But as already mentioned, in terms of color and tonal graduation, film is unmatched.
I love it how you film guys keep re-writing photographic history and moving the standards target every time digital improves. This only proves how lousy film was to begin with.
I've worked commercially with every format invented, and back before dSLRs became common 35mm was mocked as an amatuer format and most pros wouldn't touch it. Even for my own shooting I wouldn't mess with anything smaller than 6x7. So, lets move forward a decade and 35mm is better? I don't think so. The only working pros I know working with film are shooting 4x5 or bigger. Nobody shoots 35mm except crack-head photo 101 students who think grainy / muddy 35mm prints make them an artist.
One thing I give classic film SLRs credit for is ergonomics. My old Nikon F3 I used in my press days spanks my Canon 60D in every form, especially the viewfinder. Problem is, 35mm film still sucks and always will except for speed and small print. To get real quality I need my RB67 or 4x5 view camera, and those are no match for modern dSLRs in terms of speed and ease of use.
The quality issue has been beat to death and put to rest. The only people who think 35mm film delivers a better image than dSLRs don't know how to use a digital camera and need the photo crew at Walmart to make color adjustments for them. If 35mm film is so much better than digital, please grow some stones and show me these images or please shut up.
Also, film *does not* out resolve digital. Color film requires bleaching, and then the additional process of color couplers requiring industrial dye to be added. This produces a random, noisy, unpredictable image that typically looks better if you print it with the enlarger slightly out of focus. If you've ever used a drum scanner on film you learn how much the medium sucks and why nobody wants to scan creater than 2000dpi. While bayer sensors do have inherent problems, they are a billion times more linear than the dye coupled nonsense required to create an image on film. Film can't even create the same image twice - digital can.
Yeah I dont think theres a digital sensor that captures quite as much detail as a 70mm camera and thats what most of Hollywood still uses, I think.
Wrong. Most of hollywood, except for IMAX, is using digital. Coupled with DLP projectors the quality improvement is astounding. Back in the day I could watch a feature length film and not only count the number of emulsion changes with the interpositive I could tell you how much the film gate was out of alignment. Now with digital > digital I see nothing but detail.
