Swapping digital for film - good idea?

toadstool

toadstool

Messages
1,837
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
Yes
Okay, a little background info first!

I've been taking photos for a long time but only within the past 2 years have I considered myself serious about my hobby.

I'm mad over cheap crap film cameras with their grain and their light leaks, plastic "toy" cameras, film slrs, finding old cameras in charity shops and experimenting with new types of film.. I shot primarily film on a crappy (but I loved it!) zenit SLR until I started my HND in photography and bought a DSLR.

Now, I find myself barely touching film because of the ease of digital. But I'm stuck in a rut now. I haven't picked my camera up for a couple of months and am having a sort of "writers block" for photographers.

I'm desperate to get into film again.

Of course, people here will be biased but I'm thinking of selling my 500D an 50mm 1.8 lens and buying a Bronica ETRS. Do you think I'm making the right move? Or is there a better camera I can get round about that price range? :bonk:

(I've worked with 120 film a lot and can process/dev myself)
 
Why one or the other? Both serve an excellent purpose and can both be extremely fun and rewarding in their own right. Budget and money limitations aside (if it is a budget problem, then it's up to you really), there's no reason why you have to choose between film or digital.

There will be times where you want the ease of digital, and times where you will prefer the experimenting with the "cheap crap film cameras". Sometimes you wake up wanting one or the other.
 
FC2 is correct, use both, I do. Digital for wildlife and shots that I need to get spot on and film for the fun and the pleasure and the satisfaction.

Andy
 
Another vote here to work with both.

As you've already said, there are some cheap film cameras out there ...and they don't have to necessarily throw out a crap shot....some box brownies for example are dirt cheap and will throw out quite a decent result.

You're already one step ahead of many folk in that you have worked and dev 120 film so what are you waiting for?...............if you can't make your mind up, why not go out and shoot each shot with film AND digi......the film camera may give limitations of DOF etc so by having both both cameras you can get the oldie worldy shot with film and the creative shot with shallow DOF with your 1.8
 
Got my ETRS a few days ago, and i'm in love with it already! :)
 
Keep both...don't forget those quick shots, with digital, of your gear to sell on the bay :)
 
Very few people, even in here, are exclusively "film only"... I enjoy working with film, however, for certain types of shot, I prefer digital. I'm not about to stop working with either medium, actually, I wish I could spend more time working with Both!

The Bronica ETRS is a nice camera - I'm very happy with mine, though there are times I sort of wish I'd picked up a SQA instead - after all, you can always get a 6x4.5 back for the SQA (or just crop in post - but it's a shame to throw away that lovely neg!), but you can't get a 6x6 back for the ETRS...
 
Sounds like your use of film was powered by your want for new toys, sort of self perpetuating your hobby (buy camera gotta buy film, by new camera buy more film)
And your recent move to want medium format seems like a move from your digital like you've explored it enough to understand it and now you need something else to feed your hunger.
I do exactly the same lol but i tend to keep my gear and save up when im not too flush. I would keep it....digital was my first dive into photography and more recently film, including developing and for the last three or four months I've only shot film. No doubt my digital kit will be needed before long but i ain't gonna sell it cos its not gettin its former use.
 
I went film only for quite some time and did enjoy it even with the expense. The two areas of photography I feel that film doesn't really suit are macro (getting the DoF right with so few frames is incredibly hard) and wildlife. That's without taking into consideration the high ISO performance of modern day digital cameras.

There's nothing nicer than shooting landscape on film, the fact that you can entirely change the way a scene is rendered by choosing different film stock is still a very exciting prospect. To me nothing can touch a well exposed Velvia 50 frame shot in good light, I'm a sucker for the overly saturated lovely warmth of it all.
 
I'd go for both too, if at all possible. I shoot film exclusively, but that's because I'm comfortable with it and haven't ever really bothered with anything else. I've never actually owned a digital camera. So if you plan on getting rid of digital completely it's absolutely do-able, but it might be smart to keep the kit for a while, at least until you know you're comfortable and happy with using film for everything you do.
 
Dude. You asked for impartial advice in the wrong place.

Everybody here is high on hypo....
 
Shoot both, its better to have options. I also restrict my film shooting when I have too much to process, so shoot digital then! My X10 seems to be filling that void at present.
 
menthel said:
Shoot both, its better to have options. I also restrict my film shooting when I have too much to process, so shoot digital then! My X10 seems to be filling that void at present.
Click to expand...

In addition to this, I think it can be refreshing and beneficial to switch between the formats sometimes, in the same way that I sometimes switch between 35mm and medium format when I begin to lose a bit of creativity or edge whilst shooting one of them.
 
freecom2 said:
In addition to this, I think it can be refreshing and beneficial to switch between the formats sometimes, in the same way that I sometimes switch between 35mm and medium format when I begin to lose a bit of creativity or edge whilst shooting one of them.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
Shoot both. More cameras :) Seriously though, I love shooting film but I mostly use an Oly Trip and for stuff like taking photographs of my mental dog on the beach running hell for leather, the dslr skins it!

Film and digital are two sidea of the same coin. Use both and enjoy both because at the end of the day they all produce photographs and that's all that matters :)
 
toadstool said:
Okay, a little background info first!

I've been taking photos for a long time but only within the past 2 years have I considered myself serious about my hobby.

I'm mad over cheap crap film cameras with their grain and their light leaks, plastic "toy" cameras, film slrs, finding old cameras in charity shops and experimenting with new types of film.. I shot primarily film on a crappy (but I loved it!) zenit SLR until I started my HND in photography and bought a DSLR.

Now, I find myself barely touching film because of the ease of digital. But I'm stuck in a rut now. I haven't picked my camera up for a couple of months and am having a sort of "writers block" for photographers.

I'm desperate to get into film again.

Of course, people here will be biased but I'm thinking of selling my 500D an 50mm 1.8 lens and buying a Bronica ETRS. Do you think I'm making the right move? Or is there a better camera I can get round about that price range? :bonk:

(I've worked with 120 film a lot and can process/dev myself)
Click to expand...

Photography on digital got so boring for me because I knew what I'd get before I even pressed the shutter button. It had almost become too easy, like I'd already taken the photos before I'd even turned the camera on, if you get what I mean.

One of the reasons I started using film a lot more is that I like its unpredictability (comparitive to digital) and the fact that each roll is a bit different, and that you can completely change the characteristics of a roll by pushing it, for instance.

Film keeps me interested in photography which is mainly why I shoot it, now the only thing I use digital for is quick snapshots in the form of a phone.

I'd say you're making the right move, personally.
 
Sorry for late reply...just noticed this. I'm possibly as much "total film" as almost anyone around today having continued a love affair with film since 1958. But I concentrate on 35mm film. Along those lines, I'd get one good rangefinder and one good slr camera. If medium format is (or becomes) your passion and you purchase a camera like the Bronica, RB67, 645, etc...please understand your work will be less spontaneous and more deliberate. Also the gear will be heavier and less portable. Not that this is a bad thing, but it is a thing you need to understand. It all depends on what you want to do, I think. I'd use both, though. I'll admit digital imaging is interesting and useful. Good luck at any rate.
Jon
 
Thanks for all the opinions, guys :)

The reason I wanted to switch for reasons Simon photo said.. "And your recent move to want medium format seems like a move from your digital like you've explored it enough to understand it and now you need something else to feed your hunger."

I don't feel I've explored digital enough to fully understand it and I still have a bit to learn with photography in general and I know I do that better with film. Like others have said, with digital, I feel I already know what's going to happen before I press the button and the camera can basically do the work for me. If I struggle, it's too easy to switch to aperture priority or similar.

I've worked with 35mm a lot and have a good understanding of that which is why I want to try 120 now.

The reason for full out switching is simply a money issue! Selling my digitial would be the only way to fund the film. I've decided not to, though.

We get married in November and I've completely forgotten what having even a spare fiver feels like haha :bonk: but I'm going to continue on with just digital until then, learning that little bit more, and consider a nice medium format camera after the wedding.
 
You'll always be learning new stuff about photography. I've only been shooting seriously since 2003, and there's so much to learn, so many facets and genre's I've simply not explored yet. I fear the day when I run out of things that I haven't yet delved into, and with digital technology bringing along all manner of interesting new witchcraft, there'll always be something new.

And it's for that reason that many people on here, including myself, use both. I enjoy the relative simplicity of shooting film, I find it quite liberating. But I love the immediacy and convenience of digital, especially for family photographs that I can share online with the family very quickly. Plus my daughter loves to see herself on the camera screen! Horses for courses, as I'm sure someone has already said. Enjoy them both for what they are.
 
Congratulations and best wishes for your wedding, hopefully we will see you around this forum at some point when you do get back into film! :)

+1 with Andy and your point, there's so many different elements to explore!
 
Well, someone was selling a hideously cheap Rollei Magic... and it's now mine! :D
 
I hope you got the one with the ability to select manual exposure, because otherwise the selenium cells tend to be dead and you have a paperweight with two Xenar lenses attached...
 
No, I believe it's the Magic I, not the II. The seller had "Sample photos shown to prove it still works" in the ad.

He also said "only works on automatic as there is a problem with the apperture, I suspect no one has ever tried it on anything else other than automatic and the blades have stuck where they are". But when I move the aperture around and fire the shutter, they open and shut like they should so I'm not sure?

If it works, awesome. If it doesn't? That's cool too; it looks great in with my other cameras. I've wanted one for a while purely because it looks great to me. In time, I'll be looking to get a rolleiflex :) That's one I wanted purely for taking photos rather than just pure aesthetic.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top