Photography Gear Thread

[Cmike2780]

Originally Posted by DEpointfive0

If I want an old camera. I'll use an old camera. I have 3 Nikon F2s and god knows how many old cameras. I'm happy.

Yeah, I kinda agree. Not about to actually buy this thing anytime soon. If I had that much laying around to spend on a one camera, I'd buy a D800 or 5D.

To be fair, film was and is a pain to work with. The Df is definitely aimed at a specific segment. It's a bit pretentious and nostalgic, but who cares. I guess I just don't get why people are hating on this so much. It will undoubtably take great pictures in the right hands and they'll enjoy using it...isn't that the point?

[DEpointfive0]

Originally Posted by Cmike2780

Yeah, I kinda agree. Not about to actually buy this thing anytime soon. If I had that much laying around to spend on a one camera, I'd buy a D800 or 5D.

To be fair, film was and is a pain to work with. The Df is definitely aimed at a specific segment. It's a bit pretentious and nostalgic, but who cares. I guess I just don't get why people are hating on this so much. It will undoubtably take great pictures in the right hands and they'll enjoy using it...isn't that the point?

Definitely disagree, IMO, with film you had to be a better photographer, you didn't rely on, f-it, I can edit later, you didn't crop, you didn't do anything, you just took the picture better the first time.
So in that sense, getting prints made was a pain because it wasn't instant

When I shoot B&W, still do with my Nikons and Hasselblads, I develop the film myself, and I love it, yes, and that point you CAN "edit" pictures, but I for the most part have my enlarger set on +1 +2 contrast (it's a color film enlarger), and I focus the first pic, and start printing away.
Again, I guess that can be referred to as a pain, but I think it's therapy.

[Cmike2780]

Originally Posted by DEpointfive0

Definitely disagree, IMO, with film you had to be a better photographer, you didn't rely on, f-it, I can edit later, you didn't crop, you didn't do anything, you just took the picture better the first time.
So in that sense, getting prints made was a pain because it wasn't instant

When I shoot B&W, still do with my Nikons and Hasselblads, I develop the film myself, and I love it, yes, and that point you CAN "edit" pictures, but I for the most part have my enlarger set on +1 +2 contrast (it's a color film enlarger), and I focus the first pic, and start printing away.
Again, I guess that can be referred to as a pain, but I think it's therapy.

That's kind of what I mean. I think developing film is pretty fun....but it is a cumbersome and time consuming task....not to mention expensive. As for film making you a better photographer, that's highly debatable. On the contrary, I think digital makes you a better photographer. Not because of software, but for the simple fact that you can take thousands of pictures without fear of wasting a frame. It doesn't mean you're taking less time composing a shot, it means less time dealing with stuff that gets in the way. Having to develop gets in the way. Sure there are tons of advantages, especially with medium or large format film, but digital is quickly turning them obsolete. If you've got a once in a lifetime shot in the field, wouldn't it be better to see what doesn't work on the spot? Heck, pro film photographers use to do this all the time. That's why they had stuff like Hassalblads with polaroid backs. You still did plenty of "editing" in the darkroom.

Like I said, I love film and still shoot with my FM. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's a pain to work with compared to digital, especially when they end up as scanned most of the time. I love the look and feel of film that digital still hasn't been able to accurately duplicate.