I recall being a guest speaker at one of the photo colleges in California once and being asked, "what was your exposure on that shot?" I was actually a bit dumbfounded. All I could say was "the right one?" These days I shoot mostly with a Canon 1ds Mark II. (17 megapixel) When I got it, it was the best 35mm dslr made. Canon now has a bigger one but I will likely wait until something in the 30 megapixel range comes out. As it is, I think the 1ds MarkII exceeds the quality of any 35mm film camera primarily because there is no grain. Very large images of exceptional quality can be attained. AND I don't have the speedbump of a drumscan in the process. During my transition from film to digital a few years back I shot a job in San Francisco for Aston Martin on 35mm film. I processed the film and had small FPO scans made. FPO means For Position Only and are intended to be used for positioning in the layout only. After choices are finalized, drum scans would be made of the selected films. Apparently, Aston Martin was already accustomed to high quality digital cameras being used in the first place and complained that the quality of the files weren't up to their standards. Even though I tried to explain to them that I would have extremely high quality scans made of the the images they selected, it became apparent that this was already an expensive and antiquated process that no one had time for. Indeed, there are art directors these days that have never ever ordered a drum scan. I shot a job in Toronto three or four years ago for Bud Light that was to be used for POP (Point of Purchase) posters and collateral. I decided to take a 4x5 camera but in the end rented a digital back for the Hasselblad that I also brought. No small part of that decision was the fact that the assistants I hired had never ever worked for anyone that shot film. The moral of all this is. Unless you have some really really really remarkable look or technique that absolutely requires that you shoot film, you had better be shooting Digital. The entire process is geared to and streamlined for digital files. AND! You had better be delivering digital files of a very high quality. In other words, if you intend to make a living with photography in the markets that I work in (Advertising and Commercial with a smattering of Corporate) FILM IS DEAD. FUGGETABOUTIT! END OF DISCUSSION. PERIOD. STFU. Now, to address another matter, there is always someone on the set that has better gear than you do. That is because they listened to their parents and went for a career in a field that allows them to afford good camera equipment. Most photographers can't afford to always have the latest and greatest. Maybe in the beginning when you have no kids, no mortgage and no bills but as soon as you grow up, you will be shooting with whatever was the best you could afford when you were a kid. It doesn't matter. If you really really need something, you will eventually get it. (not before losing Aston Martin as a client though.) It should be mentioned that marrying well is an effective option... One last thing. I could have shot probably 90% of everything I ever shot in my career with a 35mm, 85mm and a 180mm lens on a 35mm camera or its equivalent in your chosen format. I would however choose a 24mm lens over the 35mm lens (my all time favorite) because you can crop to 35mm with it. Now we are at 93%. R
