advertisement


Film v Digital

M

Mick P

Retired and content
Chaps

I use a Leica M6 for my photography. My lenses are 35mm F2 Summicron, 50mm F2 Summicon and a 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit.

I must be one of the few of us alive who is still using film.

Am I a genuine ludite or are there any advantages in using my Leica over a digital camera.

One positive of film is that it amuses my grand children who thought that film went out in the Victorian era.

Regards

Mick
 
Get yourself down a leica shop and try an M9 with your existing lenses - I think you'll find the benfits of digital are pretty clear.

Keep the M6 of course, just get a M9 to complement it.
 
Mick,

I think you'll find plenty of people here still using film, either exclusively or like me with a digital camera.
I bought a 35mm Canon SLR for £7 last year and was delighted at how it slowed me down and made me think about what I'm doing.
However, my digital SLR allowed my to advance technically so quickly compared to over twenty years of film SLR photography. As mentioned above, try and keep both.

Tony
 
Mick,

it is undoubtedly easier to get well exposed sharp images out of an M9 than it is with an M6 or and MP. Apart from the obvious benefits of being able to change speed without changing film, and change colour balance on demand and in post processing, the main difference between the results with the M9 compared to the M6 are:

- zero grain, no matter what the speed (although 18 megapixels does limit you to around A3+ prints without some kind of post processing to scale the image)
- no possibility for the processing shop to cock up the development
- no delay between exposure and printing

The real question is, does spending £4.8K make sense?

Personally, I use the Leica MP and M9 interchangeably depending on whether I want a particular effect (eg from Ilford 3200 film at night, or Fuji Velvia 50 on a day with flat light, or Fuji 400H if I want that look to portraits, or Neopan if I want to play with the results in the developing cycle). But if you're willing to learn photoshop/lightroom etc then you can do a lot in post processing by just going 100% digital.

cheers
Cliff

PS of course you are a luddite like several people on here.
 
Mick,

Keep going with that film. It's great. I've just come up from my darkroom printing negs taken on my M6TTL and 35 pre-asph lux. There just isn't anything that beats a proper silver print - not even the M9. Yes I shoot digital too. I have two Leica Digital Modul Rs, which are fab, but it's not the same.

And in this world of instant gratification, isn't it great to have to wait a while to see what you've got?

Best wishes,

Charlie
www.charlie-chan.co.uk
 
Mick,

I wish I were in your shoes, as you have the both the classic camera and lens combination for candid, street and portrait photography as well as the time to snap away. I'd suggest buying a couple of bricks of Tri-X, a package or two of X-tol, some fixer, a developing tank and reels, and a nice flatbed scanner.

Start snapping, developing and scanning. Film is great fun if you have the time and patience.

Joe
 
Chaps

I only want one camera, so it would be either the M6 or something else.

The M6 will go on forever and I dare say film will be available for as long as I am on this earth. My only concern about buying a digital camera (even a M9) is than it has obselesence built into it or is this a myth?

Regards

Mick
 
Mick,

Just keep your M6. It will probably see all of us out. If you were a pro shooter, then the M9 would be the way to go (unless you had time, like some documentary photo-journalists). If you're like me, then just enjoy what the M6 and its wonderful glass gives you.

Best wishes,

Charlie
www.charlie-chan.co.uk
 
If you're mostly taking family and holiday pictures, which I suspect you are, you would probably be better off with a digital camera. An M9 is probably overkill, a compact high quality DSLR with a fast-ish zoom covering your most used focal lengths will do everything you need, would be more flexible than your current kit, and will last for 5 years or so, and will be much cheaper to buy. It has no cachet as an object though, nobody will be impressed by it. This is either a good or a bad thing, depending on what you want in a camera.
 
Chaps

I use the M6 almost exclusively for holiday snaps etc and the occassional impulse shot at home. The good news is that battery charge is not an issue.

The reason for buying the Leica was the lenses and I don't want to down grade to a Canon or whatever and a M9 seems a bit of an overkill for the odd shot.

I think I shall stick with the M6.

Many thanks

Mick
 
Should you move to using a digital camera you already have a good post processing product in iPhoto which came with your Mac. Should you wish to go further and wish to brush in changes to images then you could upgrade to Aperture.

Then you can have the convenience of your pics either printed or on screen - or on the TV via via DVD or a connecting cable.
 
Mick Parry said:
I think I shall stick with the M6.

Many thanks

Mick
Click to expand...

That's the third time you have said that, and yet you ask us time and again to spend time telling you what you already know.

Hey ho

To reiterate, if you want to keep your leica glass investment (circa £7k replacement cost new) and go digital, get an M9. If you want to sell your Leica gear and go digital, sell it all on ebay for a toal of circa £3k and buy something like the Lumix GF1 and kit zoom

If you're happy using snappy snaps, carry on as is ;-)

Cheers
Cliff


PS I agree with Ian above
 
As always -- damn you, Ian, for always being right -- sideshow's advice is sound, but given that Mick already has an M6, three nice lenses and is fully retired he should learn how to process his own B&W film. (More fun and rewarding than whingeing about pinkos, plebs and people who haven't amassed a small fortunate.)

He could then either set up a proper darkroom, if he wants to stay traditional, or get a flatbed scanner and photo inkjet printer, if he wants to take advantage of some aspects of digital photography, principally, post-processing.

Joe
 
cliffpatte said:
interesting that your quote was unattributed - where did that come from?
Click to expand...

Mick's quote, above mine. I was only joking around, incidentally. Nowt wrong with an M6 apart from the fact that too many of them sit on shelves unused...
 
topoxforddoc said:
And in this world of instant gratification, isn't it great to have to wait a while to see what you've got?
Click to expand...
if it floats your boat or perfection of results is the goal then yes, no doubt. If speed, workflow and not spending on films, processing and waiting for the results is the goal then no.

However, I expect every photography forum is full of that sort of debate so I don't mean to open one. What might be interesting is to see some of Mick's shots as that will tell whether he would be better off with a £200 Sony/Samsung/Panasonic, a £600 D90/EOS550D/K7 or his multi £-thousand Leica perfection. There's a difference between our skill meriting the elite kit and simply enjoying using it and I know my skills would not merit it.
 
Joe Petrik said:
As always -- damn you, Ian, for always being right -- sideshow's advice is sound, but given that Mick already has an M6, three nice lenses and is fully retiredhe should learn how to process his own B&W film. (More fun and rewarding than whingeing about pinkos, plebs and people who haven't amassed a small fortunate.)

He could then either set up a proper darkroom, if he wants to stay traditional, or get a flatbed scanner and photo inkjet printer, if he wants to take advantage of some aspects of digital photography, principally, post-processing.

Joe
Click to expand...

or, he could buy a new Summilux 35 at circa £3.3K, and trade in his 90/2,8 for the APO/ASPH one for another £3K and get a smidge more detail out of an M9 than he could out of an M6. I know this because I read it in the Leica marketing blurb ;-)

I reckon £150 spent on chemicals and some plastic to stick them in would be more rewarding in the long run.

I also reckon that 99% of holiday snaps taken on the beach in Spain can actually be well captured on something like a second hand Lumix LX2, but then again, I am one of the loonies on the beach with a 6*6 MF Film camera changing film every 12 shots while trying to keep the sand out of my camera back, and also trying to keep the body out of the sea at the same time :)

Cliff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top