Film Camaras VS. Digital?

Question

My dad is tottally on the Film SLR Camaras. - I am too, but I guess Digital SLR's are okay. What do you think?

Answer 1

Digital.. I like it and they are here to stay....
Film is on the way out...

Answer 2

If you are serious about taking pictures film is far superior, unless you have a lot of money to spend on your camera. It takes a real professional digital frame to match the quality of film, and that will cost about 10,000 dollars or more to get. Even the prosumer digitals, like the Canon 5d is still not really able to capture the depth of colors, and tones using good film produces. While that level of camera does have the ability to shoot a true full frame shot, and has a great sensor, only a camera with three sensors of that quality can match film. Any digital camera of a lesser grade won't even come close to matching up in any way. Even that high end prosumer frame will still cost more than 2 or 3 thousand dollars, which is a lot compared to a decent film slr camera.

Answer 3

There are pros and cons for both film and digital. Digital you have the advantage of larger pictures count ex. you can get a 6 mp camera and an one GB memory card, that will give about 314 jpeg large format and about 139 raw. With digital there is the lens conversion factor, with a digital camera your lens say 18-55 but with the conversion factor the lens is really a 22-60 some time more depending on the camers mp. The disadvantage is that the size of the end product, that is where a film comes handy, with my 6 mp my pic can only be enlarged to 11x17 after that the detail starts to deprecate.

Answer 4

Digital is better, film is better, which is correct? You have pro's and cons on both sides of the debate. In as much as both statements are right, they are equally wrong. Most people who would argue on behalf of film would argue that the megapixel equivalent of film in particular larger formats such as medium and large format film is superior than digital. For example the megapixel equivalent of large format film hovers anywhere from around 240-900megapixels (the latter figure being representative of 8x10 film). On the other hand, most people don't need such a robust image because their printing needs typically don't exceed the standard 4x6 or 5x7 prints you can get at the drug store.
On the side of digital sensors, they produce less signal to noise issues, and have a better dynamic range than film. In relative comparison to film a digital sensor has the ability to pick up more information than film. So if by chance one day some mad genius creates a full frame sensor for a 8x10 camera you can expect the file size to exceed that of 8x10 film.
To understand more about the differences as well as similarities between digital and film technologies I would suggest you take a look at the following links. This particular person has been working in the imaging field for many years, and really understands not just the superficial differences between film and digital technologies but is quite well versed in the physics of imaging science both digital and film.

Answer 5

I am mostly into film cameras (I own two Nikon N80 cameras and two Nikon F5 cameras). I prefer the quality of film images and the superior details in highlights and in shadowy areas. HOWEVER, there's much that can be said about digital images, too. For example, the convenience of being able to view your images seconds after tripping the shutter button, and the ease with which you can easily send them via email within seconds (scanners do this but take a bit longer... although a good scanner can yield superior image detail to most working digital cameras...). Being able to change ISO without switching films is yet another convenience that digital tech has over conventional film (and since there's no research or any kind of film technology in the works, it is likely it will never be offered in film technology).

There's one aspect in digital technology which I am totally enthralled with: the EASE with which one can manipulate images and backgrounds, colors and hues, the subjects and the backgrounds. However, all of a sudden, my laser printer is not good enough to print with (I'll need a color printer, archival inks, photographic archival papers, a card reader, more memory and more speed on my computer... that means this one is outdated... I'll also need to get a device to calibrate the colors of the computer with the next printer I'll need to get to ensure that I get what I caught on the camera's stamp-sized memory card, an amazing feat, if you ask me... and I'll have to learn yet another few things... how to work this new camera's features and the whole set of terms and functions, and a new program that has a steep learning curve, after spending money on getting a workable Photoshop program... which means I'll have to spend additional long hours behind the computer instead of being out enjoying life or enjoying photography... etc).

Now, insofar as the cameras, I suspect that the manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank... we're being offered less quality camera in build with cheaper materials and cheaper to manufacture technology at much higher prices... digital cameras take less manpower to manufacture (thanks to robotics, which cuts down on labor and benefits, manpower, employees) yet we're paying far more than if these were film cameras with all of the moving parts that required more manpower (human hands coming in direct assembly contact with the product). I suspect this is one reason (the huge profit margin) that there was a concerted effort by those in the photography industry to promote digital technology in such a frenzied way... convenience and profit over quality of image.

I recently bought a digital camera and I was somewhat dismayed with how light and "airy" the camera felt in my hands... due to the lighter and cheaper materials used and the flimsy parts contained inside. Thanks to the batteries my new camera has some weight to it... otherwise, it would have been nothing more than a collection of plastics put together by robotics and a few computer chips to perform all the photographic "work" (oh... plus the lens... now made to focus on a smaller area and thus should now cost even more, especially when they're mostly made of plastics?)

Well, back to your question, I guess digital technology will be the norm in a few years, and film will probably be used by those living in the past, like me... convenience winning out over quality; something seems wrong and I can't quite get the words out.

Answer 6

Both have their pros and cons, but in the 35mm world, digital seems to be gaining dominance for its value and convenience. For medium format and large format, film is still the best value for most of us who cannot afford $20K digital backs; however, some of the higher-end dSLRs (e.g. Canon 1ds Mark II) are causing some medium format photographers to switch over.
Your dad might be comfortable with film SLR mainly because he is familiar with the workflow that goes with it.

A number of professional photographers who switched to digital made a comment that they are working harder and earning less, more so because of the customer's perception that it should be cheaper now that it's digital. Neither format will make you a better photographer, as you can't beat having a good technique and 'eye'; however, digitals do lend themselves to more risk-taking (and hence, faster learning.)

Answer 7

I have several film bodies, and just got a dSLR after fooling around several years with higher end digicams.
The film work flow is easier for me, I still find digital takes up lots of post processing time This weekend, for the first time,, I am shooting the bulk of a wedding on digital rather than film. One thing that is handy is the ability to change ISO on the fly. I am planning to backup the formals on film, though! (Just in case)

So I say use 'em if ya got 'em. While film is still available, I plan to continue to use it. To me, there is a look about film, and a well exposed negative printed on a optical machine in silver halide is a thing of beauty.

Answer 8

digital provides different options and can be less expensive. honestly i recommend both. i always carry a digital camera as well as a film SLR when i shoot. It give me options.

Answer 9

i just got my digital camera last week and i love it. even if i have them printed, i can do it over the net and they are ready when i get there. the picture quality is alot better too. my camera reduces redeye, zooms, and records video and sound.

Answer 10

it's like marmite for either one, you either love it or hate it.
i use both film and digital too, and love using both formats. as both have their advantages for different occasions.