johnincrete wrote:I would like to know if Phil uses a camera with a film or a digital.
I've been using digital exclusively for 10-12 years, currently a Canon 5D MkIII. For most people digital has matched film in terms of quality for several years and it's still improving very rapidly.
Bonuses are, once you've bought the kit, the only cost is recharging the battery; you know immediately if you have an acceptable result rather than wait a week to get film back from a photo lab (or Boots); pictures can be viewed in any size up to a maximum of the monitor screen; no need to get extra prints to mail to family/friends - it's now possible to e-mail shots direct from the camera via smart phone. Very few amateurs print photos now and, in any case, cheap home printers will churn out OK prints up to A4 size; digital performance in low-light is now vastly better than film: I haven't used flash for at least two years for day to day photography, only off-camera flash for special effects on particular projects. My two flash units are virtually redundant (and my camera doesn't even have built-in flash).
Quality and detail are now exceptional. Canon has two cameras with over 50 megapixels - 53million light sensors - on a chip measuring approx. 36mm x 24mm. The level of detail is stunning. Sony have a compact camera
with 40+ megapx. Those are for professionals and dedicated amateurs with a bit of spare cash. The Sony, for example costs about £2,500 ................. body only without a lens. (Christmas is only 6 months away if anyone's feeling generous).