It has finally happened, and it happened much faster than I’d ever have guessed. In January 2004 we got our first digital camera body, along with the mass of equipment required to support it, just before a trip to Florida and California. I used the digital body and my wife shot film. It was quite a learning experience and it was the basis for beginning the "Dark Side of Digital" article on this web site. In September 2004, a few weeks before a month-long trip out west, we got a second digital camera body. We have done more local shooting than usual in the past few months too, and since September neither of us has exposed a single frame on film. I wasn’t thinking about all the film sitting in the freezer and the film equipment gathering dust in the closet when my wife suggested we should sell it.
.
WHAT?! Sell the best camera I’ve ever owned? You must be kidding. What about time exposures, dusty conditions, cold weather, infrared photography, and all the other things digital cameras either can’t do or are bad at doing? Can we live with the restrictions? The answer is probably yes. For us and our shooting preferences, the impact of these restrictions is tolerable. If we did lots of infrared photography, worked extensively in sub-freezing conditions, or made lots of exposures longer than 30 seconds, the answer would be different. As it is, the most extreme weather we work in is tropical heat, not arctic cold. The last time I did infrared photography I was too young to drive a car. I have made plenty of exposures longer than 30 seconds, though. Most were back when my film of choice was ISO 25 and I just needed more light for exposures at small apertures. With noise-free exposures at ISO 100 or more that is no longer an issue. Occasionally, though, I need very long exposures for creative effect. Such exposures get noisy when done with digital cameras, but to a point the noise can be greatly reduced with image post processing techniques. Exposures of many hours are still the realm of film, though. Dust, dirt, and the rest cause lots of extra work and hassle, but they aren’t show stoppers.
.
Why not just keep the film equipment? For us there are several good reasons. First, we have found it somewhere between difficult and impossible to carry the digital cameras, a laptop, and everything else needed to support digital image capture, along with a cooler full of film and the film cameras. Since most of our images are now made digitally, the film equipment is never there when it’s needed anyway. Second, after making what for us is a huge investment in digital cameras and associated equipment, I can’t imagine leaving it all at home and going on a trip with film instead. Third, our large film inventory is aging and our film equipment is depreciating while not being used, which costs us money for nothing. Fourth, when traveling overseas we used to buy film on location and process it before returning home to avoid X-ray damage. With digital we no longer need to worry about X-rays or finding film and reliable processing, which can be a big problem. Last but not least, we get noticeably more good images using digital image capture. I think this is due to having a much wider exposure latitude, instant feedback, and the availability of high ISO settings with low noise. Of course there’s no free lunch here. There’s more work, hassle, and less sleep in the field with digital image capture too. I guess it’s just the price we have to pay for more good images.
.
So that’s it. For us the end of film use has come quickly and silently, without my realizing it. The EOS 1V HS we’ll be selling really is the best camera I’ve ever owned in terms of feel, reliability, and features. To equal it in a digital body would require an EOS 1Ds Mark II that shoots 8 - 10 frames per second, is invulnerable to dust, works to -20°C, and weighs about half as much, among other things. Isn’t something like that scheduled for release next year?
.
Happy shooting,