F5 vs 1v

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:53:28 -0400, Ray Paseur wrote:

I have a D70. I have tested it for backfocus and it has no problems. And
I'm nearly ready to sell my F5, but I'm being sentimental and keeping it a
while longer.

I'll give ya $100 for it. Deal?

Here's why I would part with the F5 and keep the D70.

1. Cost of film/processing. I recently hiked Mt. Rainier and the Olympic
Peninsula and took 900 images in the process. Of these, there are a dozen
I chose to send to others via email, two I printed at 36" wide, and a big
handful I am putting into a memory book. Not one of them cost me a penny
until I had the exact image I wanted. Do the math on 25 rolls of film and
processing - even slide processing, and you'll see the economic comparison
to be fairly stark.

This is where I have found having a digital SLR with all its advantages to
actually work against good photographic habits. Had you gone up with your
F5 you would have maybe taken maybe 10 x 36exp rolls of film. I will
almost guarantee you that you would have had a lot more keepers if you had
shot on film. Time, patience and preparation are the hallmarks of good
image making and the rewards of that are mostly evident in good pictures.

You would also have had a lot less work to do when you got home.

2. The printed pictures, even when shot in JPG (not Raw) are nearly
indistinguishable from the best prints I've made with professional 35mm
film and processing. Quite simply, 6 MP is enough to do the job as well
as 35mm film.

There is no argument from me on that count. It's good for small prints (A3
maximum size)

3. Weight and battery consumption favor the digital camera.

Weight yes. Batteries no ways. I can get maybe 250 hi-res jpegs from the
two lithium ion cells in my D60 before it squeals for the mains.

4. Instant gratification (or instant re-shoot). With almost any
inexpensive printer, you can have that magical shot of the married
couple's first kiss at their table before they enter the reception.

Word of advice: never ever rely on the LCD playback screens of a DSLR to
see if you got a good shot or not.

5. No More Polaroids.

Who?

6. Easily backup or duplicate your "negatives" on CDs

Yes & no. Yes because it's easy to make back-ups of images, but it
certainly doesn't come without a bit of toil.

I am not selling my medium-format equipment. I use my D70 for proofing
before I make MF portraits. I think 35mm film is right where the vinyl
record was in 1981 - the CD was such a popular and convenient format for
music that the 33RPM record suddenly became a thing of the past.

I disagree with this. Vinyl was always a flawed medium on which to retain
recordings. It was actually crap, to be honest. Digital photography is not
even closely approaching the quality of film, so in this situation we have
a new entrant (digital) that is hoping to replace a superior medium.

Where digital is winning friends is with its convenience and unfortunately
there are far too many consumers out there who are helping it along its
way. As a photographer who uses both film and digital, my main concern is
that 35mm film will simply become an unfeasible product for the
manufacturers to continue serving a rapidly decreasing market.

If I was a marketing exec at Fuji, Kodak, Agfa and Ilford, I would be
looking at an angle to either bring the price of 35mm down to the point
where it is so cheap as to be unignored, or campaigning the superiority of
film over the current crop of 6MP digicams.

Sadly I see no such thing happening.


--
Dallas
Group guidelines on http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
Improve signal to noise ratio by filtering all crossposts.

Patrick L. wrote:


Consider the Maxxum 9 and 7 as well. The Maxxum 7 AF is very
fast and the 9 not far behind.


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

In article pan.2004.07.30.11.28.00.665000@southafrican,
Dallas writes:

If I was a marketing exec at Fuji, Kodak, Agfa and Ilford, I would be
looking at an angle to either bring the price of 35mm down to the point
where it is so cheap as to be unignored, or campaigning the superiority of
film over the current crop of 6MP digicams.

Sadly I see no such thing happening.



Interesting point.

I would love a DSLR for convienience. I have a neg scanner and I do
work on some images in photoshop. Indeed for black and white I tend
to process and scan and not even get out the enlarger (burn the heretic).
I don't shoot a great deal of film, but enought to notice I am
spending a moderate amount of money on it.

However.

I do note that the amount of money spent on a *istD would buy me a
lot of film an processing. Even with my newest toy, a Mamiya C330 which
is expensive to run compared to 35mm (assuming that 5x5" prints are so
small that is is pointless shooting medium format) the captial cost
of a DSLR would buy a lot of processing.

It is interesting, digital cameras must be selling because they
are shiny new gadgets. People seem to spend money on digitial cameras
that they would not dream of spending on a film camera when they could
get a lot of 'bang for their buck' going down the SLR route.

Pete


--

http://www.petezilla.co.uk

In article pan.2004.07.30.11.28.00.665000@southafrican,
Dallas writes:

If I was a marketing exec at Fuji, Kodak, Agfa and Ilford, I would be
looking at an angle to either bring the price of 35mm down to the point
where it is so cheap as to be unignored, or campaigning the superiority of
film over the current crop of 6MP digicams.

Sadly I see no such thing happening.



Interesting point.

I would love a DSLR for convienience. I have a neg scanner and I do
work on some images in photoshop. Indeed for black and white I tend
to process and scan and not even get out the enlarger (burn the heretic).
I don't shoot a great deal of film, but enought to notice I am
spending a moderate amount of money on it.

However.

I do note that the amount of money spent on a *istD would buy me a
lot of film an processing. Even with my newest toy, a Mamiya C330 which
is expensive to run compared to 35mm (assuming that 5x5" prints are so
small that is is pointless shooting medium format) the captial cost
of a DSLR would buy a lot of processing.

It is interesting, digital cameras must be selling because they
are shiny new gadgets. People seem to spend money on digitial cameras
that they would not dream of spending on a film camera when they could
get a lot of 'bang for their buck' going down the SLR route.

Pete


--

http://www.petezilla.co.uk

In article pan.2004.07.30.11.28.00.665000@southafrican,
Dallas writes:

If I was a marketing exec at Fuji, Kodak, Agfa and Ilford, I would be
looking at an angle to either bring the price of 35mm down to the point
where it is so cheap as to be unignored, or campaigning the superiority of
film over the current crop of 6MP digicams.

Sadly I see no such thing happening.



Interesting point.

I would love a DSLR for convienience. I have a neg scanner and I do
work on some images in photoshop. Indeed for black and white I tend
to process and scan and not even get out the enlarger (burn the heretic).
I don't shoot a great deal of film, but enought to notice I am
spending a moderate amount of money on it.

However.

I do note that the amount of money spent on a *istD would buy me a
lot of film an processing. Even with my newest toy, a Mamiya C330 which
is expensive to run compared to 35mm (assuming that 5x5" prints are so
small that is is pointless shooting medium format) the captial cost
of a DSLR would buy a lot of processing.

It is interesting, digital cameras must be selling because they
are shiny new gadgets. People seem to spend money on digitial cameras
that they would not dream of spending on a film camera when they could
get a lot of 'bang for their buck' going down the SLR route.

Pete


--

http://www.petezilla.co.uk

"Ray Paseur" wrote in message ...
I have a D70. I have tested it for backfocus and it has no problems. And
SNIP

Not one of them cost me a penny until I had the exact image I wanted.
Do the math on 25 rolls of film and
processing - even slide processing, and you'll see the economic
comparison
to be fairly stark.


....and did your D70 body fall from a tree above Paradise one fine,
sunny afternoon?


One should factor in the cost of 'little memory cards,' batteries,
etc., when expressing how 'free' it all is in the digital world. Plus
you spent zero time checking all 900 images for the several 'fine and
free' one to use. HA!

= = =

"Ray Paseur" wrote in message ...
I have a D70. I have tested it for backfocus and it has no problems. And
SNIP

Not one of them cost me a penny until I had the exact image I wanted.
Do the math on 25 rolls of film and
processing - even slide processing, and you'll see the economic
comparison
to be fairly stark.


....and did your D70 body fall from a tree above Paradise one fine,
sunny afternoon?


One should factor in the cost of 'little memory cards,' batteries,
etc., when expressing how 'free' it all is in the digital world. Plus
you spent zero time checking all 900 images for the several 'fine and
free' one to use. HA!

= = =

"Ray Paseur" wrote in message ...
I have a D70. I have tested it for backfocus and it has no problems. And
SNIP

Not one of them cost me a penny until I had the exact image I wanted.
Do the math on 25 rolls of film and
processing - even slide processing, and you'll see the economic
comparison
to be fairly stark.


....and did your D70 body fall from a tree above Paradise one fine,
sunny afternoon?


One should factor in the cost of 'little memory cards,' batteries,
etc., when expressing how 'free' it all is in the digital world. Plus
you spent zero time checking all 900 images for the several 'fine and
free' one to use. HA!

= = =

"Patrick L." wrote in message ...
I need a high end SLR. So it looks like the 1V, or the F5. I don't
have a big investment in Canon glass, just one 85mm f/1.8 lens so I'm not
glued to the Canon side.

SNIP

The F100 (in a dark environment) is probably your best bet -- the red
focus box is a tad bit advanced in a dark room over the 'black' block
found in the F5.


= = =

"Patrick L." wrote in message ...
I need a high end SLR. So it looks like the 1V, or the F5. I don't
have a big investment in Canon glass, just one 85mm f/1.8 lens so I'm not
glued to the Canon side.

SNIP

The F100 (in a dark environment) is probably your best bet -- the red
focus box is a tad bit advanced in a dark room over the 'black' block
found in the F5.


= = =