What is your favorite type of Camera?

[c0ldfyr3]

holy .... shi... $26,995 <a href="http://www.pictureline.com/product.php?id=13842" target="_new">Hasselblad H3D-22 </a>

[gries818]

This is where I'm confused. How can this be possible? For example I took a lot of pics on my 35mm of Alaska. Are you telling me I have 7MP images? How exactly can I "get" them from the photos I have? Scan them?

No, your 35 mm photos will only be at 7 mega pixels if you scan them into your computer at the rate.

7 mega pixels is the equivalent (in how much it can be blown up) in comparison to 35 mm film.

I am going to have to look into this more though, it would be a very cool area to start getting into!

[augie]

holy .... shi... $26,995 <a href="http://www.pictureline.com/product.php?id=13842" target="_new">Hasselblad H3D-22 </a>

LOL, and that's the 'cheap' one.

[gries818]

but if its a business i am sure it doesn't sound like that much money

and i am sure that camera is geared towards business (photography based)

[rippinchikkin]

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

rippinchikkin

VP - Syndication

 

Posts: 7063

Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 9:38 pm

Location: 32°28′05″N 93°46′16″W

Top

[augie]

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

augie

Community Director

 

Posts: 13045

Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 9:55 pm

Location: Laurentians, Quebec

Top

[kanaloa]

LOL, all that scanning would take weeks. I stand by Digital being the best and easiest. We have had no problems with our digital photography and we've sold our prints worldwide and published them in 2 (soon to be 3) books. When I return to Alaska to photograph it again, I'll have a digital this time around.

[Absolute-Zero]

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

[Stryker762]

I would definitely go digital for many reasons. Ease of use, instant gratification, cheaper to maintain (no film to buy, or develop) can easily be altered by photo manipulating software...etc. I made the switch about two years ago, and am now on my third camera, a Kodak easyshare P880 8 mega pixel. I also just purchased a digital photo frame for my wife, who is a photo nut. With this I can just take out the SD card and out it in the frame instantly showing off the weekend party photos without developing any film, very convenient.

[c0ldfyr3]

At WakMart they have a digital photocenter so you can have a professional quality of your digital photos. You can do taht instead of printing on glossy Photo paper.