The quality out of D800 is below 35mm film.

[Marcel]

Re: The quality out of D800 i is below 35mm film.

One thing for sure is that if we'd have to pay for every shot we take with digital, there would be a lot less of us in this forum. That being said, I still have and will NEVER sell my Hasselblad with an 80mm, 150mm and 250mm, 2 backs, polaroid back, filters, the whole nine yards. But I'm just hoping that one day, someone will make an affordable "Full 2 1/4 X2 1/4" digital film back for the old 500 CM. In the meantime, I have film in the freezer just in case. But the the ease of printing and sharing, digital is sure hard to beat. And I'd risk saying the same for quality.

 

[SkvLTD]

I can chime in on, sort of, shooting "film" since I've done thousands of shots using my non-ai 50 and aside from far lesser quality and much faster and cheaper "developing" it was like shooting film in my eyes.

Fun? When you have time and want to challenge your exposure knowledge, ability to MF, and so on- yes.

Fun when it's in more of a work kind of environment (active movement, change of lighting)? No, and my hat's off to the ground to peeps who made a living shooting anything that moved/in the dark back in the day.

 

[LeicaR9]

Re: The quality out of D800 i is below 35mm film.

Film has a whole different "feel" and charm to it that digital just simply cannot capture and I doubt it ever will. I have no objections whatsoever to grain, it is one of the things that give film its charm. Just the mere mention of the word grain makes some people cringe. And absolute resolving power does nt amount to a hill of beans, at least not to me. Digital looks very “plastic” to me. And most digital cameras cannot match film in its range of latitudes, especially in black and white. But digital does have its advantages over film. You can switch “iso” at will and of course you get instant feedback on how the image looks. It is also essentially “free” compared to film. The price of flashcards is miniscule compared to the cost of the same number of film images plus processing costs.

Still, I would rather pick up my Hasselblad and use it rather than any of my 35mm or digital cameras . It leaves them all far behind.




'

The plastic look sure comes from complex lighting. HDR can help here but not with moving subject.

Nikon D800
iso 50 2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Nikon F5
The Tree | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Robinson from Buttermere | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[Marcel]

Re: The quality out of D800 i is below 35mm film.

The plastic look sure comes from complex lighting. HDR can help here but not with moving subject.

OK, HDR can't help for moving subject. Now, where can you find 6400 iso film to shoot such subject?

 

[mikew_RIP]

Don't know why i keep coming back to this its like Deja vu this argument/discussion ran 10 or more years ago and never reached a solution then that satisfied every one.

 

[gqtuazon]

Don't know why i keep coming back to this its like Deja vu this argument/discussion ran 10 or more years ago and never reached a solution then that satisfied every one.

I ran out of popcorn already and this topic is still going on.

I think we can all agree that this is just about personal preferences and there is nothing wrong with that. I would also agree that it is ok to disagree if you don't want to accept that digital is way more economical, flexible or versatile, and wedding photographers have abandoned the idea of changing film in the middle of a photo shoot and that the costumers wants instant results. Just saying...

Now where did I put that remote?...

 

[Dave_W]

I think we're there now...

 

[Marcel]

Re: The quality out of D800 i is below 35mm film.

So we now close this dead end thread.