Scanned Film Velvia 50 vs M8

[woodda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lots of people still say scanned film is better than digital. Should I stay wiith film Velvia 50 or go to the throwaway M8:). Any comments much appreciated.

 

By the way this is a serious question

[cme4brain]

Lots of people still say scanned film is better than digital. Should I stay wiith film Velvia 50 or go to the throwaway M8:). Any comments much appreciated.

 

By the way this is a serious question

 

Just you wait for all the comments! I know how great film and its latitude is wide, plus there is no crop factor. However the convenience of digital and the incredible quality of the M8 would, I think, outweigh any advantage of film. If you are an amateur photographer with a low number of pictures taken per year and cost is a consideration, then film might be a go. The immediate feedback of seeing the picture you have just taken is worth its weight in leica glass! I have an M8 and have not even picked up my M6 since owning it. Nor used my film scanner- too much time and trouble!

[woodda]

Thanks for the reply.I look forward to tones of film/digital comments.

 

It is just I feel digital is disposable and need to be convinced the M8 will justify the difference from my MP and D70 throw away camera

[earleygallery]

Darrell, I did consider the M8 - selling all my other gear to fund it, but I realised its not the 'one camera' solution I thought it might be, so I'd still want my SLR and my MF gear.

 

Then I thought should I go for it anyway - I did a lot of thinking and decided not. If the money wasn't an issue maybe I would have bought one, but I don't usually need immediate results (I have an LC5 that's OK for when I do) and I personally still prefer the look of film, even scanned film.

 

I'm not shooting that much that scanning is an issue for me - OK it is a bit of a pain though, but I don't mind suffering for my art

 

Basically only you can decide if you need an M8, I don't know what sort of photography you're doing or if you do any commercial work where the speed of results is an issue.

[woodda]

Earl,

 

Many Thanks for your thoughts. Which SLR and scanner do you use I would be interested

 

Regards

[earleygallery]

Earl? I'm only a Sir!

 

R3 (mostly) and just an Epson 4870 - one day I'll progress to a dedicated scanner but this one has produced very good results, even up to A3. I know a Coolscan or whatever would be even better.

[woodda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Only a sir thanks sounds great

[Photoskeptic]

I recently shot some Velvia 100 and compared it to a similar shot with an LX-1 (not the same as an M8 I know, and I really can't remember why I didn't have my M8 with me at the time). The film shot had huge dynamic range and seemed more "alive" than the similar shot taken with the LX-1. I have to say that I'm not totally thrilled with the color from my M8. I don't seem to get similar colors to others on the forum and it may be due to my using ACR instead of C1. I am, however, thrilled with the color to bw conversions. Go figure.

[stunsworth]

John if the M8 doesn't look like Velvia I'd say that was a plus point for the M8 ;-)

 

Being serious although I've shot Velvia but came to dislike the unnaturalness of the colours. The M8 will have much better shadow detail than scanned Velvia IMHO.

[bsmith]

Remember when comparing film vs digital, that unless you have a $20,000 (minimum) drum scanner or a Imacon scanner your scan is useless except for small prints and temp layout use. Even the best Nikon scanner cannot scan a negative or slide %100 flat. Your film edges will ALWAYS be out of focus (soft) Even if you take the film out of the slide mount , the edgers will ALWAYS be soft. Why would you buy a M camera and expensive lenses , then scan on a cheap scanner ? It is absolutely impossible to get the quality of your "capture" with a Nikon Coolscan or any other under $10,000 scanner.

[innerimager]

In all respect, I really reject this kind of categorical polemic. Taken at it's face value, my response would be "thanks for setting me straight. I no longer appreciate the images I am getting with careful scanning with my 5000 coolscan. What appeared to be high quality B&W images worthy of gallery display, ALWAYS are unacceptable and a waste of my M7, Leica lenses, and my photographic skills". Please. best.....Peter

[earleygallery]

Well I'd be interested to see side by side comparisons, in print. That's the only way to judge who's right - although I would certainly expect more from a 20K scanner than one costing a few hundred. I'm guessing its a usual case of diminishing returns.

 

Having a negative/slide, I will still have a 'traditional' print made for ultimate quality.

[rwfreund]

This might be interesting,

same subject same lens

M(6 or 7) with velvia then scanned

M8

Cropped to same image FOV

Minimal digital adjustments (profile ok but lay off the sharpening)

Anybody up for it?

-bob

[Joe Mondello]

I think it is a "pay me now or pay me later" scenario.

 

The M8 is hardly a "throwaway" and should last quite a good long while. The only thing that could make it seem obsolete would be massive improvements in sensor technology squeezing more resolution at lower noise -- or a larger size -- out of that technology.

 

There is nothing whatsoever wrong with an analogue to digital workflow. It's certainly less costly upfront and yes mechanical Leicas last for ever -- but film won't. There may always be a niche market but it is shrinking fast and the low costs made possible by volume production and distribution will likely disappear in time as well.

 

In future film will likely become increasingly expensive and difficult to find while digital will continue to improve and cost less.

 

You pays yer money and you takes yer choice! If you are happy with your film workflow, especially if you are in love with it, keep shooting film!

 

I guess what all this means is that while I know the M8 will be obsoleted by something a few years down the road, I can get an awful lot done in those few years. Heck cars, computers, dishwashers, cell phones all have limited life spans. Now that I think of it, so do humans!

 

Don't not buy an M8 because you want a camera you can leave to your grandchildren.

[adan]

For Bob and Darrell:

 

Sorry that I can't right now show Leica M8 vs. Velvia. I patted my Nikon 5000ED on the head and put it in storage shortly after I shot and scanned the comparisons below - 5 months before the M8 came out.

 

I admit that a $900 Sony R1 is not the same as an M8. However it does raise an interesting dilemma: Either the M8 is better than the Sony, in which case it would better than either half of these samples...or the M8 is worse than the plastic zoom-lensed Sony (take your pick).

 

Technical disclosures -

 

Arches shot, R1 at "28mm" equivalent, both cameras @ f/5.6. Film scanned at 3000 ppi to create a 10Mp file.

 

Store yard shot, R1 at "75mm" equivalent, both cameras at f/6.8. Film scanned at 4000ppi (max. for the 5000ED), Sony RAW file uprezzed in ACR to match the file size of the scan (about 19 Mpixels/56 Mbytes each). Full-frame version for reference as a separate image.

 

Note that I shot stopped down specifically to use the Sony zoom at its best aperture, because I wasn't testing the lenses - I was testing silver(scanned) vs. silicon.

 

BTW - I ordered my M8 before it even officially WAS the "M8" - soley from seeing the Sony R1 results at 10Mpixels (and RAW).

 

For those who want to argue for the "greater latitude" of film - I invite you to compare shadow details and range in the shot with the red potted plants.

 

As to "throwaway" - yep, within 10 years or so the M8 may fry a part that is not longer made and become a paperweight. "Sic transit..." and all that. It'll get retired to the display case alongside my M4-2.

 

OTOH I'm running at a pace of 15,000 exposures per year. Let's see: since Velvia is the film of choice (see original post), that runs me about $16 per 36 shots, film and processing. 417 rolls = 15,000 exposures = $6672. So the M8 pays for itself along about July - and for the following 9 years puts $6500 of "disposable" income per year back into my bank account.

 

Well, maybe a collectible M3P would increase in value that much over a decade...ya think?

 

Finally - I DO have one last roll of RVP 50 in the freezer. When I get the time I will do a real head-to-head with the M8, following Bob's formula.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[hamey]

Just got my Velvia 100 slides back today, and the verdict, not very impressed.

Some shots taken under bright sun shows to much colour saturation. (unreal)

Shots taken on cloudy days are good.

I think Fuji designed this film to enhance Plastic lenses.

 

So from now on, it's Kodak E100G or GX simply superb with my Leica Lenses.

 

Cheers.

[gwelland]

Andy,

 

You KNOW that the M8 is just going to exagerate the improved quaity of digital captures vs scanned Velvia ... I was impressed that you managed to match the colour so well between the R1 (great camera & glass btw) and the Velvia 50/100F. I normally find scanned film is way off.

 

This type of comparison has been pretty much done to death and consensus continues to be that 10mp clean digital (which the M8 most DEFINITELY is) worst case matches but normally exceeds the subjective quality of 35mm scanned film. Even MF struggles by comparison with this level of resolution and image quality. However, this typically ends up being a religious debate vs an objective one so let's see what this thread turns up.

[stunsworth]

Just got my Velvia 100 slides back today, and the verdict, not very impressed.

Some shots taken under bright sun shows to much colour saturation. (unreal)

 

Hi Ken, I'm not being funny, but this is what I expect from Velvia and one of the reasons I fell out with the film.

[Photoskeptic]

Steve, I don't know how long ago you used Velvia but the new formula is much better. Frankly I believe the reason for color IS over saturation. When I shoot color I want COLOR. I guess that is why I prefer bw. I only use Velvia for sunrises and sunsets and there must be some clouds about or I bag it. We have very bright sun this morning so I'm heading out with the M8 and see what develops

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Photoskeptic]

Hmm. haven't got out the door yet. I remembered an old pic I still have on my computer. This is what people meant about the old formula Velvia.

M6TTL, 50 'cron (third series). f2 @ 1/30

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!