[Leica] Re: Leica answer

[henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)]

At 1:23 AM +0200 9/1/07, Luis Ripoll wrote:
>Henning,
>
>I find very interesting your comments, just one of my questions is if I had
>an M8, should I continue using my film cameras?, (I think yes). The other
>point, about quality, for me we should differenciate colour and B&W, and
>when we talk about B&W, it should be compared with a darkromm print and not
>with other digital cameras, on this case I continue asking me, even the
>digital quality (B&W) has been improved, if is better or not than a Baryta
>print.
>
>Saludos cordiales
>Luis
>

Hi Luis,

My quick answer would be: for B&W, the digital M8 and film M prints 
are different, rather than one being 'better' than the other while in 
colour I would say that the M8 prints are almost always 'better'.

I'm not giving up on 35mm B&W film. It's easy for me to do, I'm very 
comfortable with it and I like the look of it. If I want to shoot in 
low light, I'd use the M8 as it really makes things so much easier. 
The quick review of tricky lighting situations makes me a lot more 
confident about the shots I'm taking, and even though the M8 has 
noisier high ISO images than a Canon 5D, it still puts film to shame. 
So no more Neopan 1600, or heaven forbid, Tmax 3200.

I still have a bunch of HP5+ that I'll shoot, but that will also 
probably not be replaced. That leaves basically Delta 100, which I 
shoot at 160 to 200 and Acros, which I shoot at 100 or even slightly 
less. Those two have looks that I can't really duplicate in digital, 
and they show enough detail to be competitive or better with digital.

I love slides, but Kodachrome is history and the other stuff just 
doesn't grab me the same way. Making prints from slides, even with 
scanning, is a lot of work, and as I mentioned doesn't become 
competitive with digital until you have a really well exposed slide 
scanned on a high end scanner, which is a lot of money. And it still 
leaves you with a distinct dynamic range deficit compared to digital. 
That leaves colour negative. Yes, it does have more dynamic range 
than digital, but in general not more useable range, and things like 
crossover problems come up which can be hard to fix even in 
Photoshop, and the resolution is really not that good compared to the 
M8. Also, the colour films are expensive. So I only buy and use 
colour film in larger formats, or odd pieces like the Roundshot.

So for 35mm, there is no compelling reason to shoot colour film 
except if you want to produce a slide show, and that is something I 
now might like to do for myself but nobody will pay me to do it. The 
cost is also prohibitive now, and I need my photo dollars to keep 
upgrading my digital gear. :-) I am waiting though for a good high 
quality and affordable digital projector!

-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com