Mama don't take my Kodachrome...

[my_daroga]

It has come to my attention that it may be prudent to make the switch from my 1985 Minolta X-700 SLR film camera to a semi-pro digital format. I've been holding on for some time now, because I love my camera. But film and developing costs, the time it takes to get developing done, and the lack of control I have over said developing are getting harder to deal with. I can't "compete" with people whose shots are instantly available, so some of it's probably jealousy. Yesterday I did a photo shoot of a dog I'm to do a portrait for, and was forced to use my SLR because the little digital one doesn't shoot fast enough--but this means that I have to go get three rolls of film developed to get the one shot I want to use.

I should confess that some of what's been holding me back is pure snobbery. For instance, for me to get a nice macro shot, it means screwing magnifying lenses onto my camera and taking numerous shots to get something in focus--with that magnification, breathing can throw it off. I assume that people using a macro setting on a digital SLR camera don't have that problem. I'm assuming there's autofocus involved. Therefore, when I do get something, I feel proud that it was "all me" or whatever. But who's to know that anyway, when there are so few people using film cameras anymore? No, it's not a pretty reason, but it is a factor. Another is, well, I love the way my photos look. Will they look like that when I switch?

I don't know. I still have mixed feelings about it. Which is why I bring it to you. How do you feel about your digital camera? Did you make a switch from a film camera you really liked? What was involved in that decision? And what do you have to say about the cameras that are out there now?

x-posted to DevArt

Comments

[my_daroga]

I agree. I love the shots I do get with my film camera. What raised it to my attention, however, is when I was doing that "photo shoot" for the dog and realized that I was taking rolls and rolls of film that I couldn't even be sure I'd get one usable pic from; I won't know until I pick them up today whether there's one that's both a good moment and in focus. I'd gone in with my little digital thinking that for the purposes of this shoot (I'm not interested in the actual photo, but in getting a digital print I can work from) that was all I'd need--but the amateur (non-SLR) ones don't shoot fast enough to grab the action.

Part of it is jealousy and competition. No one I know is using film anymore, and so any "current event" I shoot appears for me up to a week or more late. While everyone else can just pop online (or to a newspaper) with their instant shots. I have no control over the processing (I'm not about to start developing color film) so I sometimes wonder what the point is. Then again, I'm not sure what my goals for photography are.

[kryss-labryn.livejournal.com]

Hubby's cell phone (Erikson) actually takes ten shots for a split second or so on either side of the actual "moment". That allows him to find that exact moment when our young son actually has his eyes open and his head up, or whatever. He can keep or discard the rest. I love it because I HATE that delay (sometimes upwards of 3 seconds, it seems) you sometimes get when you go to snap a digital pic. Might be an option to keep an eye open for when shopping around. It's pretty cool.

[my_daroga]

Oh, that's a good point. Actually, I need to see if my digital will do that. No batteries at the moment. I'll keep that in mind.