Digital vs. 35 mm?

[Komodo]

So which ones do u think is better?

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Komodo
So which ones do u think is better?

If you get a good digital camera, digital is far better. You don't need to buy film or pay for developing and you don't have to scan the photos in order to put them on your computer or the internet. If you are buying one or the other...you should go for the best quality digital camera that you can afford.

 

[Julian]

Unless you are into professional photography or just a photo nut a 2.0 megapixel will do you just fine if the most you are going to do is print out 8 x 10's, or if your just sending the pics thru emails etc.

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Julian
Unless you are into professional photography or just a photo nut a 2.0 megapixel will do you just fine if the most you are going to do is print out 8 x 10's, or if your just sending the pics thru emails etc.

I have a 3.2 megapixel and an Optical 2X Lens Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-P52 and it takes very good pictures as well as short video with sound. You can also get the special photo printer that is made especially for these cameras for good quality prints. The photos you transfer to your computer are excellent quality. To print high quality photos you'd need a good printer, preferrably one especially for printing photos.

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

No one uses film anymore, digital is great quality, its as good as film, or even better depending on the camera. The only time even professinals will use film is for billboards as the picture has to be blown up to such a large size that digital photo would get all fuzzy as its enlarged.

 

[TheRelic]

Film is better. But obviously, a hell of a lot more expensive!!

But unless youre going for truly professional shots, its not worth spending the $50,000 or so on a digital camera that actually rivals a film SLR.

Professionals still widely use film for print, as even the top consumer Digital cameras are simply not good enough for quality A4 print.

The difference in image size between 3 and 5 megapixel really isnt that much either.

A solid 3 MP digital does most people.

 

[diablo]

Many, many pro's have made the switch to digital. For example, all of the shots taken at my work are with a Olympus E-300 8.2MP DSLR. It's under $1k (with just a portrait lens) but that's probably overkill for someone not very serious about photography. The studio down my street (which shoots mainly artwork) is also all-digital. However, it has a track along the ceiling that the camera moves along - and the Mac it's hooked to "stitches together" the 4 shots of each painting/etc... so instead of a 8mp image, you have a 32 megapixel shot.

If you want a good 'party and vacation' camera, stick with a digicam of around 2-3MP. Make sure it has at least a 3x optical zoom. I'd recommend checking out the Canon digital ELPH series.

 

[TheRelic]

Canon ELPH's are good.

If you want a wide scope of functionality, also check out the Canon Powershot series, of for static point and shoot, the IXUS range is also good.

 

[Ice Cold]

Film is dead, except black and white artsy ****.

 

[TheRelic]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion .

 

[7 Virtues]

Film is dead for the consumer, yes. However film still has uses over digital (at the moment) that professionals, and prosumers need. Film cameras are resistant to extreme environments, reduced weight (no need to carry extra batteries), and provide high resoultion scans and prints that are unmatched by any digital camera.

When digital cameras are as durable, and power saving as film cameras, then we'll seed the last days of colour film.

 

[Hypoxia II]

Just a question

Let me start by saying that I am not a photographer by trade or hobby, but I do have an Olympia 3.0 megapixel digital camera (under $150 US at any Office Depot) and it works just fine for what i use it for. In combination with an HP photosmart printer and some sort of photo enhancement program such as Premier Photoshop (formerly known as Adobe Photoshop) or Jasc Paint Shop Pro, you can produce pictures for personal prints that are near perfect. I've even done artsy black and whites and made full size posters for my house.

Now my question. I saw a segment on the Discovery Channel about a new type of digital photo card that saves pictures exactly like film. Somehow instead of one pixel representing one color, on this card one pixel can now represent any combination of all three primary colors. Has anybody heard about this, and do you think it is possible?

Hypoxia II

 

[7 Virtues]

That doesn't make any sense. A digital card just stores information, no matter what. It could be a RAW file, a JPEG, an MP3, or Word document. The storage device does not decide how the picture is recorded. The CCD or CMOS sensor does.

 

[Hypoxia II]

True 7 Virtues,

After posting I did some searching and found exactly what I was talking about. It's a tri-layered PIXEL SENSOR . It's called the Foveon X3 5M CMOS.

Here is the article

Foveon X3 5M CMOS



Hypoxia II

 

[Ice Cold]

Originally posted by TheRelic
Everyone is entitled to their opinion .

Have u ever seen a 16*20 print from a 6 mp DSLR? Have u ever owned one?

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/?gallery=canoneos350d_samples1/

It's gonna take ISO 50 film to beat that!

 

[TheRelic]

Very pretty photo.

 

[Chrispy]

How much money do you want to spend, and more importantly how often and what will you use it for?

I use both:

I like SLR 35mm's because you have so much control over how the shot will turn out.

I like digital for social functions: you can see how it turned out right away.

Right now i would never get a digital SLR. I don't shoot enough photos to make it worth while.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

I'd Rather Shoot Film

I like the way images look on film rather than digital. Digital looks too "live" for my taste. I usually shoot my fine art on film and use my digital camera for snap shots though.

 

[Jake-inator]

Its just a matter of preference, for some people it is easier to just hook up their camera to their computer and voila! you get a perfect picture.

Others like to go to get their film developed/ develop themselves and have an "original print"

I used to have a 35mm film camera for my photography class in highschool, and i loved it.
But as soon as i saw that i could see my pictures right away with a digital camera i never went back.