picturecrazy wrote:
I have found (not weddings specifically) that I worry a lot more about equipment failure now than I did in the film days. Sensitive, complex, digital electronic equipment is so much more prone to failure than the good 'ol mechanical pieces.
For example, in my last shoot, I got an Error 99 right in the middle of the shoot. I turned the camera off, removed and replaced the lens, battery, CF card, flash, and when I'd turn it back on, it would just say "busy" and sit there. Nothing would work. Then I pulled out my backup CF card and stuffed it in and it worked, and I continued. Meanwhile, the rest of the shoot I was so worried that I had lost ALL the files that was on that card. Luckily, when I checked when I got home, almost all the images were ok, but there was a file system error on the card. When there is SO much software controlling your equipment, the chances of screwups are greater.
Even if you dropped a roll of film into a puddle, you've only lost 24-36 exposures, whereas on digital, you could potentially lose the entire DAY. I just find myself worrying a lot more about equipment.
Disadvantage #2: equipment upgrades. With film, you can use the same camera you used 25 years ago (which I still do) and still get shots just as good as using an EOS 1V. But with digital, you have sensor upgrades, software/firmware upgrades, upgrades of this and that blah blah blah. You pretty much HAVE to keep upgrading to keep up. It's expensive.
But other than that, I don't find any other disadvantages. The flexibility and control you have with digital is just so amazing it's worth it to me. The 20D is what prompted me to make the jump to digital. What a camera.
For me it's just the opposite. I no longer have sleepless nights as I wonder if the film stuff actually worked. I shot weddings with Mamiya Pro-TL's for about seven years and was always left wondering: Did the the X-synch work? Was the exposure correct? Did the film get fogged? I'd put the camera away after the reception and when I took it out to remove film I'd glance at the shutterspeed and if it was on 1/1000 instead of A I'd get a chill down my back. I shot one wedding about three months after I got the camera and while the dad was bringing the bride down the aisle I thought that the camera "sounded funny". After a couple of additional shots I realized that the mirror wasn't blacking out (that caused the funny sound) and since the mirror wasn't moving, it was blocking light from the film. More to the point I had NO idea as to when this failure occured. It turned out that it happened right when I noticed the noise, but I sure lost sleep over that one.
With digital I KNOW that I have it in the field. No longer am I in the prediction business, I'm in the review business. The flash did work, or if it didn't I take some more. Oh look the exposure is way off, I better adjust that. No longer do I use a special lens to soften portraits. I shoot sharp, and introduce softness during post production and the B&G get BOTH variations. I do spend more time on the computer but I also keep a LOT more money in my pocket rather than sharing it with Fuji or Kodak.
[As a completely side comment, I was at the Professional Photographer's of Canada national meeting this past weekend. I only went to the trade show and guess what, Kodak wasn't there. Hmm ...]
As far as digital being delicate I think that the Mamiya was a lot more fussy. I had to be extremely careful when I mounted a lens to make sure that the lens/meter pin engaged properly. I also had some problems with the contacts between the metering prism, the body and the film backs. I'd get wonky exposures and I'd freak. Finally the device that made the Pro-TL work well was the Metz SCA adapter and that was a kludge if there ever was one. Mine never failed but I thought that it could at any second! One synch cable, one TTL cable and one cable that went to the flash! All coming out of this module that went into a hotshoe on the side (?) of the camera!
If someone had come out with a six to eight MP 645 digital back three years ago for say $4500 or so, I have no doubt that I'd still be using the Mamiya. If that fantasy digital back had come out three months ago (before I sold all of my Mamiya gear) I wouldn't have purchased it since I have discovered the joy of the Canon zooms! I shot a wedding last summer on a sailboat and without my 10-22 it would have been impossible! With the Mamiya my longest lens was a 150mm so it's been a complete joy to use a 70-200 f2.8 which yields (effectively) a 320mm focal length. So from being 85mm long to 320!
I have no doubt that the medium format 22 or 39MP backs will make a better image than my 5D will; but I wonder if they make a better picture. The MF zooms are few and slow and expensive and fall apart - at least the Fujiblad 55-110 apparently does! In any case I just couldn't use prime only any more.
The speed of the Canon zoom lenses is wonderful as well. So too is being to use ISO exactly like shutterspeed or aperture - you change it as you need to!
I did have the 20D/vertical problem last summer but it seems to be OK now after a trip to Canon. And my 5D shows no sign of ANY problems like this at all. My biggest fear is a card failure but in the last three years I've had none, not one card failure. And card failure stikes me as being in the same ballpark as a lab losing film. It was always a fear but never happened.
"There's never time to do it right. But there's always time to do it over."
Canon 5D, 50D; 16-35 f2.8L, 24-105 f4L IS, 50 f1.4, 100 f2.8 Macro, 70-200 f2.8L, 300mm f2.8L IS.
, and would welcome any feedback.
