Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Film Vs Digital Again  
User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2504 times:

Folks, anyone interested in this topic should visit this web page and read the report and related comments

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/d30_vs_film.htm

It's sure got me thinking!

Cheers,

Colin


Colin K. Work, Pixstel
44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEricp From Singapore, joined Jun 2001, 53 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2385 times:

Here's a quick, subjective comparison of film vs digital, shot under pretty trying conditions :

Fuji S1
Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt



Provia 100F
Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Eric Phan



Granite should have exactly the same shot, from his D30 ... Gary, would you mind posting it here ?

That Provia shot took quite a bit of fixing, and you'd probably understand why if I tell you that we shot _into_ the sun  Smile

After looking at the results, that push to get a digital SLR body just got stronger  Smile

Eric


User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2383 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Colin

Very nice article indeed.

I have to agree on the printing of D30 images. I have done some from my Singapore trip and no grain can be seen whatsoever. Only 'grain' to be seen is from the dots the printer shows.

A HP 720C is what I am currently using but after doing some window shopping in Singapore while waiting for Mr Hunt to park the car, I spotted a very nice Epson photo printer. Cannot remember the model number but the quality of the sample print was excellent.

Digital v Film is always has its pro's and con's but I have to conclude in saying that I will probably not go back to prints. Yes, I will still keep some print film, Kodak Professional, in my bag and use it when I feel the need to.

So Colin......you buying a D30 Big grin

Regards

Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland




User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 3, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2378 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Eric

Yes, I have the D30 image of the UPS MD11. Don't think I have one at the same angle but very similar.....I did not want the same as you guys Big grin

I'll post it over the weekend.

regards

Gary


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2376 times:

Well Gary, I think the answer is YES, the only remaining question is when  Smile

The only thing that's really holding me back is that the EOS 3 is, I believe, a superior camera, particularly with regard to autofocus - otherwise I might be very tempted to trade one of 'em in aginst a D30. I'm thinking of hiring a D30 for a week or so to use in the field alongside my EOS 3 kit and see how it all works out in practice.

I'm starting to think along the lines "well, if I buy an D30, I won't need to buy a 600mm lens, as it will magically transform my 100-400, so I'll actually be SAVING money" this is a very bad sign. The next stage to ruination is when I start trying to explain this logic to my wife!

Cheers

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 5, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2364 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Colin

The D30 purchase for me was a LOT of money.

But once I started using it, I feel like I got it for free and haven't thought about the money....until I posted this  Sad

I would like one of the Sigma lenses that Paul D and Andrew H have. A bit expensive since I just paid out for the D30 but I have managed to sell the Sony S70 at a good price. Might keep the money back for the lens.

Go on Colin, be a little devil and get a D30......but don't tell the wife Big grin

Regards

Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland


User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2355 times:

Hey Colin,  Wink/being sarcastic Do I detect a Convert  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I never thought I'd see the day

Glenn


User currently offlineHkg_clk From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 999 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2348 times:

Wow, I didn't realise digital was that good, even though I am a digital photographer myself.

So it seems that the 5 million or more pixels we are seeing in newer cameras is really pretty useless for most people.



See my homepage for a comprehensive guide to spotting and photography at HKG
User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2348 times:

Well, I'm coming round ... I've never been AGAINST digital, I've just believed film was currently better. I think in THEORY it still is ... but "in the field" can never achieve theoretical possibilities anyway, and what I'm seeing, and what I'm reading, is pretty convincing.

What I've yet to do is produce a digital print taken by me and produced on my equipment. And there is the small matter of finding the dosh, which might take a little time!

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineYKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2349 times:

So what? Most sane people dont spend a few grand on a digital SLR just to take airplane pictures. Obviously something that costs 8x times that of a regualr SLR is gonna produce better pics and I do not see the point in comparing digital vs. film. I think it would be more fair to compare a $300 digital cam against a film SLR of the same price.

User currently offlineSukhoi From Sweden, joined May 2006, 373 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2344 times:

Most sane people dont spend a few grand on a digital SLR just to take airplane pictures.

Yesterday i was a whiner now im insane!  Wink/being sarcastic

What a week Big grin

Cheers

Paul


User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 11, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2346 times:

hhmmmm, nice review.

YKA:

Canon EOS 1V 35mm SLR Body Only

$1,345.00

-----

Canon EOS D30 Digital Camera (I)

$1,599.00.


Not much price difference there. This is at Royalcamera.com btw (i know people who have ordered from here). Taking a camera that cost exactly the same price (lets say the Minolta Dimage 7, at most shops), would be like comparing an average SLR with a top range point & shoot, there is absolutly no point because they are essentially different.

I'd have to say, that at a lower level digital is still bringing out the results in terms of quality, but their sadly lacking with using 'electronic viewfinders' and having a lag between pressing the shutter release and taking the shot. This annoys me alot, but i have got used to it, sorta.

Regards

Dan


User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2339 times:

Dan, I have the same sorta viewfinder on my 2100, argh! sometimes I could just smash that camera! But you do get used to it. So, uploaded any shots here yet dan? happy with ya '90?

LGW


User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 13, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2333 times:

Well, as far as i'm concerned the LCD is alot better, so i just use that. Although most of the time i just guess where i am pointing it, boy does it get annoying! I have uploaded some which are in the que (damn not HQ! Big grin), which EGBB says will get accepted although i am not holding my breath  Acting devilish

Regards

Dan


User currently offlineYKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2337 times:

I bet I could take a 30 year $200 old Nikon body(in good mechanical shape), put the same lens on it that Ckw had on the 1V and produce identical results with Provia 100F. Note I said "regular" SLR not something top of the line with a totaly unecassary 1/8000 shutter speed and other useless features. It dosn't matter what camera body you have but what lens is attached to it. So compared to a regular camera body the D30 is still several times more expensive.

Besides, the closest any digital user is gonna get to actualy handling some of his work is by printing the digital shots with a printer. Prints are bound to be lost or destroyed and data earased leaving the once gloating D30 user with magled and faded prints too look at in his old age.


User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 15, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2326 times:

Yes but comparing your 30yr old $200 Nikon Body to an expensive new digital camera wouldn't be fare despite the results  Big grin

User currently offlineYKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2326 times:

Your obviously missing the point, perhaps if you were a couple years older you would understand what im trying to say.

User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 17, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2320 times:

I totally understand what you are saying (btw. you've just proved about all that age thing...), i just think you are jealous!

User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 18, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2322 times:

YKA - firstly I don't have a 1V, nor did I personally claim digital was better than film, or for that matter say anything about the validity of comparing the two - I simply found an interetsing review and thought it might give some food for thought.

Having said that, did you read the review? Because the essence of it was to compare like with like in so far as was possible and compare the results. The review is interesting in that it puts up a a cogent arguement against the widely held view (myself included) that film is inherently better than digital.

No. not everyone wants to spend the bucks necessary to make what to many is a very small improvement in quality. But it is apparently possible that by going the high end digital route I can produce a better end product. I would be "insane" to dismiss this out of hand - whether or not I'm insane if I buy one is between me and my bank manager!

There are many other issues to take into account as well which may or may not be relevant on an individual basis, but here we're talking about the actual quality possible from film and digital.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 19, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2318 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

Colin, if you want to mail me privately with your home address, I can post a couple of my Singapore shots to you, printed on the HP720C, on Kodak paper.

No problems if you don't want to pass on your address.

Let me know.

regards

Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland


User currently offlineYKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2318 times:

Obviously the side by side pics clearly label the D30 as a hands down winner, there isin't really any need to read the entire article or debate whether or not the D30 is better for digital picture files.

However, my point is that comparing the D30 to 35mm SLR which has all the features needed for avaiation photography(where all SLR's under $300 will have them) is like comparing a $1500 lens against a $350 one. Comparing the 1V against the D30 was a clever move to put two roughly equaly priced cameras to the test and make the test appear fair but in reality, dare I say it again, a $200 body fitted with the same lens would have produced same results as the 1V on the subjects pictured yeilding the the price of the 1V irrelavent.

Therefore your entire effort which went into creating that webpage which in itself is very nice and conducting the tests(I appreciate the effort) yielded results which should be dismissed as invalid.

A more accurate test would involve testing a $300 digital camera against a film SLR body(however much it might be) with a comprable lens on the same subjects.


User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 21, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2310 times:

FYI Colin did not compile the test..

I think, that if you really want to compare a $300 SLR with a $300 Digital camera, go ahead, i really do not see much point. In this case i think you should compare a $300 digital camera with a $300 point & shoot camera, because they are essentially the same. Both have lenses built in, both are mostly automatic (no choice over shutter speed, aperture, exposure etc) and both are aimed at the same market.

This test is alot more realistic than your proposed one, which is almost biased so there is no possible way in which the digital can win.

Regards

Dan


User currently offlineYKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2309 times:

Sorry for asuming those was Colins tests, I did not read the title properly as I haven't slept for at lest 16 hours.

User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 23, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2306 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi

Might be a good idea if you go get some sleep now and look at the thread once you have been refreshed and understand what we are all saying Big grin

Regards

Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland




User currently offlineYKA From Netherlands, joined Sep 2001, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (12 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2308 times:

Going back to EGGD's last post...

That is why it is impossible to fairly compare a 35mm SLR against a Digital one because for this type of work the digital camera will anhailate the 35mm SLR everytime. This is what my problem is with the entire debate over which one is better when everyone already knows the Digital SLR is.

It's like you suggested, comparing a $300 digital point and shoot against an entry level SLR body with a good lens(es).

The D30 offers results that film simply cannot rival in the digital format. For hardcopy, perhaps film still takes the crown, but for internet use there is no question.


25 Ckw : YKA - that's exactly why you have to READ the article, while the screen demo is self evident, the article goes on to discuss how the D30 compares in t
26 Da fwog : If you want to compare digital with conventional and argue about prices, I suggest you put the D30 up against something like the EOS 300, which has si
27 Ckw : You got it right there Chris - one D30, with a much lower spec as a camera, costs more than both my EOS 3s put together! This is the only factor holdi
28 KingWide : I used the instead of a longer lens argument. Simple choice, 500 F4 @ £6000 or D30 and the 300 F4 I already have and £4000 to spend on sweets.... J
29 Post contains images Staffan : If you go with the 'sweets' option, don't forget to brush your teeth!
30 Andyhunt : Chris, I gritted my teeth and winced at the same time when I signed the credit card slip! Andrew
31 Post contains images Da fwog : I was most disappointed when I met Kingwide today and he didn't have pockets bulging with sweets!
32 EGGD : Was he on your stamping ground or were you on his?
33 Post contains images EGGD : From the uploads i see you were on his
34 Ckw : Went down to my camera shop today, and the b***ard owner offered to LOAN, not hire, me a D30 for a long weekend whenever I want. I'm sunk. Ever feel l
35 Post contains images Da fwog : But boy, that's a tasty worm, Colin! Try it! You might hate it!
36 Post contains images Glenn : Hey Colin, the same thing happened to me when I went to inquire about the Camera. They made the offer to loan, when I went to take up the offer, they
37 Post contains images Skymonster : Went down to my camera shop today, and the b***ard owner offered to LOAN, not hire, me a D30 for a long weekend whenever I want. I'm sunk. Ever feel l
38 Post contains images KingWide : I learnt something yesterday: Don't shoot with Sheldon! He's nicked all my shots! I figured that being the 'senior man' he might give the 'young whipp
39 Post contains links and images Da fwog : J, I simply can't believe that you can't improve on some of the "queue" shots I took down by 09R, especially when you took about 2-3 times as many pic
40 Post contains images Skymonster : What is it with this Jason chap? Does he ONLY do pics with the sun on the wrong side of what??? Andy
41 Post contains images Skymonster : Ooops... I meant "or what" at the end... And I was only joking Jason!!! ANdy
42 Post contains images Da fwog : Yes he does. But doesn't he do it WELL!
43 Post contains images EGGD : Jeez, can't WAIT to get out to LHR to try out this stuff!!! Only problem is... don't have my extender yet (£70 from Canon) so its only going to be fu
44 Post contains images Sukhoi : Andy, Where were you yesterday? I was down by the threshold to 09L. Great lighting for some fine pictures Cheers Paul
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Transferring Film To Digital posted Tue Jan 17 2006 15:29:42 by Dcz00
Your History - Film & Digital posted Fri Aug 27 2004 22:07:46 by Ryangooner
Canon Vs Nikon Again posted Fri Sep 12 2003 00:40:19 by Skymonster
Film Or Digital? posted Wed Jan 15 2003 02:55:40 by L.1011
New Lense Vs. Digital posted Tue Dec 3 2002 05:02:44 by Dullesguy
D60 And EOS3 Pictures Compared. Film Or Digital? posted Sun Oct 13 2002 03:59:57 by Fotodj
Film And Security... Again I Know... posted Tue Feb 26 2002 07:28:52 by Rolex01
SLR Vs. Digital posted Tue Oct 9 2001 18:40:41 by Airbus380
Kodak Supra 100 Film Vs. Royal Gold 100 posted Thu Jul 27 2000 05:44:15 by Gulfstreambrat
Digital Vs. Film, Again... posted Wed Apr 9 2003 09:49:32 by UTA_flyinghigh