Thanks Marco. Some of my favourite shots were taken on a 3MP Kodak compact and a Pentax 5MP compact - the colours were great without any processing. Cheers, Keith
My brother discovered our parents' film camera years ago and decided to give photography a shot. Our photos came back and the quality was as nostalgic as our baby photos. We fell in love with film. Shooting with a friend of mine who uses digital only, would compose a shot and fire in burst mode 10-20 pictures, only to decide its not worth it and move to the next scene. I laughed so hard with jealousy, but realized it is what makes film so special. Shooting film is like having a little devil/angel on your left/right shoulder arguing whether the shot is worth it or not.
I like the little devil/angel idea and that's exactly how it feels. I now shoot digital the same way I shoot colour - one shot then move on. Thanks for visiting and commenting. Cheers, Keith
You got some great images with the Sony, Keith. In this video it was notable in that you can see where the Sony (used to record your previous videos) produces better quality video than the Nikon compact in this one. Digital cameras are great for travel, it's much less of a worry than trying to get films through x-ray machines etc.
Thanks Andrew. I have had films fogged where the X-ray machines were suspect, and I have also had films that seemed untouched. Our 2014 trip to Corfu was captured on digital and I ended up losing about half my shots due to SD card failure! You can't win!. I got the Nikon from a Pawn Brokers to take on holiday to Mallorca and it is "ok" for holiday purposes. Cheers, Keith.
@@theoldunsshot1005 I like to take several smaller cards with me and swap them over to try and reduce the risk of card failure. Always a nightmare when it happens though.
I have a Nikon D3300 which was released in 2014, so a similar vintage to your Sony. I'm using it more now than I have hitherto and I probably won't be buying any more colour film when my stock runs out - I'll shoot digital when colour is needed and shoot black and white with my film cameras. Recently I got obsessed with the possibility of replacing the camera but I came to my senses and saved £2-3k. It does what I need and the improvements made in the last ten years seem to be marginal - particularly for my use which is mainly landscapes shot with manual focus.
Thanks Kevin. I haven't shot colour film since my first video here, nearly two years ago as I just can't justify the cost. I learned home developing of B&W to make the cost of that a bit more manageable. The cost of new quality digital cameras is quite astounding, especially with the speed they become "yesterday's thing". My 20mp Sony does everything I need it to, so I will be sticking with it. Cheers, Keith.
Its just horses for courses. If you're travelling and you've no idea what you're going to be shooting or you're shooting stuff moving about then digital, or even your phone, is the natural choice. If I'm shooting something specific and there's no pressure to definitely get the shot then I'll shoot film. Which shots hold my attention to look at for longer, that'd be film nine times out of ten.
Thanks Iain. Just about the same for me. I only shoot for my own pleasure, but going abroad may mean just one go at getting it right, so digital and phone it is. Cheers, Keith
Diigital does not offer perfection, it gives the impression of a perefct world. Deep down it is shallow and unsatisfying. Film is a pain in the ass to get right, but atleast the photographer is in charge, and not those little computers within a digital camera. I use both, in many formats, but with I find film a lot more satisfying if more difficult and expensive to get right.
I agree. I also think that people treat digital as a disposable resource so don't have to think too much about what and how they shoot (though there are a lot of digital photographers who DO spend time getting everything right). Film satisfies on so many levels. Cheers, Keith
I have the same toy, the A3000. Too many drawbacks, i don't want to list into here - into short, the best thing is the 20 MP Sensor, everything else..well, it's what it is. Entry level, mediocre EVF, -LCD, horrible plastic eyecup (glasses wearer), and a hell more. Why shoot digital, when one can shoot Film? It's a totally different experience. I've had digital since 97, via Olympus 750.000 pixel digicam, and Film since 84 (110) and 35mm into 87, Pentax MX. Guess what i am shooting for my personal own joy, pleasure & fun....it's not digital.
Hi Marcp! It's all true of course, but remember this was a budget camera when it came out - I think it cost me less than £250 (they sell for more on ebay now). I only noticed last week it has a dioptre adjustment dial and I've had the camera for nearly 10 years! My main activity is B&W film photography as you may have noticed from my other videos. Cheers, Keith.
So do I. B&W with 35mm film, digital is more for the non scheduled shots, but if you do something conceptual, film does come in handy, and is the real deal, especially its imperfections. I got the A3000 with 18-55 OSS Kitlens a year after being released mint for 200 bucks@@theoldunsshot1005
I hope that one day we can all raise a glass to the expression "each to their own" and stop dismissing things as "toys". Its not the camera - its the photographer. I'm surprised you still haven't figured this out with all those years of experience you bang on about.
@@Answersonapostcard Yes "each to their own". I don't think I have dismissed any camera that way - film or digital, though I do admit to not liking 110 format or the smaller Disc Camera format. Some people will have taken good photos on these formats but I have never managed it, hence my dislike. As for banging on about experience: I would much rather be a novice and a teenager again 😁 Cheers, Keith
Early digital had a hint of film qualities. Nice shots Keith.
Thanks Marco. Some of my favourite shots were taken on a 3MP Kodak compact and a Pentax 5MP compact - the colours were great without any processing. Cheers, Keith
Always enjoy your videos 👍
Thanks, Big.E. I enjoy making them. Cheers, Keith
My brother discovered our parents' film camera years ago and decided to give photography a shot. Our photos came back and the quality was as nostalgic as our baby photos. We fell in love with film. Shooting with a friend of mine who uses digital only, would compose a shot and fire in burst mode 10-20 pictures, only to decide its not worth it and move to the next scene. I laughed so hard with jealousy, but realized it is what makes film so special. Shooting film is like having a little devil/angel on your left/right shoulder arguing whether the shot is worth it or not.
I like the little devil/angel idea and that's exactly how it feels. I now shoot digital the same way I shoot colour - one shot then move on. Thanks for visiting and commenting. Cheers, Keith
Beautiful photos. I shoot digital and film - Canon EOS for both. Each has it's own quality I think.
Thanks Sarah. I still shoot both, but I have more fun with film. The imperfections of film give character. Cheers, Keith
You got some great images with the Sony, Keith. In this video it was notable in that you can see where the Sony (used to record your previous videos) produces better quality video than the Nikon compact in this one. Digital cameras are great for travel, it's much less of a worry than trying to get films through x-ray machines etc.
Thanks Andrew. I have had films fogged where the X-ray machines were suspect, and I have also had films that seemed untouched. Our 2014 trip to Corfu was captured on digital and I ended up losing about half my shots due to SD card failure! You can't win!. I got the Nikon from a Pawn Brokers to take on holiday to Mallorca and it is "ok" for holiday purposes. Cheers, Keith.
@@theoldunsshot1005 I like to take several smaller cards with me and swap them over to try and reduce the risk of card failure. Always a nightmare when it happens though.
@@AndrewWaltonPhotography so do I (now) 😕
I have a Nikon D3300 which was released in 2014, so a similar vintage to your Sony. I'm using it more now than I have hitherto and I probably won't be buying any more colour film when my stock runs out - I'll shoot digital when colour is needed and shoot black and white with my film cameras. Recently I got obsessed with the possibility of replacing the camera but I came to my senses and saved £2-3k. It does what I need and the improvements made in the last ten years seem to be marginal - particularly for my use which is mainly landscapes shot with manual focus.
Thanks Kevin. I haven't shot colour film since my first video here, nearly two years ago as I just can't justify the cost. I learned home developing of B&W to make the cost of that a bit more manageable. The cost of new quality digital cameras is quite astounding, especially with the speed they become "yesterday's thing". My 20mp Sony does everything I need it to, so I will be sticking with it. Cheers, Keith.
Its just horses for courses. If you're travelling and you've no idea what you're going to be shooting or you're shooting stuff moving about then digital, or even your phone, is the natural choice. If I'm shooting something specific and there's no pressure to definitely get the shot then I'll shoot film. Which shots hold my attention to look at for longer, that'd be film nine times out of ten.
Thanks Iain. Just about the same for me. I only shoot for my own pleasure, but going abroad may mean just one go at getting it right, so digital and phone it is. Cheers, Keith
Diigital does not offer perfection, it gives the impression of a perefct world. Deep down it is shallow and unsatisfying. Film is a pain in the ass to get right, but atleast the photographer is in charge, and not those little computers within a digital camera. I use both, in many formats, but with I find film a lot more satisfying if more difficult and expensive to get right.
I agree. I also think that people treat digital as a disposable resource so don't have to think too much about what and how they shoot (though there are a lot of digital photographers who DO spend time getting everything right). Film satisfies on so many levels. Cheers, Keith
I have the same toy, the A3000. Too many drawbacks, i don't want to list into here - into short, the best thing is the 20 MP Sensor, everything else..well, it's what it is. Entry level, mediocre EVF, -LCD, horrible plastic eyecup (glasses wearer), and a hell more.
Why shoot digital, when one can shoot Film? It's a totally different experience. I've had digital since 97, via Olympus 750.000 pixel digicam, and Film since 84 (110) and 35mm into 87, Pentax MX. Guess what i am shooting for my personal own joy, pleasure & fun....it's not digital.
Hi Marcp! It's all true of course, but remember this was a budget camera when it came out - I think it cost me less than £250 (they sell for more on ebay now). I only noticed last week it has a dioptre adjustment dial and I've had the camera for nearly 10 years!
My main activity is B&W film photography as you may have noticed from my other videos. Cheers, Keith.
So do I. B&W with 35mm film, digital is more for the non scheduled shots, but if you do something conceptual, film does come in handy, and is the real deal, especially its imperfections. I got the A3000 with 18-55 OSS Kitlens a year after being released mint for 200 bucks@@theoldunsshot1005
I hope that one day we can all raise a glass to the expression "each to their own" and stop dismissing things as "toys". Its not the camera - its the photographer. I'm surprised you still haven't figured this out with all those years of experience you bang on about.
@@Answersonapostcard Yes "each to their own". I don't think I have dismissed any camera that way - film or digital, though I do admit to not liking 110 format or the smaller Disc Camera format. Some people will have taken good photos on these formats but I have never managed it, hence my dislike. As for banging on about experience: I would much rather be a novice and a teenager again 😁 Cheers, Keith
@@theoldunsshot1005 sorry It was meant for @marcp.1752