[jonrick46]

I am very partial to film. Anything that has such minimal resolution makes me long for the incredible potential of film. A 35mm negative has the digital equivalent of 175 mega pixels, which is way over the resolution of the high end DSLR. To me it is like trying to do great photography with a Brownie camera when you have a Nikon FM3a.

I will continue to deep freeze film for my Hasselblad 500CM and run them through a scanner after processing for a top resolution of 6400 x 9600 dpi or 500 mega pixels.

[Tainan]

"comparisons" like this have been going on for 50+ yrs.
And Yes, I do remember seeing a "Brownie vs. Nikon" article in Petersons Photog. (or maybe Pop. Photography) many years back.

Quaint sells and gets lookers - but AD's want quality.
At least they used to want quality. Now I think it's immediacy above all.

[jumpingcholla34]

I’m one of the few dinosaurs who still has a home darkroom. But, finding film and darkroom supplies is becoming a challenge.

[1Old Pro]

Agreed, when you need quality the phone camera doesn’t do it. Also, you lose all the manual controls of a better camera.

Bottom line, you might better use a compact dslr with manual features, compact, light and attaches to your belt.

The world sure has changed, digital is great, but not a replacement for the resolution you cited.

Everything has it’s place. COnvenience has it’s drawbacks, like in music the mp3 simply is not the best audio, but it is convenient.