NON-digital cameras?

imported
#1

You can say I’m in the stone age, but I like the surprise of seeing what pictures I took, after film is developed. I like not having to worry SO much about my camera getting wet. And I like knowing that, if a film gets lost in the mail, only 30 or so pictures will be gone. Also, I don’t have a computer with a USB port, so I wouldn’t be able to manage the files.

That being said – is there anyone out there who still uses a NON-DIGITAL camera? Is the picture quality comparable? Can anyone recommend a lightweight, sturdy camera that isn’t too expensive, but takes decent quality photos?

nunyet

#2

I use the Fuji Disposable cameras with flash. That is probably heresy to some, but I’ve had very good luck with the 400 and 800 ones. They often are on a BOGOF at CVS or some other place.

Well, you do not get the depth that you get with a 35mm, but the pix of people are really great and the scenes good. Also, if you lose it you are not out $$$ just memories. :tongue

Lady Di

#3

I use an Olympus Stylus 35mm point and shoot. the camera is weather resistant, light and bomb proof. It takes some very good pictures. If you want to take really good photos you can’t beat a fullsize 35mm camera but the weight is a concern to me. IMO film is still superior to digital if you use a quality camera. That being said I am thinking of buying the digital version of my stylus. Digital pictures and weather resistant. Note that both cameras are WEATHER RESISTANT and not WATER PROOF. I believe that this means that moisture does not effect it but if you drop it into water you may have problems. I dropped mine in a stream once and immediately pulled it out and dried it off with no ill effects but I wouldn’t recommend doing it.

Big B

#4

There’s just something magical about real film. Even though, as my dad (VP of the American Photographer Association) tells me that the HIGH-END digital cameras are now exceeding film (like the 17 and 22 mega-pixel computers), he still sighs and looks away like he’s remembering an old girlfriend that he’s still not over when I can get him talking about film. There is a real reason for that.

The sterileness of digital is like a cyber-date. It removes you from the sexual process, which takes place in some dark silicon alley far away beyond the reaches of your grasp. All you get out of it is a baby composed of pixels, a pragmatic and efficient product simulating perfection.

When I hold my slides, which far outmatch any consumer-level digital camera in image quality and reproduction value, I know that it is a real product of light and imulsion. The light goes through the camera, hits the film, and then there it is in my hand.

But the advertisers won’t let me play with my children in peace. They want me to focus on how expensive and time-consuming they are. They tout the ease and cost-effectiveness of the process, but they fail to mention the price of computers needed to process the image, the software needed to run the computers, the printing costs and the usually below-quality or over-photoshopped results -not to mention the hours and hours needed to learn the latest software, to toil with a mouse and keyboard, to recover lost files, to resize, rotate, color-balance, soften, sharpen, crop, and splice a moment of reality.

It’s not that I hate digital or technology (beware he who insults the tech gods), but I recognize it for what it is -a simulation of a photograph (film). So far, in my price/time range, it ain’t even close to the real thing. But to each his own.

Now, to answer your question, for a special hike I want special pictures. So I take a little extra weight in that category. I carry a Nikon F3 -a very durable, versitile, and heavy professional-grade camera.

But smaller cameras, like the Nikon FM2 are excellent and are lighter.

On the smaller point-n-shoot side, my partner Adder took a lot of great photos with a Canon Elf film camera. I’ve used several point-n-shoots, but do not recommend the ones I used because they fail easily.

Tha Wookie

#5

i whole heartily agree with tha wookie about film. ohh the beckoning call of convienence and the possibility of having every picture be perfect(with HOURS of work on the computer usually per pic)the digital camera almost makes me want one. well actually not even close.

   unless you are willing to take a 3,000-4,000 dollar digital SLR camera on the trail with you, you will NEVER achive the quality of pictures with a regular digital camera that you can with a nice 35 mm camera. and slide film is even better than just regular print film. i process all my own film and prints so it is extremely cost effective by doing film.  i use 100 foot bulk rolls of film and roll my own rolls off of that.    

   if you are really into having some good quality pictures just let yourself carry an extra pound or two and carrry a nice 35 mm camera.  if you just want snapshot type pictures to document your journey and are not totally concerned about high quality, then i suggest using either an APS or film  point and shoot camera.    

   you all are probably going think i am insane, but this is what i carry when hiking.  2 pentax me super camera bodies(one for black & white and one for color), a 28mm wide angle lens,a 50mm lens, a super light tripod(weighs like 9-10 ounces!) five filters(2 uv,red,yellow,star) shutter release cable, 1 roll of each film for every two days out, and for my snapshot pictures i carry cannon elf sport point and shoot.  it is actually waterproof! it only weighs 8 ounces and has the panoramic picture setting on it.    that sounds like an awful lot, but when i hike i want GOOD pictures and it all weighs like 4-5 pounds at most.   

  digital might be tempting, but no matter what it can NEVER replace film, like tha wookie said, there is just something about film that you cant put into words, it is wonderfull.   

have a great hike!! and a great day!

orion

orion

#6

I didn’t use a digital camera on my hike. I had one that could change from normal to panoramic, and I LOVED this for the good scenic vistas and big trees and such. I’ll have to find the name of it at home. I can’t remember!

Xena

#7

I’ve been doing some serious soul searching on this subject. I’ve got a Leica M6 that weighs a pound with its 35mm lens, and I KNOW, just KNOW, that I’ll wish I’d brought it if I leave it at home. I’ll probably carry it for certain sections of the trail, the beginning and the end, but not all the way. It’s a tough call.

There’s the babysitting factor of carrying and safeguarding this kind of equipment, keeping it dry and safe and etc. Also, film is costing about 13 bucks a roll to develop and have put on a disc. There is nothing like working with a lens, the shutter speed and the aperture, and the LIGHT. It’s a dying art, this actually doing photography as attempted art.

I have one foot in the past and one foot in the future on this subject, I guess. I came up old school, doing my own black and white printing. I had a friend ask me if I was going to shoot black and white film on the Trail! (Oh, brother.)

Tha Wookie is right. Slides are like little jewels of scenery, slices of time, preserved in living color. But it’s been literally years since I shot slide film. The trouble is, if you’ve never shot lots of film with a good camera, you never know what you’re missing when you use a fair to middling digital camera–you just tend to take what you get. I’m no film snob, but I’ve seen the magic that can happen with film. Digital just isn’t quite there yet, at least in my price range.

Nathan Farb and Ansel Adams and Galen Rowell did it old school on film. Maybe simple old school is better, despite the weight? Hmmmmm.

Tyger

#8

A camera is like any other tool.You have to use it within a set a of parameters and recongnize the strength and weaknesses of the medium. It is the artist, and how the artist uses the tool, that ulimately determines the results. The tool is just a means to the end.

If given the best paintbrush in the world I woud still not paint like Picasso. If an average person is given a $4000 camera (be it digital or SLR), the results would probably still be fuzzy and sub-par.

So, don’t get wrapped up in the medium itself. Learn to work with whatever medium you use to produce good and magical results.

Mags

#9

Hey Mags.
Given the best paintbrush in the world, you COULD paint like Picasso. IF you were able. If you KNEW how. If your heart could feel and express what his heart felt and expressed.

Some artists appreciate the best tools because they are not limited by their quality. The quality of the equipment they use to produce, say, a photograph, meets or exceeds their standards of expression–their desired effect can be achieved and they can express themselves clearly. Some artists create art using disposable tools. Cameras are the same way. (Funny, you don’t ever hear writers sitting around discussing the kind of keyboards they type on…) A Zeiss or Leitz lens makes a huge and visible difference against nearly any other, given the same conditions and skill level of the photographer.

If someone is happy with the results a disposable camera gives them, that’s all that matters. I suppose it’s a matter of using what you feel gives you the best results within your budget, whether digital or film.

My dilemma is that I KNOW the quality I can achieve using film with a given camera; it’s not an x-factor. My camera just weighs a pound, versus a 6.5 oz digital. I will still shoot film on the AT, but will probably mix it up with digital for certain stretches. My perfect solution would be to carry both cameras. That isn’t gonna happen…
:lol

Tyger

#10

Which tool is better…a hammer or a screwdriver?

Depends what you are doing.

In the same way…depending what you are doing a digitial or an SLR may be better. To quote you:

“Some artists create art using disposable tools. Cameras are the same way.”

Exactly. I forget the gentlemans’s name, but a NYC based photographer is using award winning photos using disposable cameras. A type of art that is NOT able to be done as “well” with a $4000 camera. To take my Picasso analogy further, I still could not paint like Picasso. Even if I had his technical skill ($4000 camera), I would not have his creative skill. Picasso interpted the world around him based on his insights and skill. My insights, even if they were equal would not be the same.

Given two photographers with the same camera and the same skill set, the results will not be the same. Why? Each artist will interpet the scene differently.

To end this message, I’ll quote you again

“If someone is happy with the results a disposable camera gives them, that’s all that matters. I suppose it’s a matter of using what you feel gives you the best results within your budget, whether digital or film.”

Exactly. It is just the tool. The eye is by far the most important part of the art. Work with the tool…don’t let the tool work you.

Mags

#11

NUNYET:
I have been using a Olympus XA for 25 years.It weighs a little over 7 oz.It fits in the Belt pouch on my ULA P2 pack very nicely.It is 4"x2.5".It has a wide aperture lens[35 mm,f 2.8]semi automatic,aperture prefered shutter system.85cm to infinity range finder.They were made between 1979 to 1985.If you have a camera store near you that takes in used equipment you should be able to get one for a song.
I dropped mine on the rocks twice and the only damage was the sliding front cover came off,I poped it back on and the camera is working as good as the day I bought it.I have other 35 MM Cameras,but still love my Backpacking Olympus.

old&in the way

#12

I took a canon elph. It is light weight, cost about $60, it uses the advantix film, but also switched from small, to medium size, to panoramic pictures. It did take great pictures.

dreamcatcher

#13

what’s a “star” filter?

Do you scan your slides? I used a scanning service for my processing/scans, but they recently lost my business, and I’m looking for alternatives. They removed a great feature on their web that allowed the downloading of the scans they do during developing. Now the only way is to pay extra for a CD. Their rep told me, “c’mon, do you REALLY see yourself shooting film in 5 years?”

“ummm… yeah!”

Tha Wookie

#14

My personal fave is the Canon Rebel X…very light plastic body with a 35-80mm light zoom in 35mm format. This camera has been with me for many years and many miles. Tough as nails and easy on batteries. I’ve also used a Canon EOS 7 Lite that uses the same lenses as the Rebel and has the advantage of three picture formats (including panoramic) and APS format. This will, sadly, eventually replace my trusty Rebel mainly due to the flexible formats available. Also has a built in flash…just in case you want to shoot a shelter shot after a 20 mile day! :slight_smile:

leeki

#15

bring a sketchpad, practice drawing

swift

#16

on the star filter, i used my own name for that filter. the actuall name of that type of filter is called a “cross screen filter” it takes a point of light like the sun or lights at night and gives them anywhere to 4-8 points coming off of them so that they look like a star. Hence my own term “star filter”. i am sure that you have probable seen that effect on some type of picture before.

 and on the slides;  well its not like i am a cave man or totally anti technology, but i dont even have a computer.  so i havent had any experience in the slide scanning phenominon. (if your wondering how i am keeping up on this site and typing this without a computer,  i use a computer at work when i am on my break, or the library.)

sorry i couldnt help more with the slides.

Here's a grand idea!!(ready for sarcasm) you could always get a slide projector and veiw the slides on a white sheet, THEN take a DIGITAL camera and take a picture of that, AND THEN upload that into your computer!! :D    

 sorry, i couldnt help myself on that last one. good for a laugh considering the thread that we are on!

happy trails a.
ciao
orion

orion

#17

Orion: What tripod do you use that is that light? Is it sturdy enough for a medium format setup?

Wookie: I am in the market for an F3 non-HP, let me know if your dad runs across any in good shape. All the ones I have looked at smell like cigarette smoke, ick. :smokin

Prospector

#18

Actually,

Orion said,
“Here’s a grand idea!!(ready for sarcasm) you could always get a slide projector and veiw the slides on a white sheet, THEN take a DIGITAL camera and take a picture of that, AND THEN upload that into your computer!!”

That’s actually how I’m doing some of my photo editing for my book on the West Coast Trail (www.thawookie.com). Eventually everything in my book (all slide film and watercolor paintings) will be scanned for book design but I’m not sure about the printing process. I bet that’s digital also.

That’s one of the great things I like about shooting film, in that I can have both real photographs and super high-quality digital images (the images large enough for 24x36 prints can get pricey for pro-scanning, but impossible to do from consumer level digital cams now). Yet still I can get those images over 300 mb and bigger from a slide to make monster prints.

I will be selling such prints of the WCT in early summer, btw.

Tha Wookie

#19

prospector,

i stumbled upon this tripod that i have completely by accident. i found it in a lost and found that was at a place i worked. it looks like it is meant to be a very cheepo type of tripod that only cost a couple dollars. it is like half plastic and half aluminum. there is no brand name on it and it is black and neon green. the extendable range isnt bad considering it looks like it came from a toy store. i am 6’1" and when i have the tripod fully extended i only have to crouch down slightly to see through the camera.

    i havent seen another one exaclty like it since, but i imagine if you keep your eyes open at your local thrift stores(goodwill,salvation army..ect)that you can find something similar.      
this tripod withstands my 35mm cameras ok even with some wind kicking around, but i really dont think it would be strong enough or stable enough for a medium format camera.

hope this helps some.
have a great day!
happy photagraphy days!

orion

orion

#20

I have both digital and film. I like my nikon onetouch film and coolpix 2500 digital equally for point and shoot type pictures. When I want to go take really good pictures, I take the Pentax k-1000. But, it ain’t the camera. It’s the shootist.

TDale