Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by scott5050505050, May 12, 2003.
MDowdey said it perfectly. LONG LIVE FILM!!!!!
If you've got the bucks then go with the best of both worlds i.e. the digital SLR's.
All the manual controls you need plus the instant gratification of digital.
Cameras such as the Canon EOS-10D ot the Nikon D100 sell for around $1,300 to $1,400 and with their 6 Mp's you can make some very large prints. If you have megabucks then there are cameras such as the kodak DCS 14n that Ismael mentioned.
I have to agree with MDowdey. I will never give up my OM-1, N80, or N90s.. I just haven't been grabbed by the new digiatl technology.
way to go! viva la film cameras!!!
...with regards enlarging a 35mm format negative or transparency, if the film's "exposure latitude" is optimised (meaning - exposed correctly!) prints to 16x20 inches can be made without any deterioration in image quality due to grain
To achieve this, the photographer needs to establish a personal exposure index (EI) for their own camera system by calibrating their meter, camera and film to sync'
Although somewhat advanced - calibration is *most* important for those wishing to improve their images
Possibly worth a tutorial in the "How To" forum...
Any takers (???)
With regards the use of digital vs film in publishing, many publishing houses now use digital - for convenience
However, for fine work, such as in National Geographic and art print publications - transparency or B&W is their preferred medium
Digital has certainly found favour with many home users for "happy-snaps" and Web use - but the cost of top end equipment and lenses to match conventional SLR's put it beyond most except professional shooters and the keen hobbyist
Digital has the disadvantage, that, with every innovation a new camera needs to be purchased ... whereas with an SLR - new innovations simply mean purchasing the latest film
Of course, neither medium (film nor digital) can match the human eye in terms of exposure latitude: at best they are second rate!
Digital has an exposure latitude of 3 f-stops (same as transparency)
Colour negative film is a little better with 5 - in the hands of a good shooter
B&W is the best we have at 7 f-stops - but again, only in the hands of a good shooter
And the human eye?
Makes one wanna cry!
EDIT: correct a tense
I have a few slr and just got a digital I love the feeling the slr and don't think I will ever give it up. Plus don't feel I like a took with this small point and shot thing, don't get me wrong I realy like the speed and low cost taking digital pics. I would love the best of both worlds a DIGITAL SLR but dang that cost an arm and leg. When the cost drops I will most likly get one but untill then slr rules.
Separate names with a comma.