Anyone shoot film still?

[Experiment_626]

Or maybe give them to a kid to disassemble. That would be interesting.

Honestly, I wish I had an old film SLR that nobody wanted so I could take it apart. I'll bet it would be interesting.

SSB

 

[DebºoºS]

I agree if you can donate or give to an interested teen! My DS learned a lot about photography by using my old manual Nikons and lenses. He also learned how to process and print with my darkroom setup. He and his friends took some great pics of the moon with a manual Nikon mounted on our Celestron telescope. Then they processed and printed blow-ups in B&W.
Cameras and musical instruments can be passed on for a long time.

 

[CEK40]

Since reading the earlier post "Mama don't take my Kodachrome away", this has gotten me wondering, how many of you still use film? When or in what specific situtations and what equipment do you use when using film. Also, do you see a time when film outweighs using digital and why?

 

[thomas998]

I usually only use kodachrome for outdoor shots of my family, shots of flowers, or shots at Christmas time by the tree. Its pricey to process and takes time that only I am willing to put up with (the wife wants the instant gratification of digital). And mainly because looking at family shots on a viewer just looks so much better than a print... I have a nikon hanging by the door loaded with it so its ready when I get the urge to capture memories... and an old Yashica in the drawer that's only used for flower shots because I have some bellows and lens on it that I never got around to finding in a Nikon mount.

In the end there is a quality to slides that I don't see in prints... I've gotten close to it using photoshop with things like Fred Miranda's Velvia Vision... but it still doesn't quite seem the same.

The digital camera is used 90% of the time, even if the software gets there to reproduce the slide quality I'll still try to use film... if for no other reason that it seems more permanent than bits on a chip.

I think anytime you are in a situation with bright lights and dark shadows, film will win out... but maybe that's going to change if they continue improvements to digital sensors... to me digital is like a big mac and film is like a gourmet burger... they both fill you up, but one is just more satisfying.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

We were starting to get a film on the bottom of our shower door, but some CLR took care of it.

I haven't touched a roll of film since early 2002. The only thing I miss is getting all of those little containers that are useful for holding small stuff.

 

[bob100]

I think anytime you are in a situation with bright lights and dark shadows, film will win out...

I have a somewhat opposite view in that I find you can bring out amazing details in a digital photo's shadows and dark areas with photoshop but then I probably never used my Minolta SLR to its full potential because of the cost of film and processing. Once I got an HP digital camera five or six years ago I never used film again. two camera manufactures that bit the dust - but they still work!

 

[WillCAD]

I switched to digital in 2003, but I still used film in my old SLR for a few year afterward, just for fun, and for night shots that my first digital camera couldn't handle.

Since about 2005, I don't use film at all, and stick strictly with my Canon Digital Rebel 300D.

The only time I would use film these days is if I were on a wilderness trip where I couldn't find a place to charge my camera batteries every couple of days.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

The only time I would use film these days is if I were on a wilderness trip where I couldn't find a place to charge my camera batteries every couple of days.

I take my digital camera on wilderness trips. I bring along a second battery. Between the two batteries, I can get 2,000 to 2,500 shots. Extra batteries are cheaper and lighter than film.

 

[gokenin]

Still shot black and white film I dont think that a digital camera gets the same grainy feel that a film camera can for black and white and have shot some color as well. There is something for me at least of not having instant access all the time to your pictures and knowing that you have to stop and think instead of turning into a machine gunner picture taker hoping to get one that is good

 

[gokenin]

Still shot black and white film I dont think that a digital camera gets the same grainy feel that a film camera can for black and white and have shot some color as well. There is something for me at least of not having instant access all the time to your pictures and knowing that you have to stop and think instead of turning into a machine gunner picture taker hoping to get one that is good

 

[WillCAD]

Still shot black and white film I dont think that a digital camera gets the same grainy feel that a film camera can for black and white and have shot some color as well. There is something for me at least of not having instant access all the time to your pictures and knowing that you have to stop and think instead of turning into a machine gunner picture taker hoping to get one that is good

Hey, if you want grain, I'll shoot my Digital Rebel at 1600ISO for ya!

 

[boBQuincy]

After 30 years of Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Ektar, etc. I said goodbye to film in 2001 when I bought my Canon D30. No regrets, I can see no advantages to film over digital in any way (except for the little canisters, as Mark said). I mean, almost nothing fits in the CF card cases!

As mentioned before, I don't miss carburetors nor vinyl records either but realize that all of these still have their followers. All these differences in equipment and techniques is what makes photography, audio, and cars so much fun!

 

[gokenin]

could just be another quirk of us weird pentax users have one film slr, thinking of getting a second and would love to get a medium format film camera as well along with my digital cameras

 

[Andrew Bichard]

I have a 17mm rectilinear lens on a Canon T90, and a good flash with a wide light spread.

A wonderful lens for interior shots and outside shots where you can't get far enough away.

I call it my realtor lens!

I still use from time to time, because I couldn't afford an equivalent lens on a digital SLR.

And those little cannisters save the day when I was travelling Glasgow to London once. The restaurant & bar on the train were closed as it was a Sunday, but I had a bottle 100 proof 15 year old Talisker!!!

Andrew

 

[DebºoºS]

Yup, as mentioned on the other thread. Right now I'm cooling Velvia 100F in the frig

I love my D200 DSLR buuuutttt don't take my Kodachrome away

 

[DebºoºS]

And those little cannisters save the day when I was travelling Glasgow to London once. The restaurant & bar on the train were closed as it was a Sunday, but I had a bottle 100 proof 15 year old Talisker!!!

Andrew

hooozah!

 

[Groucho]

could just be another quirk of us weird pentax users have one film slr, thinking of getting a second and would love to get a medium format film camera as well along with my digital cameras

Yeah, you just beat me on that Spotmatic on the other forums. I'm not in a huge rush, I still need to finish putting a roll through my H3. It's intimidating not having any lightmeter! I do have my grandfather's ancient GE no-battery lightmeter and plan on learning how to use it one of these days.

I also have a roll of film in my K1000, and want to get some rollfilm to use in my Kodak Junior Six/16 that I recently bought... and would like to get around to build a paper pinhole camera, too.

The coolest thing I've seen in a long time, though, requires 110 film... I bought a few old lenses and a flash a couple days ago off Craigslist, and the guy had (but wasn't selling) a Pentax Auto 110. This is the smallest SLR ever built, and is a fully-featured SLR that used 110 film. There were 6-7 lenses made for it, a teleconverter, full suite of filters and such... it was indescribably tiny! I haven't checked yet but supposedly the focal length equivalent was about 2x 35mm, which would mean a similar film size to a 4/3rds sensor, but this was waaaaaaaaay smaller than any 4/3rds camera. The aperture was actually in the camera and the lenses were like little jewels of engineering, with lens caps the size of nickels! And it was still pretty easy to handle and very easy to manual focus. It was amazing, I definitely have to get one even if I rarely use it. But it is a true pocket SLR and I can see why owners have been clamoring for a digital equivalent. Micro 4/3rds is trying to get there but they're still much larger.

Bob, I think b/w film still beats digital in terms of dynamic range, though that may be shrinking (especially with Fuji's DSLR SuperCCD sensors)... but it is a different "look".

 

[Boo Bear]

I primarily shoot black and white with my Mamiya RB67 with 220 backing. I did sell out and get a Nikon D300 as my new $$$ maker though because that's what it all starting to come down to... convenience.

 

[boBQuincy]

Bob, I think b/w film still beats digital in terms of dynamic range, though that may be shrinking (especially with Fuji's DSLR SuperCCD sensors)... but it is a different "look".

Most color negative films probably have a larger dynamic range than most digital sensors as well. But with HDR the sky is the limit! There is no way I could have captured some of the night scenes nearly as well with film as with HDR.

One of the differences is in the way bright values "clip", much in the way that transistor amplifiers "hard clip" vs tubes which "soft clip". Sensors just clip while film gently rolls off the response, giving a much more pleasing transition from almost washed out to completely washed out.

 

[rst90274]

If they are still available let me know. I'd be interested in purchasing them for my twin daughters. They are taking a film photography class in high school and cameras are not provided.