Skip Navigation

Digital or 35mm?

Travel Forums Travel Photography Digital or 35mm?

Page
  • 1
  • 2

Last Post

1. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 13y

They seem to be everywhere now and like it or not, digital cameras are fast becoming the camera of choice for most consumers. I for one, still believe in the vast superiority of old fashioned 35 mm, not merely because they retain value better than any computer based product, but because of better lenses, resolution and the joyful feeling of flicking through photographic prints.

It is however undeniable that digital cameras offer a lot of convenience, particularly to the light traveller. Being able to upload pictures without having to develop them is clearly an advantage while on the road.

My question to you is, will you be taking a digital or 35mm camera on your next trip?

2. Posted by Sam I Am (Admin 5588 posts) 13y

Well Pete,

Considering you introduced me into the joys of 35mm and I spent all that money on mine I am sticking with that for now. Quality wise it just rocks. And printing your pics is dirt cheap compared to digital.

Having said that I really like the possibilities of digital. Maybe a small camera on the side. One that fits in with the 35 mm, not too expensive and for your regular pics of friends, family and all that....

I have also seen some great digital cameras that can do pretty much the same as a 35mm......the price is what killed me! Maybe in a few years....

Cheers,

Sam

3. Posted by redkid (Budding Member 3 posts) 13y

i'm going with 35mm all the way. like peter said, it's all about the physical.

i had an amazing 35mm that i had to leave in nz (it wasn't really mine) so i've now got a nice new canon that i'm still getting used to. doesn't quite work the way my old one did, but i'm still getting some nice results.

so much so that i'm exhibiting some of my travel shots, starting next week in a an organic cafe here in brighton (appropriately named kai, which is the maori word for food!).

/plug

4. Posted by Sam I Am (Admin 5588 posts) 13y

Come on, don't be shy....send us some of your pics too We may not be able to show your pics in a cafe, but we can try and show them to the world... And if you get lucky, CNN might be next to do what BBC World did.....actually show some of our pics on TV....can you tell I am proud!

Take care and thanks for the compliments on the site in the other forum....they are all for Pete as he is the designer/developer in this here project....and a good one at that!

Cheers,

Sam

5. Posted by redkid (Budding Member 3 posts) 13y

i've already sent a couple of my pics to peter to put up. i've only got a few from nz, as i haven't had much in the way of computer access over the last year. i'm hoping to scan some in soon so i can update my website so when i do, i'll pick a few more recent ones and send them on over!

[ Edit: web link removed ]

6. Posted by erik (First Time Poster 1 posts) 13y

I'm going to say neither. Digital has years to go in terms of resolution to get anywhere close to what film is capable of. I am shooting 4x5 and that holds about 2 Gigabytes of information for every picture I take. For a digital camera to do that, you have to take a picture for 15 minutes and spend $11,000 on your camera.

Its still a passionless media too. I have never seen anything good yet from a digital camera. Thanks, Erik

[ Edit: website link removed ]

7. Posted by wian (Full Member 8 posts) 13y

I don't agree with most of you above about digital cameras. I have a 4 mega pixels Nikon and when I shoot at full resolution, pictures are perfect. Also, in Canada, printing digital is now cheeper than old 35mm (10$ cad for a 36 poses, where as digital pictures are less than 0.20$/each).

Not convinced? I did the test: I shot a sunset and other pictures with my Nikon digital and my old Nikon 35 mm (zoom 35-70mm) and my friend and I could just not make the difference.

I go digital all the way...

Ian

8. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 13y

Another thing that I have considered is that digital cameras are losing value in much the same way that computers do. Three months after you have bought that beautiful 4 megapixels camera, you can buy a similar 4.5 megapixel one for the same price! Some 35 mm cameras actually are worth MORE now than they were 20 years ago, so from an investment point of view 35 mm is still the way to go.. and I doubt that that will change either considering its digital nature!

Interested to hear other people's views. I know there are a lot of proponents for digital out there ;)

9. Posted by rebmamber (Respected Member 40 posts) 13y

Sorry, but I too would have to jump on the 35mm train. I do enjoy the instant gratification of digital, but there is nothing better than shooting a role and anticipating the results. How did you capture "reality"? There is no magic in digital. Plus, qualtiy is no contest (unless you're merely comparing point-and-shoot).

10. Posted by don_kam (Full Member 115 posts) 13y

I am deifinately a 35mm fan. The only advantage I see in digital is really in the fact that its light weight.

For short holidays and during times when I wanna travel light, digital is definately the way to go.

As for the joy in taking the shot, theres nothing compare to a 35mm.