Film or Digital for Beginner (with Prior Experience)?

[MLJ1764]

Hello Everyone,

I know that this question may have been asked a hundred times before but I couldn't find a complete answer using the search feature so here it is again.

I'd like a recommendation/to hear the opinions of the users of this forum regarding starting out with film or digital.

Before you answer, let me provide a little bit of background about me and photography. When I was a kid a took a serious interest in photography and learned as much as I could about the technical aspects of it. I read books and practiced the basics using my Mom's 35mm cameras (Konica Autoreflex T3 and a T). Unfortunately, I didn't take nearly as many photos as I should have to really nail the techniques down and start exploring other aspects, such as proper framing and composition. Cost was mainly the issue (for film and development) - didn't have much of an allowance. So, I suppose you could say that I learned how to "work" the camera and film, making all the right technical choices to achieve a proper shot, but didn't use that as a basis for getting into the more enjoyable, creative aspects of photography.

Anyway, after a couple of years, my interest sort-of waned and I eventually abandoned it altogether. That was many years ago but recently that old interest has returned with a vengeance. I've gotten the Konicas out and have been taking a few rolls each week but I've decided, since I've got some money saved up, that I want to invest in a quality SLR system (besides, there's sentimental attachment for those Konicas since they were my Mom's and I wouldn't want anything to happen to them).

So, I am faced with the dilemma that I suppose most beginners face and that is whether to go film or to go digital. I'm not asking which is better (I do not want to open up that debate). Personally, all I've known is film and have a certain fondness for black-and-white photos shot on film, so I cannot really comment about digital. What I am asking is, for someone who isn't a complete neophyte to photography and wants to build an SLR system to use for personal enjoyment and possibly (in the distant future) some working jobs, is film still a viable option or is the only reasonable choice digital?

Also, if film isn't dead yet, which SLR system would you recommend looking at for these purposes? I was eyeing a Mint Canon EOS-1V but I know that Nikon has the F6 still available as well.

Thanks in advance for any help/insight you can provide.

All the best,

Michael

 

[Designer]

Hi, Michael Since you mentioned cost, I would remind you that film purchase and processing is expensive when compared by the cost per shot against digital. If this would have any effect on how many times you get the camera out, I would think very seriously about getting a DSLR. It would be significant cost to get set up, but then your shots would simply be taking up space on a memory card.

Let us know what you decide.

 

[Alex_B]

The learning curve can be faster with digital as you can see results the second after you took the image. However, some people put more effort in each single image on film, since it is more expensive. If you are one of the latter type of person, having a film camera does help ... maybe get a cheap film body from Nikon or Canon, with a lens mount compatible to their current digital SLRs. Then you can live in both worlds.

 

[TCampbell]

I highly recommend digital. I've been shooting for decades... grew up shooting film (medium & 35mm). But I don't miss it (much.)It'll be a hassle to buy film and get it processed and that will slow you down. You also get faster feedback on your mistakes as you can see the results almost immediately. The only thing I appreciated with film is that the expense and delay of processing and printing made the penalty for mistakes higher and, as a result, I think it slowed photographers down. You wanted to make sure you were doing things right or you'd be disappointed.

 

[Derrel]

Digital. I shot my first film in 1972, and my last regular use of film ended when I bought a Nikon D1 in February of 2001...I do not miss film's expense, hassle, and slowness. Today, developing and proofing and printing of film has become almost a niche business, with higher than comfortable prices for even DECENT work, and HIGH prices for good to excellent work. The economies of scale for film labs are gone in the USA...the business of printing out images has shifted to 95% digital files and prints made from digital files. "wet" darkrooms are much rarer now than they have ever been. Today, unless the film is developed by a QUALITY lab, one runs the risk of receiving shoddy handling ,and shoddy workmanship, and shoddy end results--on negatives, transparencies, and proofs and prints. In major metro areas, decent labs are still available, but in the hinterlands (ie 97.5% of the USA), developing of film is a limited-outlet business,and it's an iffy proposition, IMHO.

I just spent a couple hours at Fry's Electronics, and looked, handled, and checked out every d-slr they had, plus multiple mirrorless cameras. I would never suggest a film camera to ANYBODY who wants to get back into the field of photography in this, the second decade of the twenty-first century. Film still has most of the qualities and attributes it used to have. FIlm still works. But digital slr's are like a dream...camera and film and developing all in ONE product! Most definitely, buy a d-slr. Forget the film cameras and leave them to the craft workers and commercial shooters who already have enough invested in cameras, and film tech, to make their use of film actually worthwhile.

 

[ulrichsd]

I agree with everyone, if your going to pick one or the other, go digital. That said, I miss film, and once you have a digital setup, its fairly cheap to get into film as the majority of lenses are FX lenses. Just plan those into your purchase when buying digital (for Nikon, 50mm instead of 35mm dx or 24-80 or 24-120 instead of 18-55dx or 18-105dx) and you can pick up a used N90, N75, or N80 for around $30-40. Even an F100 will only go for about $200 used.

 

[Tony S]

Ditto... go with digital to get back into it. Pull out the Konica once in a while just for memories sake. The amount of learning and progress you can get in using digital will amaze you. Looking at your images right away and evaluating what works and doesn't work is a great learning tool, not to mention less expensive since you are not printing each image you learn with to see the results. Realize though that digital can be expensive up front with all the extras you may find yourself needing.

Now if you really, really had a desire to get back into film, I would steer away from the 35mm size and look at getting into medium format film work. But that is a whole nother horse to ride.