film vs. digital

[mandrake]

Michael H. Reichmann at his fantastic site "The Luminous Landscape" ran extensive tests years ago using a Canon D30 (3.1 MP DSLR)vs scanned Provia HERE and shows that even the old D30 was superior to film. For an even better side by side comparison see THIS REVIEW . Most reviewers rate the Canon 1Ds as rivaling 645 medium format scans as seen in this review Here as well as the above link. Do a search, "film scan vs. DSLR" and try to find anyone claiming "35 mm" film superior to DSLR. It only get's grey when you start comparing MF film to a digital MF back but that is only in relation to costs; the quality is already equal to, to above that of 6X7.

Hi Dave, I just found the 1Ds vs MF article at Luminous Landscape myself and was just looking back through this thread to make sure no one else had already posted it. I just wish I could afford a 1Ds, but then I can't afford a Hasselblad either, so what difference does it make? The point of this article extends up and down the whole camera price spectrum -- for what real people do in the real world, digital is competitive with film. It can be better, it can be worse, depending on a lot of factors, but for your needs you can almost invariably get a digital solution that rivals a film solution at any given price point. The writing is indeed on the wall.

 

[clive francis]

Wal-Mart and Walgreens here do that too. They are Convenience Stores. Not Photo Labs. They are'nt Pro labs and Your not going to get the Best Print from them. They are a Mass Market way of Printing.

i have tried walmart/asda but it wasn't the best, i take mine to Jessops which is a national chain of photography shops

 

[clive francis]

Color Film is in LAYERS. 3 or 4 Layers. To capture the Colors. They overlap themselves. To make for a very great color saturation. And to Blend for better resolution. Film in the last 5 years has made Leaps and Bounds. It hasn't been sitting still like others think. But then again. I don't buy my film at Wal-Mart.

Digital is making Leaps and Bounds ALSO. But it isn't there yet. The reason your gonna need 40-50mp is for the Details. And to be honest. It's gonna be hard to tell a 30mp from a 50MP. Till you get to the details. Like the Hair in an Eyebrow. The extra is for the VERY fine Details. But that's also how you get great pics. Details. And that's what Pro Level film is giving now. So to match it. Digital has to get it too.

Wanna know a next step. Use a OLY8080 with 4 of the 8mp sensors. To get 4 Different colors. Then Overlap them for final print. Then, Maybe your getting there. It's coming. It's not here yet. Because they need to make there money off these things. Or it would already be out.

Or the Kodak 14CN with 4 of the 14mp Sensors. Each recording a different color. And overlap the output. I'd bet that would get there.

I like my 5060. Kinda wish I'd of waited and got the 8080. It's been fun. I don't like 35mm anyway. I like 6x7 and Large Format. And they don't make a housing for a 8x10. That I could change film in.LOL

have you heard of the SD10 by SIGMA?

as this does exactly what you are talking about it has RGB layers overlayed giving 10.2 total pixels and file sizes of up to 75MB

which is about as close as you are going to get to true colour reproduction at the moment.

will be interesting to see what the S3 is like with its new dual photo detectors

 

[Mverick]

have you heard of the SD10 by SIGMA?

as this does exactly what you are talking about it has RGB layers overlayed giving 10.2 total pixels and file sizes of up to 75MB

which is about as close as you are going to get to true colour reproduction at the moment.

will be interesting to see what the S3 is like with its new dual photo detectors

Yep, it's using one detector to do it. And not taking multiple pics to overlay. Just doing it digitally. Which will add noise.

Cannon uses Optical image stabilization on there higher end video cameras for a reason. Digital Stabilization adds noise. Do it optically. Not digitally.

Yep, when they come out with 3 sensor cameras like they've done High level video. You'll be seeing some real great quality. It could easily outdue 35mm. And probably Medium formats too.

 

[PapaBob]

I really love threads like this because you get the benefit of everyone's experience. I couldn't wait to get a Cannon 300D when they came out and I love the camera. That said, I now enjoy shooting both film and digital.

I doubt I will get the 300D housed and take it underwater. My Nikonos III rig does just fine and I have a great variety of professional film to shoot with. I like prints so Kodak Royal Gold in 400asa was a favorite (now discontinued) and Kodak 400VC works great. You want better color saturation then select one of the professional slide films. If I want a digital file then I can scan a negative (or positive). My local Costco will now do the same thing at reasonably hi res for $0.7 per neg. Since a minority of UW shots are winners, the few I would scan would not break my wallet.

A newbie must consider how much he or she is going to use the UW camera. I have always been an advocate of not throwing $$ overboard on a new hobby until the bug really bites hard. I say this because there are some great deals on used UW film rigs on Ebay and a newbie with good mechanical camera skills might do well starting out that way. If the newbie does not have extensive film experience, or wants to start out "state of the art" then digital seems to be the way to go.

I love these me vs you debates because I often come away thinking "why aren't both right?" I have been away from this forum for awhile but I remember asking DEE whether she will ever use film underwater again after her experience with the OLY5050. How about it DEE, is film all washed up?

---Bob

 

[Cecil]

I should throw my $.02 into this discussion. I was an avid user of 35mm for 30+ years but was pretty disappointed in my 35mm underwater pictures. I was using a Reefmaster and was fed up with the lack of macro capability. The final straw was a trip to Belize.

There I was in a perfect position as a VW sized Loggerhead turtle went directly over me. Well three weeks later when I finally got my pictures back, all I got in the frame was one fin. That lousy sport's finder bite me for the last time.

That Christmas I got a Sony DSC-P5 and have not looked back yet. The first dive trip I took it on, I also took the 35mm. My thinking was, I'll use the 35mm for above water and the Sony UW. Not.. the 35mm never left the room. I used the digital for everything.

Now that my digital is on the fritz, I've gone back to the 35mm to hold me over. I could not be more dissatisfied with the 35mm. In each picture I always think how it would be better with the digital. This is all a surprise to me, as I like most people thought I was stepping back in quality when I went digital.

One other aspect that needs mentioning, is the convience of digital. I find, due to the size, I always have my camera with me. In the old days with 35mm, I needed to haul a camera bag with film, lens and flash. Now I just stuff the camera in my pocket and I'm gone. Someone mentioned how you never know when that great shot is going to present itself, well you can't get the shot if the cameras at home due to the hassle of bringing it.

 

[DesertEagle]

Wow. What a discussion! Just use the right tool for the job. The same rules apply to film and digital- get close to your subject, balance ambient and fill light...

Sorry to hear that the Reefmaster didn't work. I started by renting a Nikonos and was thrilled with the results. It was enough to make me spend lots of money on gear. My personal experience with film has been great but I'm tired of lugging my Nikon 8008 and Aquatica housing through airports. A nice 5 megapixel camera is going to give me better viewing than the housing has. The only thing I will miss will be looking at a new slide on a light table. I "suppose" that viewing photos inside the camera during the decompression stop will make up for that.

 

[cdiver2]

sounds to me your blaming the camera, but from what you said you did not know how to use it.

 

[The Hamburger]

I think the answer to Digital / Film is that both still have their respective advantages.

I have just turned into a 2 camera family with a D70 to go with the F80.

D70 will be the Macro Camera , F80 for WA.

Cheers

 

[friscuba]

Have you ever used a Reefmaster? Have you ever used digital?

Last time I went to DEMA (fall 2002) they were touting their new top of the line with built in macro. Even the pics in their display album left a lot to be desired when compared to what you can do with a decent 3mp digital.

You have to be dead on the money using the sportfinder for aiming AND dead on the money on both exposure and distance to get a decent picture. I think that's what Cecil was trying to get across. Digital is much more forgiving, flexible and easier to work with.

later

Steve

sounds to me your blaming the camera, but from what you said you did not know how to use it.