Just as a mater of interest mate, when you get you film developed do you tell the lab to proses with no alteration or do you let them do what they won’t????
If you don’t tell them to print direct they will colour correct to a preset colour profile which in most cases is nothing like the way the sean looked.
I love this hobby, now with digital it gives me total control over the entire proses from shutter trip to print. Now you can honestly say I did that to someone that admires you work.

cheers
Ray

Raydar's source said:

Raydar wrote:...if camera gets a bit wet, who cares!

We're intelligent enough to find shelter and get out of the rain...

and

Raydar wrote:...Figure it out, next time you are photographing a storm and you take a pic and say "dont like that" fiddle with the menu to delete it

ONE BUTTON on the back of the camera!!

Raydar wrote:fuss with the menu again to change your aperture and exposure time you probably missed some of the best flangs;)

Then finally after two hrs of digital madness...

We digital types don't fuss and fiddle 'cos between nature's fireworks shows we've already done our research, fired off a heap of test shots and KNOW what settings are going to work.

Surely this guy's a dinosaur and is merely finding a verbose way of expressing his jealousy. Either that or he's got shares in a photolab and sees his future going the same way as film cameras.

Just the thoughts of this humble being.

Ray,

Raydar wrote:Thanks for your input Garry that is a good read I'd like to stick that at him as well

Please be my guest.

And especially, please feel free to point out the last sentence of my post.

If you're going to choose one medium over another, at least do it for the right reasons!

Thanks mate!!!

If he takes the bait, I’ll stick it in his face

Cheers
Ray

It's a simple numbers game, especially with the example given of lightning.

Would I have even tried to get a lightning shot with my old SLR? Yes, a couple of times I tried. But then I looked at the number of shots I'd taken (and would have to pay to get processed) and stopped - before I got a decent shot.

How many shots did I take the afternoon I got my lightning shot with the D70? (Yes, I know I keep bringing it up - but I do think it's pretty good ) I took approx 40-50 shots that afternoon. A whole 2 - yes, TWO - had lightning in them!

Would I have got my lightning shot with film? Yes, maybe. Would I then go out and try again next time? Probably not.
Will I go out next time I'm in the right place at the right time with my D70? YOU BET!

It's very easy to sit back and pick Raydar's "mate" ( ) to pieces. In fact, it's so easy I don't even know why some of you are even bothering to rise to the occasion! In this battle of wits he's turned up unarmed.

Why don't we all just sit back and wait for the not-too-distant future when we are welcoming this chap as a new member into our fold once he's awoken from his coma and gone out to buy a D70.

I doubt he will ever wake up. If you does he will probably buy a canon 300d and spend another 10 years complaining about it by this stage the rest of the world will have moved on.

One example you could hit him with is the unbeatable versatility of the D70 with it's histogram and overexposed on screen dispaly, instant ability to check what you have shot in the field. Something you could rattle off three of four rolls of Fuji Velvia iso 50 slide film (that costs $35 dollars a roll to have developed properly) only to get the film back and find out you were off by such and a such or under/over exposed by 1/3 of a stop on 90% of your shots. Something you could have corrected after 2 shots with the D70 ...

That said I still own a Pentax SP1000 and half a dozen lens's, fully manual everything ... great camera, but it's had it's day.

Manta wrote:It's very easy to sit back and pick Raydar's "mate" ( ) to pieces. In fact, it's so easy I don't even know why some of you are even bothering to rise to the occasion! In this battle of wits he's turned up unarmed.

Why don't we all just sit back and wait for the not-too-distant future when we are welcoming this chap as a new member into our fold once he's awoken from his coma and gone out to buy a D70.

great stuff what a classic!!!!
your dead right mate

Sheepie
you have every right to keep brining it up that is an awesome image that you don’t come across very often

Cheers
Ray

we have a bite!!!!!


Yes I have used a digital SLR and even taught Digital Imaging and Incoroporate Digital Photography at TAFE.
As for the scans being of lesser quality,Fuji frontier minilab scans at 300DPI which is magazine quality. However I have no need to purchase a $2000 scanner as I have my scans done at Metro in Sydney to a size which enables me to print larger than 10x15.
As for the film quality being nowhere near that of digital I think you will find that is not the case.
A typical slide is about the equivalent of a 45 megapixel image my friend who worked for Canon informed me, may be right may be wrong.

At the end of the day use what works for you
That post was written with my tongue firmly jammed into my cheek with a slight bent to stir up a hornets nest at the same time as the film vs digital post always does.

A digital image still does not look as sweet as a transparency on a lightbox.

Have a nice day people

Cheers
Ray

"You can't reason someone out of something they didn't reason themselves into." - Jonathan Swift

Whilst the film shooter is depicting worst case scenarios, there are a few truths scattered in there, and we should be appreciative of the factors that I feel may have been taken for granted in our humble D70. eg. the one button delete. Some cameras (ie. Canon) does requires menu navigation, flicking of switches to enter playback mode from shooting mode before image review and ultimately deletion is allowed. These factors composing the superior ergonomics and speed of the D70 should not be taken for granted.

So in essence, it's a fair comparon between shooting a manual Pentax with a digital Canon. Film would be superior compared to shooting a Canon DSLR IMHO. eg. the 'versatile' EOS mount that takes no manual focus FD lenses, entire range of lenses having no aperture rings, top of the range bodies and L lenses that fall apart from a simple studio fall (aka Paul Pope & his 1Ds mk2 as reported on OCAU), etc.

Birddog114 wrote:My answer is:
Let them go their way, wasting of our time to convince and explaining.
They want everything for nothing and still whingeing, one day they will come back self confess.
I ignore them as part my life, cos I haven't get lot of fun in telling them.

Look out for #1
Dont step in #2

Who cares?

I don't want to talk anybody out of what they want to do, unless it's my wife

If someone wants to debate the merits of competing systems or methods, then there needs to be a rational basis or it is pointless.

I agree with greg, 'Who cares'.

I am waiting for the next big thing in Digital SLR's, the Nikon H70 HOLOGRAM camera.

Then we can compare lightning shots with film users

Killakoala wrote:I agree with greg, 'Who cares'.

I am waiting for the next big thing in Digital SLR's, the Nikon H70 HOLOGRAM camera.

Then we can compare lightning shots with film users

Now THAT would be a step up! Probably not great resolution, but can't be beaten for 'in your face' factor!

skippy wrote:

Killakoala wrote:I agree with greg, 'Who cares'.

I am waiting for the next big thing in Digital SLR's, the Nikon H70 HOLOGRAM camera.

Then we can compare lightning shots with film users

Now THAT would be a step up! Probably not great resolution, but can't be beaten for 'in your face' factor!

Well if its resolution you want, then try the Nikon D1000VR
1 gigapixel 3CCD 35mm SLR
coming out soon!

lejazzcat wrote:

skippy wrote:

Killakoala wrote:I agree with greg, 'Who cares'.

I am waiting for the next big thing in Digital SLR's, the Nikon H70 HOLOGRAM camera.

Then we can compare lightning shots with film users

Now THAT would be a step up! Probably not great resolution, but can't be beaten for 'in your face' factor!

Well if its resolution you want, then try the Nikon D1000VR
1 gigapixel 3CCD 35mm SLR
coming out soon!

lejazzcat,
Have you order it yet? special built for you.

As incorrect and prejudiced as the original complaint is, his experience comes across to me exactly how I felt after playing with a P&S the other day. Small cameras obviously can't fit all the buttons that would be desirable in addition to a reasonable sized screen and viewfinder, but IMO the D70 is excellent in most of these areas.

I can change all of my common settings without going into the menu system, and apart from changing between AF-S and AF-C, I can't think of any function that can not be changed as quick as its film SLR counterpart.

He makes a point that film is not as expensive as sometimes implied, and all added up, digital is not as free (pricewise) as we would like to believe, especially if you do post processing. I don't see any reason to evangelise the benefits of digital if he is happy with film.

However he would probably be surprised at the speed of the workflow if he had a D70 loaded with fotogenetic's P&S curve (after which 99% chance of no post processing). It is also circular reasoning to argue that having to sort through more shots is a disadvantage. If you only want 36 shots, press the button 36 times just like you did in your film days. You can then take your card straight to the lab and print them as is, just like your film days.

I wonder if he ever wished he had a B&W film loaded, or he knew he should have been using ISO 400 film but was only using ISO 200 or something.

There are reasons one would stick with film for certain tasks, pictures of lightning would not be one of them.

Adam

Adam,
Soon, he'll be able to buy a B&W CF card from SANDISK
I've been down that road and the more debate going the more confusing other people. Just ignore and walk away from those fellows with our respectation of their doing and

Like a lot of people in this forum, I've come from a film background and I had a ball doing it - I also used to watch black and white TV as a kid and enjoyed that, I had a HT Holden as my first car and enjoyed that (even when it over-heated soon as the temperature reached 23C), I even admit that I (many years ago) used to enjoy cask wine.

The point is, time moves on. After experiencing GOOD digital gear, I'm not going back to film - why would I??

There is some merit to the quality arguement for Film vs Digital.

Slide film has a resolution of approx 18megapixels for something pro like Fuji Velvia iso 50

http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film ... mary1.html

given that you need 4 times the resolution of a given digital image not twice then the D70 does appear to fail over at about half the best quality film can provide.

The reason you need 4 times the data (megapixels) to get twice the quality is because of pixels and the need for things to be square... if you have one pixel you need four to get twice the resolution ... ie keep things square .. putting another pixel next the first does not give you twice the quality, you need three more.

However the human eye cannot percieve the difference after about 240dpi and for anything 6x4" this is about perfect so you cannot pick the difference between film/digital at this size. To get to A4 300dpi is prefereable or more the D70 can provide this and again ... the diff between film/digital to the eye is virtually nil. All the way up to about A3 you will have a world of trouble picking the Digital from the Film. That's because the human eye simply cannot pick the difference, it cannot differeniate between the two as the human eye if thankfully flawed ...

The time of film is coming to an end, surely everyone here can see that with what the D70 has started and what will happen in the next 10 years with camera and printer technology things can only get better ...