I like photography with film, but I love digital photography

[Panama Hat & Camera]

The thread An interesting experiment... is really very interesting. When I read the article and saw the video, I remembered how I took photos with film. I'm not a professional photographer and, definitely, I don't have the same knowledge or the skill level of Alex Hutchinson, but always I tried to do my best.
The cost of each photo (film, development and printed copies) was significant and I could not take many photos to get just a few decent pictures. Normally, I had one roll of 24 or 36 exposures (I carried until three cassetes of 36 exposures during a vacation!). The disadvantages of analogue photography are well known (but there are some advantages too).
Nowadays, with digital photography we have the entire control of the process of taking and processing photos (and we can send the photos for all the world with just a few clicks). It is wonderfull!
Cheers,
Antonio.

[Manfred M]

Antonio - I haven't shot film in at least 3 or 4 years, but I plan to do so again this year, likely in the spring and summer. I expect I will be doing some side by size comparison with digital (same shot / same camera settings) and expect to order the output as high quality digital files, rather than prints.

Back in the pre-digital days, when we were travelling I would generally budget 1 - 2 rolls of 36 exposure film (which meant I could usually squeeze in at least 38 shots) per day of the trip.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

Antonio - I haven't shot film in at least 3 or 4 years, but I plan to do so again this year, likely in the spring and summer. I expect I will be doing some side by size comparison with digital (same shot / same camera settings) and expect to order the output as high quality digital files, rather than prints.

Back in the pre-digital days, when we were travelling I would generally budget 1 - 2 rolls of 36 exposure film (which meant I could usually squeeze in at least 38 shots) per day of the trip.

Manfred,
I would like to see the photos of this comparison. Please, publish it in a thread of CiC.
Which film camera do you have?

[Manfred M]

Manfred,
I would like to see the photos of this comparison. Please, publish it in a thread of CiC.
Which film camera do you have?

I have two Leica R3 cameras and a Nikkormat FTn. Lenses for the Leicas range from 19mm - 400mm and for the Nikon I have lenses from 24mm - 200mm. Some of my newer ones might work with it too.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

I have two Leica R3 cameras and a Nikkormat FTn. Lenses for the Leicas range from 19mm - 400mm and for the Nikon I have lenses from 24mm - 200mm. Some of my newer ones might work with it too.

Manfred,
Do you have a Nikon DSLR that can use the same lens of Nikkormat camera or vice versa?

[Manfred M]

Manfred,
Do you have a Nikon DSLR that can use the same lens of Nikkormat camera or vice versa?

I have three lenses with traditional aperture rings, but without the aperture ring cam, so they could be used in theory. They are not ideal as metering will have to be done stopped down. That means I would have to focus wide open and then stop down manually to take the shot. As I have lenses for it that can cover most of the focal lengths I commonly shoot at for the Nikkormat, I don't really need to use the newer lenses.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

Very good! For a fair comparison, the same lenses must be used in the analogue and digital cameras.

[Manfred M]

Very good! For a fair comparison, the same lenses must be used in the analogue and digital cameras.

If that is indeed the objective of the exercise, but in my case it would not be.

I will likely be shooting with the Leicas, so the lenses would not be the same (all my lenses, save one are fixed focal length lenses) versus the zooms I normally use on my Nikon. The beauty of the Leica lenses is that they have relatively few elements, so they create images with more depth and contrast than the modern zoom lenses I use with my Nikon camera.

I'm looking at two different pictures taken of the same subject.

[mikesan]

Not really responsive to the OP but, (with regard to 35mm format only):

I like making photos with my (by comparison, large, heavy, ergonomically awkward) digital cameras, but I love making photo with my film cameras which are small, light-weight and fit my hands like a glove.

[rpcrowe]

What's film

Oh yes, I seem to remember that stuff I used for over 50 years. I used digital for about three or four years, starting about 2000, using an Olympus 5050 but, when I wanted to shoot anything serious, I would revert to a Canon A1 and AE-1P SLR film cameras and several lenses or to medium format gear when the photography was "really serious" like my daughter's wedding.

However after I purchased the Canon 10D, my first DSLR (about 2003 or so), I never again shot a frame of film and I don't have any expectations of ever using it again. I basically "gave away" my film gear but, own a greater selection of digital gear than I ever had with film.

[DanK]

What's film

Oh yes, I seem to remember that stuff I used for over 50 years. I used digital for about three or four years, starting about 2000, using an Olympus 5050 but, when I wanted to shoot anything serious, I would revert to a Canon A1 and AE-1P SLR film cameras and several lenses or to medium format gear when the photography was "really serous" like my daughter's wedding.

However after I purchased the Canon 10D, my first DSLR (about 2003 or so), I never again shot a frame of film and I don't have any expectations of ever using it again. I basically "gave away" my film gear but, own a greater selection of digital gear than I ever had with film.

Ditto.

I am also not convinced that weight or ergonomics are particularly pertinent to the comparison. I haven't compared the weight of my Canon 5D III with my FTb, which I still have but haven't used in many years now. I'm guessing that the FTb is a bit lighter. However, in terms of ergonomics, the 5DIII is in my opinion better; the FTb didn't even have a grip. And many digital cameras are far lighter. I took the image below with a Lumix LX-100, which weighs all of 393 g with battery and SD card.



I rather liked the fact that wet developing is a physical process, but I don't miss the toxic chemicals, and I thoroughly enjoy the much greater flexibility offered by digital development.

IMHO, this is just a matter of personal preference.

[rpcrowe]

I like being able to sit down and work on my images for a sort time and then leave without any cleanup or waste of mixed chemicals. The footprint of my monitor and keyboard is incredibly small compared with the trays and washer and dryer needed for film photography. In fact, I cannot see any advantage to film at all now that digital photography has evolved quality wise.

If I want the look of film, I can get that with my NIK Software...

[Ken MT]

I just gave my enlarger to the local museum, so I guess that I will be all digital unless I go to slide film, oh yes I gave that away as well.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

Not really responsive to the OP but, (with regard to 35mm format only):

I like making photos with my (by comparison, large, heavy, ergonomically awkward) digital cameras, but I love making photo with my film cameras which are small, light-weight and fit my hands like a glove.

Only for curiosity, please, tell me which cameras (digital and film) do you have.

[mikesan]

Only for curiosity, please, tell me which cameras (digital and film) do you have.

Nikon D800
Contax IIa
Contax 139Q
Contax RTS II

[DanK]

This got me wondering. B&H lists my largest DSLR, a Canon 5DIII, as weighing 857 g. I just weighed my old film FTb body, and it weighs 783 g. I'll wager that later film models probably weighed less, however. The FTb was a tank, with almost no plastic.

I think the bottom line is that the major determinants of ergonomics and weight are the choice of camera and general technological change, not film vs. digital per se. For example, one of the biggest ergonomic advantages of my 5DIII relative to my FTb is that with the 5D, I can control both shutter speed and aperture without moving either hand: my right thumb controls one, while my right index finger controls the other. (I can change which dial does each.) This is possible because the control is electronic, while it is mechanical in the FTb.

[Panama Hat & Camera]

The Nikon D800 is great camera (maybe a little big).
The Contax IIa is a classical (and pretty) rangefinder camera.
The Contax 139Q and the Contax RTS II are very good SLR cameras.
There are some mirrorless cameras that are smaller than DSLR cameras, but with the same image quality.
I understand your preference for film cameras. Each person has their own needs and different expectations and workflows.
I was much more careful when taking pictures with film. There was the cost of each photo and I had to wait a few days before seeing the printed photo. Nowadays, I see immediately the result of each shot and that is the reason why I prefer using digital cameras.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

This thread has me very close to selling off all my film cameras. Problem is, I'm a hardware junkie and their 'mechanicalness' has me in a death grip. My digital cameras just don't quite grab me the same way.