Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

MF film owners: why still use 35mm film?

E

evgeny

Member
Since I bought my Contax 645 I start think to sell or not to sell my Nikon F6, a top Nikon 35mm film camera.

The Nikon F6 is a very advanced camera, which looks and performs like the D2x, but equipped with a 35mm film back.
Comparing to Contax, the F6 has a much better viewfinder, matrix metering, fast auto focus, higher shooting speed, etc, etc, but it is 35mm film...

I can use my 17-35 and 70-200 VR Nikon lenses with Nikon digital cameras, like D3 and D300.

So, what would you do, owners of MF cameras, sell F6 or keep it (and still developing 35mm film = money)?

PS: I scan 35mm and 120 film with Nikon 9000.
 
KeithL

KeithL

Well-known member
"why still use 35mm film?"

Why indeed.

Although I still prefer drum scanned Medium Format film over anything I've seen so far from the 35mm based DSLRs and the 16/22MP digital backs, even I can't make much of an argument for 35mm film.

Possible exceptions? Well, perhaps using very high ISO films to achieve an impressionistic quality, but honestly, I can think of little else.
 
L

LJL

New member
Not to sound out of place here, but regardless of which high end 35mm camera one uses, the film does not come close to providing an image with higher IQ than most high end DSLRs, and definitely not close to any of the newer MFDBs, from what I am seeing. As mentioned, if there is some special artistic need for using the 35mm film, fine, but those may be limited. Additionally, the availability of many films, and the high quality processing needed for best results also seems to be much more limited today than just a few years ago. So, regardless of how good a scan one may be able to get from a 35mm film, the IQ is still not going to match, nor beat what one can get from digital full frame, nor MF digital. Shooting MF film still has its place, but even there, it is rapidly losing ground to the digital backs and the files they are able to produce.

LJ
 
Bob

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I shoot Tri-X in an MP when I want that 35mm TRI-X look.
It is the easiest way to get it and it really looks close to the real thing.:ROTFL:
-bob
 
Bob

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Hey,
once the film is scanned it IS digital, and it is processed with a digital workflow, just with a funky sensor.
-bob
 
D

ddk

Guest
evgeny said:
Since I bought my Contax 645 I start think to sell or not to sell my Nikon F6, a top Nikon 35mm film camera.

The Nikon F6 is a very advanced camera, which looks and performs like the D2x, but equipped with a 35mm film back.
Comparing to Contax, the F6 has a much better viewfinder, matrix metering, fast auto focus, higher shooting speed, etc, etc, but it is 35mm film...

I can use my 17-35 and 70-200 VR Nikon lenses with Nikon digital cameras, like D3 and D300.

So, what would you do, owners of MF cameras, sell F6 or keep it (and still developing 35mm film = money)?

PS: I scan 35mm and 120 film with Nikon 9000.
Click to expand...
That's a very personal choice, imo each format has its place and one doesn't make the other redundant. Let's just forget about the format, wether using digital or analogue, I don't see how MF can replace 35mm in certain situations, like shooting in adverse weather conditions, your F6 and Nikon pro lenses are sealed and no MF that I know of is. Then there are other issues like underwater housings, have you priced one for MF recently? Zoom lenses aren't my thing but you seem to like them, you're not going to find the variety and range in MF if that's how you shoot. Its not always about resolution, only you know your needs and habits.

david
 
F

fotografz

Well-known member
You've posted this question on a pixel peepers forum, where "blow-up doll" skin texture is highly prized ... so keep that in mind ;)

IQ (as in: Image Qualities) is subjective at best. I find the IQ of 35mm film to be unique and not matched by any digital capture ... except when it's reduced to a sub one meg. files on the internet.

If the look and feel of film is your IQ criteria then IT is the superior medium.

BTW, that F/6 is one step away from going extinct and you should sell it to me :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top