Decisions, decisions....

[Orgnoi1]

Thanks for the compliment... I have to agree if I had a darkroom I would shoot a TON more shots in film... but since the digital age has come... and I can go out and shoot 250 shots at the trains without batting an eyelash... and then go home and process the ones I like within a reasonable amount of time, I shoot MUCH more digital then film... although I like shooting digital... I LOVE shooting medium format B&W...

 

[PNA]

Here's the end of the story....I eventually install commercial Minolta B&W and Color copy machines and junked the presses! Again, no one knew the difference......

 

[markc]

I like Angel's wing#2!!! They're all great shots.

And thanks for you input.

Thanks! (that's on the 10D, btw)

I think you'll find that if you do decide to go with film and scan, that the results will vary a lot based not only on the scanner you choose, but your workflow.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

He agreed with you about the larger viewfinder. It's the rest he disagrees with, and so do I. I'm using the exact same metal lenses on my 10D as I did with my EOS5, and I shoot and compose the same way too. Don't blame sloppy habbits on the equipment. I rag on people using zooms all the time, but not because zooms are crap. It's not the zooms, but the lack of understanding how to use them.

Fine.

I didn't get the split screen for my digital yet... and I don't have any adapters for EOS mount either.

 

[raven4ns]

I shoot using 2 EOS3's and either XP2 super for B&W or Reala for color. I scan these using a Canon FS4000 film scanner and then use PS as my digital lab. In 2007 when Canon releases it's new pigment printer that will give me the prints I want.
I would use digital but I hate the loss of information from acutance. Since I will be doing a lot more macro and because of my preferences in shooting I will stay with film. Digital is a lot more convenient but my photography isn't about convenience.