Film beats digital

[CSBC]

AP News

[Steve]

Sounds like a slow news day at AP towers

[TimF]

Good chap (though he's talking carp about the Arctic ice disappearing!).

[Atavar]

In hot countries quartz watches are rubbish, the heat makes them run fast and mechanical is the movement of choice. Would extreme cold make the metal of the cameras movements contract changing the dynamics of the moving parts and not take the image at the selected shutter speed? Of course a battery and chip camera would have exactly the same issues... why have two things that can go wrong when you will only have to worry about one?

EDIT - now i come to think of it the watch thing may be a myth.

[Malcolm_Stewart]

I wish him the best of luck.

Personally, I don't like getting cold, and I'm amazed at what some people endure.

From years ago, I remember people being advised to have their mechanical cameras winterised, and being warned about the films themselves cracking, so he's got quite a lot to contend with.

[AndyTake2]

Think he needs to talk to Andy Rouse et al.
Digital cameras can be used.
If there is a problem, stick them in a separate housing.

Circuits slowing down? err- no, sorry, wrong end of stick.
Batteries may be troublesome, but circuits are in fact liable to speed up due to decreased electrical resistance. either way a film camera and digital shouldn't really be compared, they're differnet beasts entirely.

[chris000]

either way a film camera and digital shouldn't really be compared, they're differnet beasts entirely.

Errr ... I think that is precisely why he did compare them. and he's made his choice. I don't know whether he is right, but (extract from his profile)...

"One of the world’s leading expedition photographers, Martin Hartley has documented 19 unique polar assignments and is one of the only professional photographers to have crossed the Arctic Ocean on foot and with dogs"

... I rather suspect that he speaks from personal experience.

[Staropramen]

In hot countries quartz watches are rubbish, the heat makes them run fast . . . .

EDIT - now i come to think of it the watch thing may be a myth.

I can assure you, that ain't no myth . . . it is utter twaddle (based on a modest qualification in electronics and many years collecting, servicing and repairing mechanical watches).

However, The Arctic Leica 'razzle-dazzle' is not really news, it's more a bit of free publicity bordering on hype (IMO).

[Atavar]

I can assure you, that ain't no myth . . . it is utter twaddle (based on a modest qualification in electronics and many years collecting, servicing and repairing mechanical watches).

Thanks for the clarification, more hype fed to me while buying an oris then. The salesmans jargon was that the quartz crystal vibrated faster throwing the timing form +5/-5 to up to +60/-60 where as a mechanical would continue its usual loss or gain. Not that thats why i liked the brand, though. Wish i'd been able to get a chronomiter.

[daft_biker]

... I rather suspect that he speaks from personal experience.

Is he sponsored by Kodak?

Best of luck to him anyway.

[beejaybee]

Can only add that if I was going somewhere with very low temperatures & no access to networks or mains power for recharging batteries, I'd be using a mechanical film camera too. Maybe not a Leica though.

[Graham_RM13]

Makes me wonder how anything works in space? Isn't it a wee bit chilly out there

[LargeFormat]

From years ago, I remember people being advised to have their mechanical cameras winterised, and being warned about the films themselves cracking, so he's got quite a lot to contend with.

This is correct. Archival film kept in cold storage has to be aclimatised before it can be used.

Makes me wonder how anything works in space? Isn't it a wee bit chilly out there

I think there may be a problem with batteries. In space they took mechanical Hasselblads.

Good chap (though he's talking carp about the Arctic ice disappearing!).

At -40oC it gets a bit hard to think about global warming.

[Cuthbert]

I think there may be a problem with batteries. In space they took mechanical Hasselblads.

There's a bit here about the modified Hasselblads used on the Apollo missions - apparently they were fitted with motor drives. Exposure and focusing were manual, but limited to a few basic settings.

John Glenn took a modified Minolta Hi-Matic on the first orbital flight in 1962.

[beejaybee]

Makes me wonder how anything works in space? Isn't it a wee bit chilly out there

There are large extremes of temperature but controlling the temperature of an object is actually quite easy. Wrap in a lot of mylar film to reduce radiative losses (or incoming solar radiation) & most electronics will provide plenty of heat to keep the temperature well up. Then some sort of active cooling - Peltier or evaporative - with thermostatic control.

In the vicinity of the Earth, if you paint an object "NASA white", and it's reasonably conductive, its temperature will stabilize out around "room temperature" without much extra fuss. It's only heat sources that need active cooling, or spacecraft operating in shadows for prolonged periods of time (or shot to the outer solar system) that need to worry about being kept warm.

In arctic / antarctic / high mountain regions, you have to worry about cooling by conduction & convection to the air as well as by radiation. It's a completely different problem.

My experience is that ordinary film works reasonably well in temps down to -30C if it's wound slowly & evenly. Rapid winding is likely to cause static discharges which register on the film, ruining it. Breakages of film are known but not common. However there's something to be said for roll film - where the paper backing eliminates the risk of breakage - if (big if) you can manage the weight & clumsiness of handling medium format cameras.

The 'blads used by NASA in the 60s & 70s were heavily modified for ease of handling with thick, clumsy EVA gloves. Similar modifications would no doubt be useful to polar explorers or mountaineers.

[Damien_Demolder]

Sounds like a slow news day at AP towers

Are you kidding?

[Still_Togging_Along]

If you are going to a sub or Tropical climate, it certainly is the case that the glues used on straps, are seriously prone to getting kn**kerd within 6 months. Sometimes even the stitching can be affected too.

[Learning]

Can only add that if I was going somewhere with very low temperatures & no access to networks or mains power for recharging batteries, I'd be using a mechanical film camera too. Maybe not a Leica though.

Quite. I would use my FM2n. I assume that Nikon servicing with dry lubricants is still available. I would also use AF lenses because the helicoids are not stuffed with thick lens grease. Nikon AF lenses focus manually quite nicely, if a bit loosely maybe.

[Staropramen]

Thanks for the clarification, more hype fed to me while buying an oris then.

This is a bit O/T, but here goes ...

Salesmen's hype often focuses on non-issues, or exploits the customer's sensitivities or common misconceptions - that's marketing! But it's also often matched by the over-enthusiastic (and frequently blinkered) opinions of devoted users and owners: Rolex, Omega, Leica, Canon, Nikon proselytes come to mind. I'm sure Leica Cameras will appreciate the publicity afforded by an Arctic environmental survey expedition - maybe they are closet sponsors ....

Oris watches have always been a good brand: well made, reliable, progressive but not necessarily truly innovative technically, but often with an attractive, slightly quirky, style. As with most of the upper echelon of Swiss mechanical watches, they tended to be overpriced, but not horribly so: I believe you more-or-less got what you paid for.

Really good quality mechanical watches (particularly chronometers) need to have numerous 'adjustments' to compensate for operating/environmental variables like temperature, movement, magnetism, mainspring reserve power, and so forth, to improve timekeeping while the watch is being worn (left wrist only for most) and while running but lying unused (invariably button down rather than any other way up) . . . Then there's a need for precision regulation, waterproofing and protection from (even slight) mechanical shock. All these factors add to the cost, which is/was justified by a goodly dollop of sales hyperbole, rather than factual explanation. And, incidentally, a replacement movement for a "half-decent" (i.e better brand) Swiss mechanical watch can nowadays cost hundreds of pounds (and the rest!).

Quartz watches are much more accurate, reliable, durable, less complex, cheaper to buy and run, feature-laden, and do not need much maintenance. However, they may stop working for no apparent reason after even a short life, and are virtually unrepairable at the "discrete component level". However, replacement movements, even in some £1000 watches, can cost as little as £4 . . . not that a repairer would ever charge so "much" .... ;-)

As a complete digression, my every day 1942 Unitas ATP (Army Time Piece) wristwatch - like my near-contemporary Leica IIIb - is packed with character and it still 'keeps' 4 seconds per week as long as I keep wearing it. Neither are as accurate or dependable as modern watches/cameras - and neither would fare as well in extreme environments: however I am not going to take either to the Arctic in order to test the assertion that mechanical/analogue is better than electronic/digital ...... mainly because I haven't been invited!

[daft_biker]

....I am not going to take either to the Arctic in order to test the assertion that mechanical/analogue is better than electronic/digital ...... mainly because I haven't been invited!

I'd love to see that test in AP