Old digicams are an easier substitute for a retro noisier look but film is still on another level but involves a more tedious and expensive process but like with fountain pen owners... The process is part of its charm.
Digicams give off a nostalgic vibe and fun form factor that’s inviting like a film camera would be but can be shared quickly. I brought my powershot sd1100 to the bars and an afterparty and got a lot of great reactions from people which made the photos turn out all the better and I was able to edit, post and share the same photos the same night while drunk lol if it was on film I probably would’ve forgotten to get it developed by now
I hope you two make another video together. Because of your SD1000 episode I actually bought one and loaded it with the CHDK Custom firmware that gives you the option to shoot in “RAW”. I hope you guys make another episode on street photography utilizing the custom firmware & you’ll have lots of fun! Looking forward to this episode!
How do you get such a great look with the SD1000, when I export my pictures to my laptop the resolution and the quality of my pictures look so bad and they’re really small. Is it just me? Yours looks awesome!
Picked up a canon powershot & its a lot of fun even if the images are similar or worse than smart phone. The process is more enjoyable & pretty liberating to just point and shoot again.. Wont replace film for me but its a fun experience, using it with the flash definitely has that 2000's vibe to it.
Cool video but 7 megapixels is not low megapixels for a digicam, thats actually at the top end of what you want. The "digicam" people are referring to the last few years with a filmic look are older, low megapixel (3-6 megapixel) cameras. The SD1000 is too modern and too many megapixels to give that more filmic look IMO. My Canon Powershot G2 and A85 are more what you want. Early 00s with 4 megapixels. They both nail that film look and give you full manual control, which I like. My favorite digicams for that film look are the older A and F series Fuji Finepix with the excellent SuperCCD sensors. Look for the A400, 500, 600 and 610. For the F series, the F10, F11, F20, F30 and F31fd.
I recently picked up an Olympus E500 with the 8 MP Kodak 43 sensor and two lenses for $150. Film-ish, but not a true reproduction. However, it's a look I can learn to live with for the cost savings.
The worst part is that most people are shooting for the look, and don't even know what the look is. We've got people put here shooting at a super warm green white balance, so their digital shot looks like it expired before World War I, and calling it a Portra look. No subtlety just muddy green images and calling it the film look.
My SD1000 gets here today and I can’t be more excited. It was definitely hard to decide which out of the hundreds of digicams there are out there to buy for my “go-to nostalgia pocket camera”, but I can’t lie you put me on this one, and that’s what I went with. Also bought an S120 but I know this one will probably bring more character to the images.
@@nardocat9842 A Kingston 4GB card. As long as it’s not SDHC it should work.. I intentionally bought a low capacity card to avoid any comparability issues.
I think a better match up for the Canon SD1000 would be the Canon Sureshot AFMii. Both point and shoot, have auto focus, compact, and with a f2.8 lens. The persona of someone wanting an SD1000 would be someone that would also get a AFMii as their film camera.
Here is a question. Why not instant cameras? It's still film and if you are going to limit yourself to entry level point and shoot digital cameras, you might as well be shooting instant film. You can get a much better film look with an instant film camera (obviously) than a digital camera. Although if you did want to go full manual control and quality lenses on an instant film camera, MINT makes some great ones.
I just got back from a trip to Australia, New Zealand, and Tasmania. This was the first big trip (of many) I did not take a film camera with me. Why? The film hassle at all the airport scanners I had to go through. On a recent trip through Egypt I counted 21 scanners I have to go through and beg the operators to hand check the film (airports, hotels, museums). Most of the time I was successful but I held up lines and had to deal with some power trip jerks in charge of the scanners. I still shoot film on local photo walks.
It amaze me reading about some people "discovering" Digital photography in 2023, as if it's something new. "OMG I can now share photos almost immediately", "so cheap", "Very Convenient!!!". I think people saying that Digicams are like film is a bit overblown, I don't know if they say it for the lack of another word, but I think what they mean is that it feels nostalgic and in that regard I could agree, but the quality of the image is different, and most importantly the process. Most of the times I can easily tell a photo taken digitally vs on film. I remember back in 2006/2007 (when many of these digicams were in their prime) a few people started to shoot film again, it wasn't as popular as it is now, there weren't any influencers around, youtube still on diapers, no tik-tok, just forums etc, it was more word of mouth and some selected webpages (flickr!!). Anyway, at that time I almost never heard anybody saying OMG this Canon Powershot is just like film, look at the grain so "organic", Indeed people used the digital cameras a lot as they were fun, easy and cheap, photos for the people and very convenient, but again Film was seek for how it felt to shoot with and the look.
Very good idea 👍🏻 to show the potential of these little CCD digicam. I use still a canon G7 (amazing) and a small CCD lumix FS something….but if you want to be closest to your film experience, you must try a Nikon D100 or D200 and you will reach the nirvana of DiGi-analog experience. A canon 40D even if already CMOS and 10MP is also a fantastic tool. Old DSLR are amazing also as their mimic their SLR counterparts (especially the D100)
i find it really interesting that the conversation of digital vs film (regardless of whether its digicams or disposables) is always about the photos. but i dont shoot film because of how the photos look -- i shoot film for the experience: having to wait for your photos and be intentional with each and every photo, the feeling of winding the film, the slap of the shutter, the way the camera extends into its own being. you simply can't replace that and as much as im shooting digital more because it's cheaper, i will never kid myself into thinking a digital experience can replace an embodied and (almost) sacred analogue experience.
Thank you so much for this Video. Actually very timely for me as I recently resurrected my Panasonic TZ3 to use again and was ruminating if a camera with such a small sensor could ever match the quality of Film. Your conclusions were amazing as I thought Film would win hands down, which is where your technical breakdown of the images of Digicam V Film was so useful and apt. Thanks again, great Vid.
I dont have any film cameras... but i do have lots and lots of digicams and old digicams... the only reason why i bought old digicams is just to mimic film cameras ngl, low cost and you can shoot infinite "films" and not waste and film rolls.... for me, i choose digicams... but i only buy those to look like film... so film wins overall... but digicam wins it for me
I don’t think one is better than the other in post. Film can be shot and scanned in ways that allow for greater manipulation in post, so can digital, there is a lot that can be done with both. I think the only limitations for both are crushed blacks, blown highlights, and certain types of color shifting that can be difficult to work with. I don’t think a digicam can replace your F3 HP, that is a really nimble camera that can do a lot more than what the video shows.
Ironically, I just added a film camera setup (Nikon FM2N) the past two weeks to my creative space. I don't think I'll be shooting w/a digicam because I already shoot w/a DSLR & mirror-less (more frequently w/ the mirror-less). Lol
I have to agree with a tie between the two, but I have to side with film cameras. In my own similar experience, I own a Nikon ZFC and shot a handful of film cameras, I have to say out of convenience any digicam ( or mirrorless) are a lot easier to get into for wanting just to take photos. Though, everyone has a different reason behind their craft of photography for me its all about the process behind it and the shooting experience. Like I love shooting my ZFC but, it wasn’t like when I shot on film in the past. The film look is appealing and sometimes can be replicated (to a degree) with newer cameras but, the whole process of shooting film is a lot different and more involvement to crafting the photo. Ultimately, its up to the person and what aesthetic in color, sharpness, and feel of the photo outcomes for them to decide.
I remember an old article from Luminous Landscape, from the year 2003 and they where saying that digital cameras with more than 3 megapixels had more resolution than iso 100 35mm film
I shoot film because of its quality. Yes it is getting more expensive and if it were to get to a point where I can't shoot it anymore I will just stick with my fujifilm digital gear. Don't see me picking up a "digicam" from the 2000's or god forbid earlier any day of the week.
The Canon sd1000 is giving the Nikon some comp here. Again this is not a fair comparison between a 35 mm film camera and a digicam. The Canon has a starting focal length of about 35mm I believe. You should never shoot a digi cam during daylight above 200 ISO better to stick with 100 if possible. A better comparison would be to get a Canon G9 that shoots Raw never put the iso above 200 unless you're shooting at night. Then put a 35mm lens on the Nikon then let's see how they compare. And many of the shots the sd1000 a cheap Point and shoot held up really well considering it's being compared here to a top-of-the-line 35mm camera with premium glass. The digicam has one incredible advantage over the film camera you can see the exposure and adjust if necessary before you ever take a shot. I'm not saying one's better than the other just some things I noticed after printing many thousands of photos from numerous 35mm and digital cameras not just viewing them on a smartphone or computer screen.
Personally I feel a older used fuji model for the value. with a low cost vintage lens would be a better choice, for that classic film camera feeling. It's a little bit more. But offers more versatile platform. That would be closer to a slr experience. Digicam are closer to point and shoot cameras. But to me at that point I may as well just use my phone. Photography to me is about the thought process and creativity, without the tactile feeling of the lens. I don't feel inspired. I'm just taking another snapshot of something I could have done on my phone. I would love to hear your thoughts. No hate to the digicam, just not for me.
Digicam, all the way! If you're new to photography, go digicam. And I'm not here suggesting digicam because of recent spikes in film costs due to the supply and demand of film. It has nothing to do with that. Digicam.
Most of the images containing scenes with artificial light shot on film camera look green because in film photography u can't choose the whitebalance. All the whitebalance work in film relies on the type of film. If you want to shoot with film camera for the scenes containg indoor or artificial light, u may need to consider non daylight film. For instance CINESTILL 800Tungsten etc...
On the topic of editing photos from digital files vs scans of film... When scanning film (and even when developing) exposure can definitely be adjusted. Dynamic range can be limited when you get a JPEG from the lab but much more can be done prior to scanning.
Canon color science generally shoots warm colors, Nikon shoots cooler tone science directly from the cameras. The Canon digital cam looks better than the film in this example my opinion of course. My Sony cameras shoot neutral colors a bit closer to raw to adjust the colors.
While I love the tactile experience of film shooting, it's gettin super pricey these days. Shooting film for a time helped me shoot digital differently. I compose more carefully, think more and only take an image or two of the same thing. Wayyyy less culling in LR! I say if it's keeps you shooting, creating and exercising creative muscles then shoot digi...different strokes for different folks. 🤣 I'm also using my SD1000 I bought 15 years ago... love the bnw mode. Definitely a film vibe... you should shoot bnw for an episode!
A more fair comparison would be a film point and shoot like an IQZoom / Sure shot, or a older DSLR against the F3, but yes film saves on editing time when it comes to certain colors / vibes.
I mean, when a digicam is holding its own against a then top of the line, and now overpriced film camera....It would annihilate the film point and shoot.
I find it great that all the zoomers are moving to digicams, this will cause the demand of film to drop and hopefully help to drop the film prices as well. It's all about demand and supply in the film world;)
Instead of using cheap digicam, I still shoot on my old smart phone tho. Film is just too expensive that one prefer to have digicam. Just bcoz film is expensive
Phahaha... Not even close... Don't know how you see similarities in colour... The examples are miles away... I love how hipsters went to film cameras, then discovered digicams, soon they'll find out about dslr's and basically repeat history from 20yrs ago. Hopefully prices of film cams would go down...
No, the benefits of film are that despite being old, they still produce exquisite images. Digicams are only coming back because of misguided nostalgia. I don't see the appeal of these cheap cameras with poor sensors
He and his friend explicitly gave reasons above in the video as well as getting into digicams is a good thing for film folks as the industry may look into reducing prices for film
It's for the look. Not everyone gives a shit about ultra crisp shots of flowers in the backyard. To each their own right? And what cameras are cheap now?
🔥 Alright gang! Which one do you guys prefer? What are your thoughts?! Can a Digicam replace a film camera?! Comment down below 👇🏼
I like taking pics with my DSi
they just have a different charm :)
Digicam gang 🤩📸
Old digicams are an easier substitute for a retro noisier look but film is still on another level but involves a more tedious and expensive process but like with fountain pen owners... The process is part of its charm.
Digicams give off a nostalgic vibe and fun form factor that’s inviting like a film camera would be but can be shared quickly. I brought my powershot sd1100 to the bars and an afterparty and got a lot of great reactions from people which made the photos turn out all the better and I was able to edit, post and share the same photos the same night while drunk lol if it was on film I probably would’ve forgotten to get it developed by now
I hope you two make another video together. Because of your SD1000 episode I actually bought one and loaded it with the CHDK Custom firmware that gives you the option to shoot in “RAW”. I hope you guys make another episode on street photography utilizing the custom firmware & you’ll have lots of fun! Looking forward to this episode!
How do you get such a great look with the SD1000, when I export my pictures to my laptop the resolution and the quality of my pictures look so bad and they’re really small. Is it just me? Yours looks awesome!
What settings did you use on the digicam ??
Picked up a canon powershot & its a lot of fun even if the images are similar or worse than smart phone. The process is more enjoyable & pretty liberating to just point and shoot again.. Wont replace film for me but its a fun experience, using it with the flash definitely has that 2000's vibe to it.
Cool video but 7 megapixels is not low megapixels for a digicam, thats actually at the top end of what you want. The "digicam" people are referring to the last few years with a filmic look are older, low megapixel (3-6 megapixel) cameras. The SD1000 is too modern and too many megapixels to give that more filmic look IMO. My Canon Powershot G2 and A85 are more what you want. Early 00s with 4 megapixels. They both nail that film look and give you full manual control, which I like. My favorite digicams for that film look are the older A and F series Fuji Finepix with the excellent SuperCCD sensors. Look for the A400, 500, 600 and 610. For the F series, the F10, F11, F20, F30 and F31fd.
I recently picked up an Olympus E500 with the 8 MP Kodak 43 sensor and two lenses for $150. Film-ish, but not a true reproduction. However, it's a look I can learn to live with for the cost savings.
Get an instant film camera or two. Thats a true film look 😀
Absolutely not. Is everyone forgetting why we shoot film to begin with? It’s not just about the look.
Yeah so I can make camera loading reels and then pop the prism off for some WLF of old cars.
The worst part is that most people are shooting for the look, and don't even know what the look is. We've got people put here shooting at a super warm green white balance, so their digital shot looks like it expired before World War I, and calling it a Portra look. No subtlety just muddy green images and calling it the film look.
@@-grey My man is spitting straight facts right here
Digicams all the way 😍🤩📸
My SD1000 gets here today and I can’t be more excited. It was definitely hard to decide which out of the hundreds of digicams there are out there to buy for my “go-to nostalgia pocket camera”, but I can’t lie you put me on this one, and that’s what I went with. Also bought an S120 but I know this one will probably bring more character to the images.
What Sd card did you use?
@@nardocat9842 A Kingston 4GB card. As long as it’s not SDHC it should work.. I intentionally bought a low capacity card to avoid any comparability issues.
I think a better match up for the Canon SD1000 would be the Canon Sureshot AFMii. Both point and shoot, have auto focus, compact, and with a f2.8 lens. The persona of someone wanting an SD1000 would be someone that would also get a AFMii as their film camera.
Here is a question. Why not instant cameras? It's still film and if you are going to limit yourself to entry level point and shoot digital cameras, you might as well be shooting instant film. You can get a much better film look with an instant film camera (obviously) than a digital camera. Although if you did want to go full manual control and quality lenses on an instant film camera, MINT makes some great ones.
Awesome Vids ! keep the DigiCam vids coming !!
is the cannon sd1100 a good camera?
Were the digital images from the sd1000 SOOC? Or were they edited to mimic film or to look closer to the film shot?
Nice video, i still have an SD1200IS i got new in 2011, still fun to use when not carrying larger camera.
I recently bought a Nikon s3000 and took it to a hang out with my friends and I love the pictures I took, we had a fun time taking the pictures
I just got back from a trip to Australia, New Zealand, and Tasmania. This was the first big trip (of many) I did not take a film camera with me. Why? The film hassle at all the airport scanners I had to go through. On a recent trip through Egypt I counted 21 scanners I have to go through and beg the operators to hand check the film (airports, hotels, museums). Most of the time I was successful but I held up lines and had to deal with some power trip jerks in charge of the scanners. I still shoot film on local photo walks.
It amaze me reading about some people "discovering" Digital photography in 2023, as if it's something new. "OMG I can now share photos almost immediately", "so cheap", "Very Convenient!!!". I think people saying that Digicams are like film is a bit overblown, I don't know if they say it for the lack of another word, but I think what they mean is that it feels nostalgic and in that regard I could agree, but the quality of the image is different, and most importantly the process. Most of the times I can easily tell a photo taken digitally vs on film. I remember back in 2006/2007 (when many of these digicams were in their prime) a few people started to shoot film again, it wasn't as popular as it is now, there weren't any influencers around, youtube still on diapers, no tik-tok, just forums etc, it was more word of mouth and some selected webpages (flickr!!). Anyway, at that time I almost never heard anybody saying OMG this Canon Powershot is just like film, look at the grain so "organic", Indeed people used the digital cameras a lot as they were fun, easy and cheap, photos for the people and very convenient, but again Film was seek for how it felt to shoot with and the look.
You just earned a new subscriber. I just watched a guitar video in 2011, March 22 of you playing "Sleepwalk"
You inspired me to go through my storage and get my old digicams lol
Very good idea 👍🏻 to show the potential of these little CCD digicam. I use still a canon G7 (amazing) and a small CCD lumix FS something….but if you want to be closest to your film experience, you must try a Nikon D100 or D200 and you will reach the nirvana of DiGi-analog experience. A canon 40D even if already CMOS and 10MP is also a fantastic tool. Old DSLR are amazing also as their mimic their SLR counterparts (especially the D100)
I much prefer a good phone stead of a digicam, i see no use in having one
i find it really interesting that the conversation of digital vs film (regardless of whether its digicams or disposables) is always about the photos. but i dont shoot film because of how the photos look -- i shoot film for the experience: having to wait for your photos and be intentional with each and every photo, the feeling of winding the film, the slap of the shutter, the way the camera extends into its own being. you simply can't replace that and as much as im shooting digital more because it's cheaper, i will never kid myself into thinking a digital experience can replace an embodied and (almost) sacred analogue experience.
I think both are simply just different and have their own style but I see what you mean
Thank you so much for this Video. Actually very timely for me as I recently resurrected my Panasonic TZ3 to use again and was ruminating if a camera with such a small sensor could ever match the quality of Film. Your conclusions were amazing as I thought Film would win hands down, which is where your technical breakdown of the images of Digicam V Film was so useful and apt. Thanks again, great Vid.
I dont have any film cameras... but i do have lots and lots of digicams and old digicams... the only reason why i bought old digicams is just to mimic film cameras ngl, low cost and you can shoot infinite "films" and not waste and film rolls.... for me, i choose digicams... but i only buy those to look like film... so film wins overall... but digicam wins it for me
I don’t think one is better than the other in post. Film can be shot and scanned in ways that allow for greater manipulation in post, so can digital, there is a lot that can be done with both. I think the only limitations for both are crushed blacks, blown highlights, and certain types of color shifting that can be difficult to work with. I don’t think a digicam can replace your F3 HP, that is a really nimble camera that can do a lot more than what the video shows.
Ironically, I just added a film camera setup (Nikon FM2N) the past two weeks to my creative space. I don't think I'll be shooting w/a digicam because I already shoot w/a DSLR & mirror-less (more frequently w/ the mirror-less). Lol
I have to agree with a tie between the two, but I have to side with film cameras.
In my own similar experience, I own a Nikon ZFC and shot a handful of film cameras, I have to say out of convenience any digicam ( or mirrorless) are a lot easier to get into for wanting just to take photos. Though, everyone has a different reason behind their craft of photography for me its all about the process behind it and the shooting experience. Like I love shooting my ZFC but, it wasn’t like when I shot on film in the past. The film look is appealing and sometimes can be replicated (to a degree) with newer cameras but, the whole process of shooting film is a lot different and more involvement to crafting the photo. Ultimately, its up to the person and what aesthetic in color, sharpness, and feel of the photo outcomes for them to decide.
I remember an old article from Luminous Landscape, from the year 2003 and they where saying that digital cameras with more than 3 megapixels had more resolution than iso 100 35mm film
It all depends on the scan
I shoot film because of its quality. Yes it is getting more expensive and if it were to get to a point where I can't shoot it anymore I will just stick with my fujifilm digital gear. Don't see me picking up a "digicam" from the 2000's or god forbid earlier any day of the week.
I shot both and I gotta say digicam just cause I grew up in the digicam era having used digicams all throughout my childhood
The Canon sd1000 is giving the Nikon some comp here. Again this is not a fair comparison between a 35 mm film camera and a digicam. The Canon has a starting focal length of about 35mm I believe. You should never shoot a digi cam during daylight above 200 ISO better to stick with 100 if possible. A better comparison would be to get a Canon G9 that shoots Raw never put the iso above 200 unless you're shooting at night. Then put a 35mm lens on the Nikon then let's see how they compare. And many of the shots the sd1000 a cheap Point and shoot held up really well considering it's being compared here to a top-of-the-line 35mm camera with premium glass. The digicam has one incredible advantage over the film camera you can see the exposure and adjust if necessary before you ever take a shot. I'm not saying one's better than the other just some things I noticed after printing many thousands of photos from numerous 35mm and digital cameras not just viewing them on a smartphone or computer screen.
I was thinking about trying a Digicam to get that film feeling, this video came at the right moment
I love your videos man, I also love asian squidward when hes on
I don’t know, but I really like the Canon Elph SD 1000 7.2 mp camera! I would like to find and try to shoot on this camera! Thanks for Positive ✌🏼
Personally I feel a older used fuji model for the value. with a low cost vintage lens would be a better choice, for that classic film camera feeling. It's a little bit more. But offers more versatile platform. That would be closer to a slr experience. Digicam are closer to point and shoot cameras. But to me at that point I may as well just use my phone. Photography to me is about the thought process and creativity, without the tactile feeling of the lens. I don't feel inspired. I'm just taking another snapshot of something I could have done on my phone. I would love to hear your thoughts. No hate to the digicam, just not for me.
What Fuji model would you recommend?
Short answer, no lol
Great video!!
I have a Nikon Coolpix 995. It's 3 megapixel and still rocks! Lol
Digicams, digital cameras, digicams are the champions!
Digicam, all the way! If you're new to photography, go digicam. And I'm not here suggesting digicam because of recent spikes in film costs due to the supply and demand of film. It has nothing to do with that. Digicam.
The film definitely gave liminal and more of a vintage film.
I think the green and yellow tones come from
The film stock and maybe the scanning
The green and yellow come from how he edited them.
you should've had to compare the digicam with a film point an shoot for a more fair comparison
Most of the images containing scenes with artificial light shot on film camera look green because in film photography u can't choose the whitebalance. All the whitebalance work in film relies on the type of film. If you want to shoot with film camera for the scenes containg indoor or artificial light, u may need to consider non daylight film. For instance CINESTILL 800Tungsten etc...
Same discussion could take place 25 years ago with the same camera 📷
On the topic of editing photos from digital files vs scans of film... When scanning film (and even when developing) exposure can definitely be adjusted. Dynamic range can be limited when you get a JPEG from the lab but much more can be done prior to scanning.
Canon color science generally shoots warm colors, Nikon shoots cooler tone science directly from the cameras. The Canon digital cam looks better than the film in this example my opinion of course. My Sony cameras shoot neutral colors a bit closer to raw to adjust the colors.
hey bro
stop uploading video
cause I bought ixus70(sd1000) and ricoh etc
I can't buying stuff after watching your video❤
While I love the tactile experience of film shooting, it's gettin super pricey these days. Shooting film for a time helped me shoot digital differently. I compose more carefully, think more and only take an image or two of the same thing. Wayyyy less culling in LR! I say if it's keeps you shooting, creating and exercising creative muscles then shoot digi...different strokes for different folks. 🤣 I'm also using my SD1000 I bought 15 years ago... love the bnw mode. Definitely a film vibe... you should shoot bnw for an episode!
A more fair comparison would be a film point and shoot like an IQZoom / Sure shot, or a older DSLR against the F3, but yes film saves on editing time when it comes to certain colors / vibes.
I mean, when a digicam is holding its own against a then top of the line, and now overpriced film camera....It would annihilate the film point and shoot.
digicam is like taking a Taxi, Filmkamera is more driving myself....
I find it great that all the zoomers are moving to digicams, this will cause the demand of film to drop and hopefully help to drop the film prices as well. It's all about demand and supply in the film world;)
Hell yeah brother
If the demand for film drops too much, they just won't make it anymore. It's costly both ways, production, and purchase.
@@dalespencer11 They can't keep up with demand that's why the prices are high, it just needs to stabilise a bit.
Lol, if the zoomers move on and demand for film drops, they're going to discontinue the film.
Composition vise the film photos were taken way better.
From a practical point of view only: digital.
From an esthetic point of view: film.
Instead of using cheap digicam, I still shoot on my old smart phone tho. Film is just too expensive that one prefer to have digicam. Just bcoz film is expensive
I like the Nikon F3 images a little better. But the Canon SD1000 still look very good. I'm nick picking.
Please upgrade your videos to 4k or at least 1440p lol. Hard to compare IQ when UA-cam’s 1080 is shite lol.
Phahaha... Not even close... Don't know how you see similarities in colour... The examples are miles away... I love how hipsters went to film cameras, then discovered digicams, soon they'll find out about dslr's and basically repeat history from 20yrs ago. Hopefully prices of film cams would go down...
No.
Yessss more SD1000 content!
No, the benefits of film are that despite being old, they still produce exquisite images. Digicams are only coming back because of misguided nostalgia. I don't see the appeal of these cheap cameras with poor sensors
SD1000 looked 🔥🔥🔥
Soulection holla
Simple answer NEVER
first
Old digicams are trash. For how cheap new cameras are why buy a seriously outdated one?
He and his friend explicitly gave reasons above in the video as well as getting into digicams is a good thing for film folks as the industry may look into reducing prices for film
It's for the look. Not everyone gives a shit about ultra crisp shots of flowers in the backyard. To each their own right? And what cameras are cheap now?
Still prefer the film.
The pics could easily me made to look exactly the same with a bit of processing.