why do i need a dslr?
Don't get me wrong, film is good, I have a film SLR (that shares lenses with my DSLR). But buying and processing film is expensive and time consuming.
And if you want to scan/digitise the images from the film to use on a computer, the scanning is never completely accurate colour or detail-wise.
The other big advantage of digital is that when you take a photo, you can see if it looks how you wanted and if it doesn't you can take 20 more shots till you're satisfied without it costing more. And once you've got the shot, you can edit it straight away without having to wait for the film to a) be finished b) get processed and c) be scanned.
The last film I shot cost about £4 to buy and £11 to process (including scanning the negatives and putting onto CD). That's £15 for 36 shots.
Given that I've already taken about 325 shots this month, it would have already cost me £135 this month.
That said, it's good to use film, it gives you limitations which makes you creative:
1) you can't just snap away till you get a good shot, you have to think about your shot more before you hit the shutter button
2) you are stuck with one ISO (film sensitivity), you can't just up the ISO if it's a bit dark, so this means you have to think more about lighting.
I learnt on a manual film SLR years ago, but my photography has come on massively since going digital.
Both film and digital have their place and are both good for learning different things.
If you don't have the money for a DSLR right now, then sure go ahead and learn what you can from using film.
Or if you can't afford a new DSLR, how about a secondhand one:
Canon 350D.
I'm trying to advocate both film and digital, I like both but for different reasons.
