Digital VS Film RF

[attitudee02]

Hi

Whats is the difference between the digi and film RF?

I love the film quality that the RF can give. Can the digi one produce the same effect?

 

[Dslrman]

With my limited experience I can answer you only with the second question. Film is definitely better than digital due to its higher and more depth in the (color & contrast) tonality range. Any image that is captured digitally will render photo colour table to be slightly incorrect, especially the dreaded "purple fringing" effect presence. Even if you scanned your film you still have this, but less so as compared to digitally captured via any CCD or CMOS sensors. So inorder to get the best optimal color tonality you will need some sort of digital PP to correct this anormally.

I have not tried a digital RF before. The closest I can get is a DSLR with a manual focus lens, when you are in focus there is a green dot in your viewfinder. May be similar concept with a digital RF. Whereas Film RF gives focus by merging the double image in the center of your viewfinder to set focus.

 

[osocan]

Hi

Whats is the difference between the digi and film RF?

Besides the obvious film vs digital, not much. What I can think of:

1. By its own definition, digital RFs are electronics and wont work without a battery. Many film RFs are 100% mechanical and dont require any battery.

2. Crop factor of 1.5x to 1.33x for digital unless you can lay your hands on an M9 which is FF. But crop factor, IMHO, affects those who came from film more than those who started with digital.

I love the film quality that the RF can give. Can the digi one produce the same effect?

In a word NO

 

[Dslrman]

Ah, then that begs another question. What is considered a real digital RF then? AFAIK, M9 stays true to its RF "heritage" hence is considered a digital RF. How about those camera whose functions including TTL viewing, auto-focusing, and other automated functions that found in those digital compacts and DSLRs? Are they considered digital rangefinders, digital compacts, DSLRs, or all of them can be also considered? :think:

 

[Yoricko]

I've got both film and digital. I started at the digital age so the crop was not too bad for me, but it is still a considerable annoying factor (M8).

As for the film-like feeling, I'm not too sure... Sure you can PP your digital files have the same feel and tonality to film, but it takes time to PP. Whereas shooting film does not require any sort PP to give that awesome feel to your photos.

Resolution wise, film wins digital hands down, only IF, the film isn't directly scanned and instead enlarged and scanned (from an article i read somewhere). Home photo scanners or even the Nikon 35mm film dedicated scanner cannot match up to the enlargements.

Anyways, for the differences. Digital RFs also costs quite a sum more than the film RFs.