Re: experimenting with 35mm film

In message <fs5hdm$b5u$1$8300dec7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Fred Anonymous 
<anon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
<snip>
>
>Hello folks.
>
>I used Canon EOS film bodies and lenses until I felt that Canon offered a
>decent (for my needs) digital body. Note that I stayed with film until
>digital bodies met my needs.
>
>My second-hand digital body cost around £400. On its first outing on a
>week's holiday with me it saved me well over £200 in film purchase and
>processing costs. One great advantage of digital is that I can change ISO
>without having to carry lots of half-exposed films.
>
>For my needs, digital is better than film.
>Regards, Ian.
>
>I
>
>
Likewise I used Nikon film bodies and lenses until Nikon offered a 
digital body that met my needs (D200, since added a D300). I'd been 
buying digital compatible lenses for a while which made the move less 
painful, but still used some of my older lenses for a while until I 
could justify upgrading them.

I do a lot of motors****ts photography where it's not unusual to shoot 
1-2000 frames in a day which is a lot of film to lug around. I don't 
take many more shots on digital than I did on film, just that a day's 
motors****t can be 15-20 races and I tend to shoot bursts of 3-5 shots at 
a time. Shooting/processing costs are lower due to film costs but the 
time expended is greater. I used to just get contact sheets from film 
and pick the best images from them to enlarge, with digital I miss out 
that step but spend much longer on the PC processing so have a greater 
outlay in time. Kit costs are higher, mostly due to the greater cost of 
decent bodies, but not excessively so unless you feel the need to 
upgrade every couple of years. I don't anticipate upgrading either of my 
digital bodies for the next 5 years unless one gets damaged which was 
the usual reason for replacing film gear as well.

The ability to change ISO on the fly is extremely useful - I'd often end 
up processing half exposed films before the move.

I've also been able to add a couple of DX format lenses to my kit for 
travel use which has significantly reduced the weight of my travel kit. 
I spend several weeks/year in wilderness areas (5 weeks in Greenland 
this summer) so having a lighter travel option that doesn't 
significantly impact image quality is very useful. The lack of film to 
carry also helps significantly - it's easier to protect CF cards in 
difficult conditions than film (film also tends to become rather brittle 
at extreme low temperatures).

Saying all the above, I still find uses for my film kit but have reduced 
the number of film outfits to 3 from 5 - 1 Nikon body (used to be 3), 1 
Kiev range-finder with a selection of lenses and a Semflex TLR.

Will
-- 
e-mail news dot will at lancre dot net
'98 300Tdi Defender 110 CSW, 1/12th NB Sometimes
PGP Fingerprint E089 1736 A023 9E5C AFA3  0B40 E5DC D80A 9E1F D521
Public key can be obtained from ldap://certserver.pgp.com