Some film questions...

[imperialism2024]

I think it's time for me to start using film, as most of my shots are landscapes, and I believe the general opinion is that film is much better to use for landscapes than a DSLR. I also have an attraction to B&W portraits, which IIRC is better with film because pixelation from digital cameras becomes more apparent with the higher contrast... Or maybe I've merely become the subject of the urban legends of photography.

At any rate, what's a good film body for Nikon lenses that will do what I need it to do? I'm willing to spend as much as necessary to get what I need, but I'm open to using second-hand equipment as I'll probably be using the D70 75% of the time anyway.

Also, any suggestions for film for landscapes and black and white portrait work? For those of you who don't know, I love to oversaturate my photos (er, at least the ones I don't completely desaturate...) so I would want a film that would do that... I see Fujifilm Velvia brought up a lot, but I'm not too familiar with slide film.

Anyhow, I'll clarify later if necessary... when I'm more coherent... :sleep:

[350wedge]

Hmm few questions there.....

For a good Nikon film model with plenty of control I'd say go for an F80 or even an F100 depending on how much cash you want to spend. F100's are plummeting in value and can be had for about £300 secondhand now. F80's rarely fetch more than £150 and are very good in themselves. I used to have one until I turned to the Dark Sdie!!! Only irritation I found with the F80 was its tendancy to underexpose..

Film choice for landscapes is a no brainer...Velvia rules for saturated colours and now its available in 100asa it offers a bit more flexibilty (still have a fridge full of the old 50asa though )

Black and white I dont have as much experience with but I've used Ilford 50asa to excellent effect, super fine grain and loads of detail!!. In fact any Iford film will be great. Also Agfa RX50 is worth a look at.

Film choice is very individual, I know what i love (fuji!!) but you need to shoot a few rolls of different stuff to see what you like. Slide film though is not as tolerant as print film on exposure error. A perfectly exposed slide will always look stunning while a bad one will stick out a mile...

[simpo two]

IMHO for landscapes and portraiture I don't think the camera body is that important, it's the lens that will make the difference.

[LongQ]

I always thought the consensus was that landscape and portrait was the province of medium format cameras.

On the other hand Luminous Landscape articles indicate that a change to digital only has become viable - even for professional landscape photographers.

www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dq.shtml

and


www.luminous-landscape.com/locations/big-sur.shtml

Quote from this one:

"There was one more consideration. In the 3 months leading up to this shoot I had switched from doing landscape work in medium format to using the new digital Canon EOS 1Ds. I had quickly determined that this full-frame 11 Megapixel camera actually exceeded medium format film in every way, and I had subsequently sold almost all of my medium format camera gear."

But there is still something about film ...

Edit - to add that I have just found this item and it all adds to the debate.

www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/clumps.shtml

>> Edited by LongQ on Tuesday 9th August 11:11

[chrisj]

Can't comment on a suitable Nikon, but I'd second Velvia being a no brainer.
I have no experience of the 100F version but the 50asa is just superb.
Ditto the comments about a lack of lattitude, I know from experience.
But then this should push you to improve your picture taking.

I've just tried Provia 100F for the first time and I'm impressed.
The colours aren't as saturated as Velvia, but still a very nice result.

As far as the digital sharpness verses film sharpness debate, the question should be how sharp do you need a picture to be?
When compared in fine detail, the shots from my Dads 4mp Minolta are nowhere near as sharp as 2400dpi scans from my 120 slides, but when they are viewed at A4ish size there is little between them.
Most of it comes down to personal preference.
There is no doubting the speed of digital (speed as in access to the piccies) and also the convenience of being able to view the results, but then I like the ritual of my all manual TLR and wouldn't trade it for any digital.

PS. For black & white try Ilford FP4.

[GetCarter]

my 2p worth

Agree on the colour film, and Ilford I've always found best for B&W.

As for Digital v Film.

Well (cat amongst pigeons time) If you want to do landscapes and want to do film I think 35mm is the wrong way to go. CAVEAT - money! If you are on a tight budget, then there are good arguments.

I print digital landscape pictures from the D2X to A2 size and sell them framed for silly money and there ain't one of THEM out there that can tell whether it was taken with the F6 with velvia or the D2X with a card.

Now there may be one or two of YOU that might guess... but you'd have to be a VERY sad and hardened pro.

I just sold a load of medium format gear - and If you need to enlarge bigger than A2 - then forget digital, forget 35mm - buy medium format.

I however, never do, (professionally anyway) enlarge bigger than A2, so the gear had to go, as it was never getting used.

My point. Medium format (loads out there second hand) or even large format (the dogs) is the way to take REALLY classy landscapes. 35mm although providing much more 'information' than digital is only a step up in terms of your final result (digital providing SO many advantages that you already know about) - a step that will only show to the keenest eye, and at A3 or bigger.

Remenber the Caveat? We are talking £5k minimum for pro digital body & lens ...so If cash is an issue I would suggest you might just consider looking on e bay for a Bronica GS1 medium format 120 film camera (or similar).

...and lookie here>

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Bronica-GS-1-Camera-System-with-accessories_W0QQitemZ7536377093QQcategoryZ3350QQssPageNameZWD2VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

In the USA!

Steve

>> Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 9th August 19:05

[GetCarter]

Just a final thought before I get lambasted.

I reckon (assuming decent SLR or DSLR) and not for a bill board!

69% subject and light
15% lens & camera
15% photographer
1% film or digital

any thoughts?


>> Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 9th August 19:26

[FunkyNige]

GetCarter said:

Just a final thought before I get lambasted. I reckon (assuming decent SLR or DSLR) and not for a bill board! 69% subject and light 15% lens & camera 15% photographer 1% film or digital any thoughts?

I think the photographer is more important than you say, give me a perfectly lit fantastic subject and I'll be able to balls it up quite easily. If you saw the digital picture of Britain TV show on a while ago you would've seen the decent photographers given low end equipment and non-perfect situations and still come out with fantastic shots. I agree with the film or digital though, I use film as I will lose all my pictures if they're stored digitally and probably get into the habbit of deleting all the ones I don't instantly like the look of.

While I'm here I may as well ask - how would I use slide film? I see all the recomendations for Velvia, but can I just stick it into my 35mm SLR and get it developed as usual? Sorry if it's a dumb question my I haven't got a clue!

[GetCarter]

You can stick it in your camera as usual, but you will end up with slides - not prints.

Back onto the photographer - I'd further suggest that of that 15% only 10% is 'eye' and technique - the other 5% is getting up early enough, walking far enough and sticking round for long enough.

I'm sticking to 15% - unlike music, where it's at least 17%.

[imperialism2024]

Hmm so the general feedback is that digital is either the same or better for landscapes than 35mm, and if I want really good landscapes, then I should go medium format.

Medium format seems intriguing... but yeah it definately looks like I can get second-hand stuff dirt cheap. It's a shame I don't have the money right now to bid on that kit on eBay...

Anyhow, perhaps if I'm going to spend a few $K, I may as well just get a D2X and just use the lenses I have.

[te51cle]

I agree with medium format, as I find somehow prints look more relaxed with less enlargement even at 16x20/A3 size. They don't have the stress of being pushed to the limits of the 35mm technology. I think medium format allows more accurate rendition of gentle tonal changes.

I tried a roll of 100 ASA Velvia (RVP 100F) in my secondhand Mamiya 7 the other day and thought it was excellent. As for B&W, I like the Ilford Delta films, particularly the 400 but be aware of quality problems recently as they made some false economies whilst trying not to go bust.

[imperialism2024]

GetCarter said:

You can stick it in your camera as usual, but you will end up with slides - not prints.

So... how easily can one get prints done from slides?

[ehasler]

imperialism2024 said:

GetCarter said: You can stick it in your camera as usual, but you will end up with slides - not prints. So... how easily can one get prints done from slides?

Easy peasy

There are two ways really:

1) Ilfochrome (aka Cibachrome), which is an enlargement of the slide onto special paper, so is totally manual.

2) Scan the slide, and print as you would any other digital image. Most decent flat-bed scanners will produce decent scans, although for the best results you'd want to use a dedicated film scanner.

[simpo two]

GetCarter said:

69% subject and light 15% lens & camera 15% photographer 1% film or digital

My 4p:

30% subject
30% light
30% photographer
10% lens/camera

However it's not as simple as that because you NEED at least three: subject, light and photographer.

[_dobbo_]

simpo two said:

GetCarter said: 69% subject and light 15% lens & camera 15% photographer 1% film or digital My 4p: 30% subject 30% light 30% photographer 10% lens/camera However it's not as simple as that because you NEED at least three: subject, light and photographer.

You guys, so modest.

For me it's:

99% photographer
1% everything else

liar, really it's 99% photoshop....

[simpo two]

ehasler said:

Film vs Digital for Landscape?

A remarkable difference, and I'm sure it would hold true for any subject, not just landscape.

[imperialism2024]

Hello again, everyone.

Electronics retail has been crazy lately, as one might well expect around the holidays. Which is why I haven't posted in quite some time...

At any rate, I was browsing ebay for some reason or another today and came across this: http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-F100-MB15-Grip-MINT_W0QQit

Having not much experience with ebay, is it a good deal or a rip-off?

[GetCarter]

Don't do it... Do this!

http://cgi.ebay.com/Bronica-ETRSi-in-super-condition



Steve

>> Edited by GetCarter on Saturday 24th December 09:28