Seriously?

[Wil_Bloodworth]

I saw this on another nikon forum:

I'm rarely using my D700 and shoot much more film and actually prefer it most of the time. I've decided to offer up my D700 as a trade for a F6. The only time I used the D700 was for youth sports ( my kids ), and even then I wasn't a spray and pray type of shooter, hence the low shutter actuations.

D700 will come with all boxed items as bought new. I am not the original owner. The body is in near new condition. ~3000 actuations. Basically the camera sits in a bag when my kids are not doing sports. US model.

I'm interested in a similar condition F6--newer condition the better ( less cash you add to compensate for value ). US model a must. All boxed items, including strap and front cap as well as docs and software. Lately F6's have been selling around $1400-1500 for a mint copy. If your's is mint, I'd ask an additional $500-600 cash.

Really?! You've got to be just stuck in a film rut to make that kind of decision. Even if you shoot the exact same way with the D700 as you do the F6, you're still getting better image quality and saving $ by not buying and developing film. Does anyone else find this retarded?

- Wil

[PeteQ]

Wil, maybe this is one of those PROCESS over RESULTS kind of people. There are some of those out there you know...

[toverman]

In the beginning, DSLRs had some catching up to do. But wow, a D700 with its stellar high ISO performance alone would be a good reason to ditch film. I think even bodies produced the last several years by the Big Two surpass anything you can squeeze out with a 35mm film camera. But to each his own!

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Yes, I seem to be coming across a lot of those *process* over *results* people. Hey, if they're more *in their comfort zone* with worse results... so be it for them. I guess it's another example of "old dog new tricks".

I hope I never end up where I'm afraid of technology or don't embrace change.

- Wil

[dmcantrell]

I don't know if I'd use the term "retarded", but this person's explanation does seem to go against most accepted opinions on such a comparison. In the end, it seems like a good deal for someone looking to dump an F6 though! I kinda wish I had one to offer as a trade...

[venchka]

Smile when you say, "Retarded."

If you visit the right places, you will find "dumping digital and returning to film" folks almost every week.

GASP!

There are even folks on this planet who never dumped film for digital in the first place.

So, who's retarded?

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by venchka

Smile when you say, "Retarded."

If you visit the right places, you will find "dumping digital and returning to film" folks almost every week.

GASP!

There are even folks on this planet who never dumped film for digital in the first place.

So, who's retarded?

I don't literally mean retarded... more like extremely foolish or just too set in their ways to be considered mentally competent.

Those "dumping digital and returning to film" are just, well, again, favoring PROCESS over RESULTS... as Pete mentioned. There isn't a single decent reason to go back to (35mm) film when awesome digital solutions easily prevail.

- Wil

[venchka]

I won't debate the topic. However, I know a few dozen, maybe a few hundred, folks who would. Trouble is, there is no right or wrong answer. For the time being, we still have choices. Assuming the current monstrosity being perpetrated by a couple folks in Congress doesn't outlaw the use of silver by private citizens in hopes of stopping global warming.

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by venchka

I won't debate the topic. However, I know a few dozen, maybe a few hundred, folks who would. Trouble is, there is no right or wrong answer.

Oh, I agree completely. I don't really care at all... but I found it quite interesting that people are doing that. I think it's actually great for my business because (basically) they're taking themselves completely out of the photography business and relegating their contributions to "hobbist".

Lets not get started on Congress!

- Wil

[crackhead]

ITT: people get defensive about other people's photographic choices

[ronocnikral]

Originally Posted by ParkImaging

Even if you shoot the exact same way with the D700 as you do the F6, you're still getting better image quality and saving $ by not buying and developing film.

hmmm...IQ better? what tests have been done? or this proven fact that should be taken as gospel?

I actually believe film is cheaper...

but to each their own.

so yes, seriously!

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by ronocnikral

hmmm...IQ better? what tests have been done? or this proven fact that should be taken as gospel?

Of course not. But you whip out your 6400 ASA film and I would be happy to hear what you have to say then.

Originally Posted by ronocnikral

I actually believe film is cheaper...

Hmmm. No cost at all (digital) versus never-ending purchase of film and processing fees. How is that cheaper? Come on. Don't just stand on one side of the fence out of principle. If you want to stand on that side of the fence then do so. But at least acknowledge facts.

Originally Posted by ronocnikral

but to each their own.

I'm completely agree.

- Wil

[venchka]

Originally Posted by ParkImaging

...

Hmmm. No cost at all (digital) versus never-ending purchase of film and processing fees.

- Wil

You don't honestly believe that do you?

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by venchka

You don't honestly believe that do you?

Yes. Why wouldn't I? I know a couple of wedding photographers that stated directly to me that they started saving over $25,000 each year when they switched from film to digital.

Why do you think otherwise?

- Wil

[ronocnikral]

Originally Posted by venchka

You don't honestly believe that do you?

apparently he is calculating starting now and all costs incurred in the past are sunk costs. it's a good way to do economics, if your project/business/life is failing and you are committed to execution.

as someone who shoots both digital and film, i know for a fact which one I have more money invested in. And my total investment in film (with 3 cameras) will be less than photoshop alone.

want to talk about standing on oneside of the fence, not facing facts and "retarded" (used within the OP's context of course)...

other lessons to be learned in this thread: most people overstate what they make, especially photographers. most photographers are piss poor at cost/project evaluation.