target does too, as does WalGreens

Happy Hammer wrote:

rippinchikkin wrote: Well I guess you guys are going to leave it up to the old photographer to wave the film banner... IMO film has a feel and clarity that cannot be beat (still at this point) by digital, there is just something about a continuous tone photo, a richness, a quality that digital just does not have. In my opinion I doubt that digital will ever reach that level. Not to say that digital isn’t worth it, I doubt very seriously that I would by another film camera (but I have a closet full, so I have no need) But if I was getting into fine art or photography as a living, well film still has its place. FWIW Don't worry, Dave, I'm with you on this one. Just check my old thread, here. IMHO, standard 'film' beats digital hands down for the quality of the final image produced. They just have a better, overall, 'feel' than their digital equivalent. Don't get me wrong, I like digital for the simplicity and speed in which you can get your images but printing stuff at home on glossy 'photo' paper will never compete with getting your images developed at a quality studio. This goes for both normal film and digital alike. My wife has a simple, point-and-click digital for taking snapshots when we're on holiday, all the 'quality' (I say quality but I'm not all that good with it yet) shots are taken using my old Canon AE-1 SLR. It's nearly thirty years old and still producing outstanding photographs.

Good to not be alone.. lol (I think I moved your thread here, too. lololol)
And I agree, I use digital for holidays, family things and anything where the photos are needed quick and quality is not an issue.. But anytime photos are needed and clarity is needed, I slide back to film. Just cant beat a good ol photo. lol
(That and I still get bit in the rear occasionally, as digi doesn’t respond the same as film in every instance.)

digital. i can delete pictures easily and see the pictures in an instant

I voted digital, it is perfect for non-professionals

im going to have to go with a film carma. there are a lot of fetures on a digital but nothing beets the quality of a nive old 35mm camra

Film. My DiMAGE X1 can't take still pictures... it drives me insane. Even if it looks like you're holding it still the picture will come out fuzzy and messed up.

I also took a lot of pictures, had them in my hard drive, then inadvertedly formatted the hard drive. Very fragile there- I still have low res pics but... 640x480 compared to 3264x2448 .. woo.

Digital is nice... but I still would prefer film. They also won't kill batteries as quickly as digitals.

There are times where digital is nice though. If you take a good mountain shot, it's much quicker to have it as a nice wallpaper on your desktop

The more I read in this thread, the more perhaps the argument should be Cheaper Digital vs. 35mm.

I own a Canon Rebel 35mm a Canon Elf (Digital) and a Nikon D50. I refuse to believe the Rebel, which is a fantastic 35mm, takes any better shot than my Nikon. Now the Elf, yeah it (the 35mm) probably beats it in quality.

The 35mm easily beats any of my old Sony Mavica's.

But the higher end Digital Cameras... the Nikon D50, D80, and especially the D200... plus the higher end Canon Digital Camera's are arguably just as good as any 35mm camera. I mean my D50 gives me images at 300DPI at 3,008 x 2,000. The D80 3,872 x 2,592 at 10MP.

I agree

Here's another point to consider.

Unless you have a kick a** scanner at home, or can afford a big lab's scanner (the local guys likely have close to the same equipment you do at home) you're not going to be able to scan in your photos at the ideal level the 35mm guys are talking about. Once dust gets on your negs you loose resolution for scanning.

Second, are you really willing to pay for the scanning at a (dust free) lab just to gain a little bit of clarity? Are you willing to wait to get those photos, which likely won't even have any color correction? Are you willing to risk the shot not being what you hoped it was?

Instant gratification with a digital camera is worth it. Instant knowledge of EXACTLY what you took is worth it (delete the bad, keep the good). High quality that can be shared online or moved to any media device easily is worth it... you can do it all at home for NO cost.

Once you buy a digital, unless you want to print the photos out (which can be done at home or in a store) you have NO further costs. If you go the 35mm route, regardless of what method you choose... print or just to store digitally, you're going to pay for development and either scanning or printing.

Digital (high end Digital) comes out on top IMHO.

Digital, I wouldn't be able to have any fun, on my computer, late at night anymore..... If everybody went to film