Input for MM cameras wanted

[RonFrank]

I am very much a film photographer - F3 and FM3 - and embarking on u/w photograpy. I am deciding if I should go digital or stay with film camera. I am considering the MM III or MM II. Can someone share your experience with the MM? Thank you.

Go digital. There is a reason it's replacing film, it's better.

I grew up on film, and have owned both the camera's you name. Those along with the F4s, Hassy systems, Cambron large format, and a ton of film gear from Mamiya, Contax, Bronica, Linholf, and more.

I have sold it all, and work now exclusively with Nikon Digital. Why?

White Balance. There is little with film, you shoot Daylight (5500K) or Tungsten (slow shutter speeds) and that's about it. Sure filters help, but it's just not the same as having a built in WB meter that adjusts both color temp and color levels based on the light.

Histogram. The single biggest factor in exposure info in digital. Look at the histogram, and you have all you need to decide what to do.

Shots - shoot all you want! No more 36 exposure limitation, or 24 in the case of MF, or 1 shot in the case of LF. You shoot to the limit of the cards, and they are CHEAP.

UW shooting is difficult. One has varying color temps generally lacking the red channel, and you are task loaded with diving and shooting, and using the viewfinder UW is more difficult. With a rangerfinder like the Nikonis, you are basically guess focusing.

So here's the bottom line.

Film Pro - Cost of equipment - A once high end film camera is going to cost relatively less vs. a digital DSLR.

Exposure - Assuming you are using negative film, you can worry less about overexposing images. Digital behaves more like shooting positive film, so is less forgiving of exposure error, especially overexposure.

Digital Pro - Near live review (DSLR) or Live preivew.
Histogram.
Almost unlimited shooting.
Custom WB settings.
Current technology, and all that buys (warrenty, maintenance, parts, technology).
Resolution - Don't kid yourself. Medium format backs rival Large format film. High res 35mm type sensors (10mpix~16mpix) rival medium format film. If you doubt this, then read some of the tests on:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/

Here is a group if high end film shooters that have done the comparisons. Bottom line, digital competes with larger format film cameras dispite what dye in the wool film junkies would like to believe.

Digital Cons - Price - maybe.
You have to carry around STUFF. Batteries, chargers, laptop, media.

The bottom line IMO is that it's not about the ride, it's about results. Digital is just hands down better, and while I may sound opinionated, I shot film for two decades, and did everything short of making my own emulisions.

If you decide to go film,I have a Durst 4x5 enlarger and complete wet darkroom I need to get rid of sometime soon!

 

[Chris Bangs]

Ron - WOW

That is the best "readers digest" version of film vs digital I have seen!

do not forget having the ability to change ISO on the fly as needed!

cheers

Chris

 

[RonFrank]

Ron - WOW

That is the best "readers digest" version of film vs digital I have seen!

do not forget having the ability to change ISO on the fly as needed!

cheers

Chris

Ahh, thanks for the kudos, and more so for adding in a VERY valuable advantage of digital that I forgot to include! Yeah I LOVED medium format cause I could carry around Reala, TMAX, and Velvia, and shoot a scene with one of each! Digital ended all that need!

 

[cummings66]

The conclusions they've drawn are I think fine and I loved the Phase one backs, the P45 is very nice indeed, but I'd hate to buy one much less take one of those under water.

I too own a medium format darkroom and have done everything from B&W to color. I don't use it much anymore either. I'll buy chems every once in a while to do B&W, but for color I don't bother as I can't do it cheaper. I can do it better than the 1 hour labs but not cheaper.

I shoot digital mostly and find it's as good as my 35mm Cannon would do. Once they hit 6 mp I think 35mm started losing out. For underwater usage I tried the film bit and it was a PITA compared to digital. The ability to set WB right there and immediately see how it came out is nice. With film I had to shoot the card, then the pic I wanted and do that for every shot at different depths. Then you had to dink around in the darkroom wasteing chems and paper because it was off and not what you wanted. I can spend half a day in the darkroom trying to get a few good pics developed and with digital I can duplicate that in minutes.

For underwater usage digital in my book is the only way to go. Above water it depends, I still like my Pentax 67 and the images I get from it. However I like my Digital Rebel for 99% of my shots.

To be honest, digital now is for all practical purposes the equal of film and there's no reason not to invest in it. Especially for scuba diving.

I tried the MM II and it was now in retrospect the only piece of gear I've bought I regretted. In one outing with my digital Cannon A620 I got more usable pics than I had in all the trips combined together with the MM II.