Re: experimenting with 35mm film

"Tony Polson" <docnews2011@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:ne72u3d1c5j3dr074r9hsv8a8pvsokmubt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Woody" <woody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >I had one of those - brilliant camera.
> >
> >However you will find two problems (1) sourcing the film amd (2)
getting
> >it processed - not to mention the cost.
>
>
> The cost????
>
> It isn't film that costs money, it's digital.
>
> By the time I had bought several DSLR bodies, replacing them as better
> ones became available, had the sensors professionally cleaned several
> times, replaced several of my lenses because, while they gave perfect
> results on film, they didn't work well on digital, upgraded my PC and
> bought new monitors, a monitor profiler and some very expensive
> software, plus additional hard disks for storage, burnt a great many
> CDs and DVDs, and spent a fortune on memory cards ...
>
> ... I could have bought and processed all the film I would need for at
> least the next 20 years.
>
> There is nothing expensive about film.  Digital is a money pit.

Not only is digital more expensive than film it is also a lot more
complicated and it is possible to spend a lot longer on the computer than
you ever did in the darkroom.  Having said that it is very versatile for
various types of manipulation which are currently the fa****on.  I've still
kept some film cameras and lenses just for the time when I want a more
simple life.

Roger