[rollei_list] Re: Scanners
- From: Frank Dernie <Frank.Dernie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:26:44 +0000
Thor,
Pre-digital I often carried film home to the UK for a couple of the
photographers of the weekly magazines, if my flight was before theirs. Quite a
big bag, my guess would be 50-100 films each.
I think film or digital is about personal choice for any use. Digital certainly
is very expensive for the larger sensors!
Personally, whilst in principle I still can use film, since I have film in the
freezer, a perfectly good Rolleiflex TLR and a 6008i and some lenses, in
practice I never do.
Frank
On 25 Nov, 2009, at 09:56, Thor Legvold wrote:
> Hi Frank,
>
> thats *a lot* of film! Obviously (as Mark has pointed out) what you want to
> accomplish will dictate your choice of tools. I guess when the cars move as
> fast as they do (and with as many bikini-clad pit stop girls as there are!)
> you can burn through a lot of film to get the one perfect image.
>
> It seems that sports and news are two areas where digital seems like a
> no-brainer. I shot news with a Bronica for a while, but gave in and bought an
> FM2 after a few months. It made things much easier.
>
> What about portraiture and landscape? What are pros/cons of digital there? Is
> Arizona Highways still exclusively analogue, and ideally large format? Just
> curious, not trying to start a war :-).
>
> Cheers,
> Thor
>
>
>
>
> On 25. nov.. 2009, at 08.09, Frank Dernie wrote:
>
>> Hi Thor,
>> I am an amateur photographer too. My work is in the Motor Racing business
>> (for 30+ years) and know most of the pros well, particularly those that have
>> been around a long time. One of them told me a few years ago, when the
>> digital bodies were more expensive than now, that his body cost about the
>> same as 3 months film, so changing the camera every couple of years was
>> still a huge saving for him.
>> FWIW
>> Frank
>>
>> On 24 Nov, 2009, at 17:37, Thor Legvold wrote:
>>
>>> , I wonder what the equipment costs are today vs 30 years ago - a few good
>>> bodies and a collection of nice glass that basically lasted for years and
>>> years, with film costs as the expendables vs. a digital body or two with
>>> modern glass, the difference being that digital body manufacturers seem to
>>> encourage 'upgrades' every few years, and the prices are pretty steep.
>>
>> ---
>> Rollei List
>>
>> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>>
>> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
