HikeArizona.COM

Thursday, May 25, 2006 Reuters:
Canon considers halt to film camera development

Nope, probably not, anyone want some great Olympus gear? It was state of the art for about 20 minutes in the early 80's.

Perhaps I'm a dinosaur, but I do love slide film. I'll keep shooting medium format until the day that digital can perform correctly under low light conditions (i.e. lightning, stars-digital pictures of these that I've seen always have an unnaturally harsh black edge around them).

I used to love messing around with black and white in the darkroom. I don't have one anymore, but nearby I could take a photo class and then I could use the high school's darkroom. I think it's fun. I do have a digital camera, and use it a lot, though.

Kodachrome 25 always made sweet slides in the daytime light. My current profile photo looking down over the rim was with my old Nikon. I'm glad I traded it though in the early nineties. Transferring to digital is too slow and the quality is somewhat lost. Computers are here to stay, digital will find a way.

I have found that I take a whole lot more pictures using the digital camera. Example I took over 150 this weekend. In the film days I would only take 3 rolls at the most.
I like showing my slides on the slide projector, better than the computer screen.

I love using my eos 3 and e100vs. No matter how much I use photoshop, I can't get a digital photo to have the rich tones that a e1oovs slide does. Saying that, I'm shooting digital and will never go back. Digital will totaly surpass film in a few years. I think we will have point and shoot type cameras that have medium format film quality

I have done slide show talks for the local archaeology club with both formats. Just this month I showed digital slides of my Grand Gulch, Utah trip. The laptop that someone else brought worked, but they couldn't get the darned projector to work, so we had to watch the slides on the laptop. I will need to spend money (and I'm on a very limited budget!) to buy a better digital camera with more megapixels--current one has only 3.3. So next time I plan on putting together a presentation for a group I may go back to using my Canon AE1 and slide film. I already have those things, and I own a projector that works, so I won't need to spend any money, except on film and developing.

In response to joe bartels' reply: At a astronomy convention this weekend and the Canon Reps were there and gave a talk about that the film cameras are only a small part of there business. They are now putting all the money into the digital because they sell about 4 billion in the US in sales in that area. They also do the machine that does the dyes for the chip that goes into their own cameras. Kodak has stopped all development on their films and are trying hard to get into the camera market. They have even discontinued all kinds of films. I don't know how long slide format will be around. At the conference Canon was talking about their new Canon line that the chips are the size of 35mm and that all the newspapers and sport photographers are switching over.

Yep, I'll race out and buy another film camera right after I buy a covered wagon and cap and ball revolver and 8 track tape player. I have several film cameras that one day might be useful to throw at a mean bear or pound some tentstakes into the ground.

In response to Preston Sands' reply: The problem with the astrophotos aren't the camera as much as the person processing the image. My husband has the Canon 10D and is using it for doing astrophotos. He also has a CCD camera made for astrophotos. And Canon even developed a camera just for astrophotographers. You can see his pictures at http://www.schursastrophotography.com. He has retired all his film cameras now.

My photography has improved by leaps and bounds since I started with digital. The instant feedback of an LCD and the ability to shoot the same scene multiple times cheaply (without the film and development costs) are what cinch it for me. I doubt I'll ever go back to film cameras.

Dschur wrote:You can see his pictures at http://www.schursastrophotography.com.

This is truly awesome.

Is this a business or hobby?

In response to al1inaz's reply: Just a hobby. My husband has been taking astrophotos since the 1970's and has gone along with all the medias along the way. Anyone want an enlarger head? He found a use for the base. Just like lots of the equipment for the darkroom that our downstairs bathroom used to be.

In response to Dschur's reply: Fuji stopped making my favorite Velvia 50 speed slide film recently. I feel so outdated. I keep waiting for my 3.1 meg Kodak digital camera to die. I've taken over 7000 pictures with it. I've had my eye on a Cannon (rebel) 8 meg digital for the last year, it's down to about $700 now.

Isn't the development process of a photo just as important, if not more so than the actual film? Once the film is processed, you can manipulate it (over/ under expose) the print to your liking.

I think this is more true with B&W images, but I had an introductory class and remember moving around a piece of card board with a pin hole in it to expose a particular area of the print.

I have a Canon F1 - but I haven't used it in a few years.

Bryan

Yes, I just think it's fun. I was lucky as a kid, the neighbor had a great darkroom and taught several of us kids all about photography. Burning and dodging, over and under exposures, etc. I'm sure the digital cameras will find a way to do black and white pretty well, but I don't know if it would be as fun. I even like the smell of the developer and other chemicals, and the photo paper.

wetbeaverlover wrote:Yep, I'll race out and buy another film camera right after I buy a covered wagon...8 track...

Put the 8 track in the covered wagon, then fit a jet on back. Take it to the Pavillions on Fri/Sat night and heads will turn!

Lizard wrote:The instant feedback of an LCD...

I really liked that too with my first few digitals. On the SLR models though you lose that feature as you have to look through the lens.

bryanmertz wrote:Isn't the development process of a photo just as important, if not more so than the actual film? Once the film is processed, you can manipulate it (over/ under expose) the print to your liking.

Software seems to take that roll now. The point could certainly be argued to infinity. For myself, the ultimate photo is one I don't have to adjust by light or crop in anyway.

azbackpackr wrote:I even like the smell of the developer and other chemicals, and the photo paper.

Clinton didn't have quotes this good

Oh, shush, you! :roll:

TOKYO (AP)
Jun 6, 11:44 AM (ET)
Sony Enters Digital SLR Camera Market

More than three-quarters of all cameras sold today are digital, and digital images are expected to account for 90 percent of all professionally taken photos by 2010, compared with 70 percent now, according to InfoTrends, a U.S.-based marketing group.

The upcoming Alpha DSLR-A100 can be viewed at dp
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/sonydslra100/

looks like they're putting a dune buggy in the Nascar Canon/Nikon race