Old technology vs. New

An older image from the badlands, shot on 4X5, wooden Zone VI camera (the original imported one), 210 Symar S lens.

The image below is from 2003 and is a six image stitch from a Canon 10D.

I don't think that one technology is better than the other - with stitching, it takes almost as long to make the series of images with the digital camera as it does with the 4X5. Metering is theoretically simpler with the digital camera but by the time you bring up the histogram and check for flashing highlights and adjust the exposure for what you see and erase the image that wasn't right, well spot metering looks pretty simple.

Focussing is definitely easier with the digital camera but lining up the ends of the image is harder without an actual image frame to work with. TIlt focus with the 4X5 makes up for less depth of field on average so no big diff. there. Scanning is a pain but so was stitching in the old days (easier with PTGui now).

Spotting dust after scanning for flatbed is a real pain, drum is great but at $100 an image for a good size file, it doesn't take too many images to pay for digital equipment - overall I miss the routine of a view camera but I like the bright viewfinder, easy focussing, greater depth of field, clean images and I really don't miss a flapping dark cloth. Latterly I was using the focussing hood from BTZS which was great and with it's elastic collar, stayed permanently on the back of my Linhof Color Kardan - nice camera.

DIgital is certainly faster when in a rush, forget the multiple image stitch and rely on the built in meter and autofocus and bam, you have your image - but that's cheating. With 4X5 you have a permanant negative that is hard to destroy and with modest care will almost certainly outlast the photographer. Still, when I die, my digital files will still be around and hopefully my family could make a print from my already post processed image files - all burning and dodging done.