Is the SLR dead?

[Anonymous]

I mean the "traditional" non digital SLR. I've long been considering a dive into the digital world of photography, but I have this lovely little SLR that I hardly know how to use.

I guess I'm asking your opinions here.. Is it worth getting rid of and replacing with a digital model?

I have to admit, I really like the looks of the new digital Rebel. If I went digital I think I'd be saving my coppers and nickels for that.

thanks in advance for your thoughts...
-m

 

[Anonymous]

IMO, yes, the days of film are numbered. That being said, I think it'll take several years (basically until the current crop of film photographers retires) for film to dissappear completely (or to the point where it's an oddity rather than a norm).

That's especially so since the next generation of DSLRs is making its way to market. The Canon digital rebel leading the pack. I just picked up one of these beauties over the weekend and it's staggering the leap in quality from even a prosumer DSLR-like camera (I'm coming from a Minolta DiMage 7i). (See some of the shots in the photo forum for early examples.)

 

[Anonymous]

Asa mainstream medium? probably - but for hobbyiests I don't think so.

My wetdream is a blad with a digital back though =)

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I do think film's days are numbered. However, it won't be for the next couple of years. Digital cameras still can't match the quality of small-grained films. Even with the best digi's out today, you can't go much above a 11x14 print size. (at least not any that I've seen) You can still go much, much bigger than that with film.

I think I read that photography film would translate into 14-16 megapixels. Once digital cameras pass that mark, film will definately be on it's way out. Hopefully that won't be for a few years. (I still like the smell of photo fix.)

Speaking of which, I'm probably going to sell all my darkroom equipment. I haven't printed photos in well over two years.

So, I guess I've made the switch. I've got a nice 35mm slr that's just collecting dust (okay it's broken, but that's another story) that I'll probably sell as well. . .

B

 

[mkirda]

I mean the "traditional" non digital SLR. I've long been considering a dive into the digital world of photography, but I have this lovely little SLR that I hardly know how to use.

I guess I'm asking your opinions here.. Is it worth getting rid of and replacing with a digital model?

The film-based SLR is not dead, but it will start to be used less and less as time goes by.

Digital has a future, a bright one at that. In time, it will surpass film, probably within the next five years or so, at least for 35mm.

I'm not sure it will ever surpass LF photography. Just really hard to beat an 8 x 10" negative for detail... Actually, this is probably a good analogy. There are still many people who shoot in large format. For them, they see a major difference between 35mm and a 4 x 5" negative. You also have the 'look' of a particular film emulsion, something that will be difficult to achieve in Photoshop, I think. (Velvia filter, anyone?)

Frankly, I do hope that all types of photography stick around for the ages.
It isn't like you can't take great photos with digital or vice versa. Knowing your equipment and how to use it comprises a great deal of what is needed to become a good/great photographer. That will remain true for any photographer, IMO, regardless of the means of obtaining the image.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Anonymous]

My wetdream is a blad with a digital back though =)

I'm not responsible for your mess.

B

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks all, for your thoughts

My husband and I discussed getting some digital equipment, eg camera & printer, and with some eggin' on from gramps who realllly wants a digital camera but can't afford one, I think we'll be looking at getting something post holidays.

And so another hobby to justify a second job begns! Can't wait :lol:

 

[MattM]

Even with the best digi's out today, you can't go much above a 11x14 print size. (at least not any that I've seen)

FYI - I took a sample photo from the new Pentax 6mp D-SLR and printed it at 13" x 19" with no visible artifacts. Experiments in photoshop show that it would go another 50% without visible degradation (that's 19.5" x 28.5").

Here is the full size sample: http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/35mm/ist-d/image/ex_01.jpg

 

[jamesw]

I have printed and shown 16x20 photos taken with my Fuji S2pro

Let me ask you this question: How many new SLR cameras have you seen announced this year? Compare that to DSLR's. You get my point.

Cheers
James

 

[TS]

Here's your Velvia filter:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/DV

His actions are great, would love to try this one but "saturation" seems to be a dirty word in the reefers' community so I stay away from it.

T

 

[madmeri]

I'm a film geek.

Although I do own a digital - I still primarily use film for my good shots.

I doubt that film is going to go away anytime soon, as there are still problems with digital.

Keeping in mind I'm yet to play with a DSLR - although I seriously hope that will change sometime soon.....

My main area of focus (pardon the pun) is bird photography, so I can see how the 1.6x crop factor will come in handy - but at the same time, I also do landscapes, and the 1.6x crop factor can be a detriment - as you're only using the centre of the lens for pics - and you can't really get the 15-17mm range on a dslr unless you spend the $$$ on a 1Ds. And although I'd love to get my hands on one of those babies - a 10D would do me fine for the rest.

For large scale photography though, as in 20" and above - film still has its advantages. Most digital images are only captured at 300dpi with a certain resolution, and unless you interpolated the pic, well... you're going to end up with pixellated prints.

Film on the other hand can be scanned up to 3200dpi, and can be printed quite large. I'm yet to see a digital file go up to large scale work. Yeah, sure, I've 20x30 inch posters from a 10D file, BUT what if you wanted larger?

I love slide film, I also love medium format photography. Although you can get digital backs for mf cameras, I want to see a real MF digital, and not a digital back.

Until the technology is there.......

What I want - although a digital back on a blad is nice - I want a digital back on a Holga 120S

-- L

 

[Anonymous]

Holga digital:
Get a digital back for the blad and tape it on with black electrical tape. Just like the regular film back on a holga!

Wow. A friend in college shot with a holga. Then her hubby bought her a really mamiya. Haven't thought about LK or her camera in a while. . .

B

 

[madmeri]

oh wow - someone actually got my reference to the holga - or did you google it??

most of the time when I mention that I shoot with holgas, I get a blank idiot stare

 

[Anonymous]

I haven't really experimented with digital yet, but a lot of my use for the slides I shoot with an SLR are for painting and drawing backgrounds or other bits into my art. Go out, shoot a roll, put it on the lightbox or projector and get printed the one I want to use as a reference. I imagine that digital would just skip the middleground of actually having the slides made. Would you just take the file of the image you want a print made of to the photo shop?

FWIW, I use an old Minolta x-700 all manual SLR. It's been on many backpacking and offshore trips with me. I get the feeling the body itself is almost indestructible. I love that camera. Even if I fell in love with digital, I will still find a way to use that camera until someone pries it from my cold dead fingers.

Chris (who also likes photo fix )

 

[Anonymous]

oh wow - someone actually got my reference to the holga - or did you google it??

most of the time when I mention that I shoot with holgas, I get a blank idiot stare

nope no stare here. I know what a holga is (thus the use of electrical tape to seal the back!) I just never stepped from 35 to 120. I'd have to drop a few grand on a nice blad, and some lenses. I would have then stepped right up to a 4x5 or bigger. I like to shoot small things and blow them up realllllly big. I never had (have had) the budget for more camera stuff. I still shop fleamarkets and thrift shops for 120 or 220 cameras.

I still have my enlarger and all the stuff for my darkroom. However, I haven't set it up in over 2 years (eek!)

I may just take my 35 out over christmass and put a few rolls of tmax 400 through. . .

B (who also likes the smell of fix)

 

[madmeri]

*sigh*

oh how I miss my darkroom - I'd have one set up now - if we had the space

that and i'd need to get new equipment as I moved from australia to the US earlier this year and donated all the stuff to my old high school...

but I want another one..

and how I would love a 'blad x-pan panoramic camera - pity its over $1000!!

 

[Chucker]

People said vinyl would die with the advent of the CD, but it's still kicking around. Same will happen for film. There's always the traditionalist that prefers the original media.

 

[mkirda]

There's always the traditionalist that prefers the original media.

And there are those who still can recognize the superior quality of the image.

Regards.
Mike Kirda