Which are you and why?

I am a film girl. The actual print always comes out better, in my opinion. And if you make your own prints, the feeling is great knowing you've had full control from start to finish.

I would love to have a digital SLR on the side. But of course they are way expensive. That just adds to my reasoning of choosing film... cheaper. But even if DSLR's were cheap film would still be my choice.

i like digital u can get what ever u want but u do not have to get the newest slr camera a good older slr camera is a if u like nikon. Get the nikon d100 if u dont mind haveing a older camera i have a d100 and its a good camera you can get one on ebay for $700 and thats relly cheap. and its a vary good camera

Digital. Film is great if you want to go through the whole process yourself, but other than that there's nothing you can't produce better than with digital IMO. It also makes it easier to sit and take the same shot knowing you're not wasting film.

If you are interested in the whole process and willing to take the time (and risk) of working with film, then go for it. Digital is my choice.

Nikon D80 is the best for amateurs I believe. D200 is pretty sweet, but for the same price I'd rather have a D80 with an extra lens or 2 for the same price.

Still I use my film camera.
I think digital camera is not very good. Unfortunately for the very good one you should pay loads of money !

I have been shooting on film since the early 1980's and I loved the whole process. I never got tired or watching the image appear in the dev tray in the darkroom. I used my first digital camera in 1999 (sony FD95 - it had a floppy disk for storage!) and I fell in love with the immediacy of the process - though not the limitations of the quality. I fully changed over to digital in 2001, as the savings made on film and processing costs were massive. Today I would have to say that there are only a very few instances where film would be better - and they are usually all instances where it would also require a large format 5" x 4" camera too.

Digital. No words. With digital you also may process your photos like in darkroom. But if you choose a DSLR camera, you must spent a lot of money to buy good lenses. Kit lenses aren't good. I have a Sony Alpha with kit, and when I buyed old Minolta 50/1.7 lens I've looked a difference. A big difference. New good lenses are very expensive. Then I recommend to buy a hybrid camera like for example Sony R1 or other brand of course. Film cameras (SLR) are cheaper, but also depend from lenses, that are same price.
With digital you have an instant result.
With digital you may make many more shots than with a film camera. You can choose the best shot from many more.
It's a big advantage.
But if you like darkroom and to develope the pictures, choose a film camera, off course.

film. always have been shooting with film. there's a tradition to it, a certain feel of nostalgia using 35mm.

At the Moment, I use a digital camera. But at home, I have still my analog SLR.

I go digital, mostly because I'm a child of the digital era, but also because I shoot animals a lot. As we all know, animals tend to move around a bit, and a digital camera is a better choice for me, both when it comes to my economy and the outcome of the pictures.

Normally I shoot with a Canon EOS 350D (Digital Rebel XT) and I just love it. Besides the fact that it doesn't really matter how many pictures you take with a digital as you can always delete them, it's also much handier for me to have the pictures in digital format. I share pictures with friends over the internet, and not having to order pictures taken on film, wait and pay for them is a better choice than having to.

I have to admit I dream about being able to make my own prints, but I have nobody to teach me. I do own a really good film camera, a Minolta Hi-Matic S from '78, but I haven't really used it yet.

Neither. I use my memory to capture the images....much more reliable.

Just joking....digital all the way for me and Wooden Dude

Pav

The pros and cons of film vs digital have been covered.

Photography is very new to me. I started out with digital. I have a Sony Cybershot F717 - not quite an SLR, but a great camera.

But recently I purchased a Pentax K1000 35mm SLR. I have collected 3 lenses for it now (fast prime lens, zoom & telephoto). I also purchased a scanner which can scan negatives. So if I ever upgrade to digital SLR, I can use these lenses.

I wanted to explore 35mm film (tho' I don't do my own developing) just to see how it compared to digital.

I love both digital and film.

I must admit though, I love taking shots with film. I love winding the film on and clicking the shutter. I love the simplicity of my 35mm camera. No power-ups, white-balance, auto-focus... doesn't even need a battery.

And I recommend the experience... I think I have become a better photographer for it.

And 35mm film looks different to digital. Film grain is beautiful, digital noise is ugly.

I use both digital and film.
I love both digital and film.

Digital.

I've tried so many times with film, and just not succeeded. I'm not technical enough, so I really appreciate the ability to look at the little screen and get a rough idea of what sort of picture I have taken.

I also use massive memory cards on my camera (Canon Eos 350D) so if I want to get it right, I can take loads of pictures with graduated exposure & aperture just to be sure.

I moved to full digital recently. I was a keen positive film fan. I still think that the experience of visualing results through the viewfinder, waiting films for development, picking slides from roll sheets, mounting, putting them on a slide slot and viewing the pictures from a projector is a great joy and in no way, a comparable expereince you can get from digital images. The projected image quality directly from slides is just brillant and striking especially, if you use highly saturated emulsive like Velvia.

The film cameras have better shutter touch, the feels and sounds produced from mirror, diaphram, winder are crispy, especially from mechanical camera.

My change was actually due to a mini-digital cam which I've got a year ago. I was so impressed by the quality of the images from that handy little. It simply has made me shoot more which is important as I believe the more you shoot, the better image you get. I found a dilemma when I realised that I had left a few rolls of slides undeveloped for months and after have them developed never mounted and viewed. The whole process of film shooting takes too long and crumsy and is extended awfully if you plan to digitise your films unless you can afford to let somebody do it for you.

So, I moved to full digital last month with a DSLR and a couple of new lenses. Having explored some possibilities of post-editing in the digital world, I am glad that I have experience my old days of film and darkroom because no matter how good your post-editing skill is, the most important is to get the image right from the beginning. I still think that someone goes through the practise with a basic film mechanical camera using fixed focal length lenses would help them to understand photography better in terms of choosing a right lens or a right angle of view if it is a zoom lens, understanding the meaning of decisive moment and the different quality of light, and framing precisely.

Digital is great for keeping, editing, and sharing. If you only see image through a computer screen as most of us do these days, it is the choice.

I have to disagree with you..Film may produce better prints and perhaps more artistic ones, but it is certainly more expensive and more unpredictable than digital. I shoot exclusively in digital...Although I would like to have film on the side for some particular applications, but it is way too time consuming and unpractical..