Shutterbug Strasse

APS? Awful Photographic System?

207.207.244.64

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display Email ] [ Shutterbug Strasse ] [ FAQ ]

(i)

In Reply to: Aps vs 35mm point and shoot posted by chaslieb on May 26, 2001 at 12:55:52:

APS uses smaller neg's. This is ok if ALL you ever want is snapshots.
HOWEVER. All you get is the "consumer" emulsions, in high prices, and with lower availability.
35mm COULD have been adapted to do all that APS does, and still have a better neg size, and keep the price down.
You may detect I'm unimpressed.
It IS ok for snapshooting. I prefer a 35mm for that, though, and my 6x7 for real photography :)
JJ

Follow Ups:

Not even! marantzman 20:14:53 07/03/01 (2)
I like my APS camera, a very humble Kodak I bought on a whim 2 years ago.
Yes, it IS a "snapshot" format (I prefer the term "happy snaps"). But it's well designed for that use.
How many 11x14 or 20x30 prints do you have done a year? My last one was made almost 10 years ago. Most "happy snaps" are 4x6, 5x7, or 8x10 at best. APS does this very well! I love the date and time on the back and the format choices as well.
APS is cool, fun, reliable, and totally reliable. I think of myself as rather advaced in photography, but when I take happy snaps I love the APS system.
Have fun and snap away!
Dan
- Like I said - jj 16:32:36 07/06/01 (1)
  It's ok for snapshots and 5x7's.
  On the other hand, film is cheaper for 35mm's, they don't cost any more than APS, the variety of emulsions is much wider, and you can get a whole variety of accessories, etc, that don't exist under APS.
  Yes, they are a bit larger, the film is larger. My kids have a couple of 3:1 zoom P&S 35mm cameras that fit in my hand, though, and at least one of them has quite a decent optical system.
  There was no reason to decrease the neg size when they did this. I have no idea why the industry is constantly trying to feed us stuff like APS, 110, 620 (as opposed to 120/220), 127, disc film, etc, when the 35mm standard gets all the use anyhow.
  JJ
  - Re: Like I said - Steve L. 22:58:38 09/14/01 (0)
    Hi jj,
    I am glad you appreciate APS, but you have a few errors in your APS comments. Hopefully I can help clarify a few points:
    1. APS film (at least the good stuff from Kodak, Fuji and Konica) is based on a newer technology than most 35 mm emulsions, and is capable of very high quality results. Also, the film base of APS films is a much thinner, more optically pure material than can be used in a 35 mm camera. This is why 35mm films can't be coated on the same base material.
    2. The smaller size of the negative does allow for a more noticable grain structure on larger prints than 35mm, but the higher resolution film provides for very sharp enlargements nonetheless. I have several 12 x 18 inch enlargements shot on a Canon Elph (very early model) that are crystal clear. One key is that most APS cameras are very small and light, and therefore hard to stabilize for really sharp images. My vacation photos of Yosemite were mostly shot on the Elph mounted to a Tiltall tripod (one of the old good ones). Yes it looked very strange having such a small camera on such a large tripod.
    3. Since APS was designed for printing in modern photofinishing labs, not home darkrooms, there are many benefits to APS in conjunction with modern photofinishing printers. The cameras (those designated "IX") write data about the exposure onto magnetic strips on the film. The printers automatically read this information (called PQI DATA, or "Print Quality Improvement") and can let the printer automatically compensate for lighting, flash, and a variety of other factors. Look on the back of your prints and you should see a long data string of information the printer read.
    Yes I am a little partial to APS, I work for a company that was the first to have full scale APS processors and printers ready for the market, and I was in on the testing long before it hit the market. I was a presenter for our company at the Society of Photo Finishing Engineers meetings at our industry's big convention for the launch of APS.
    APS was not intended as a replacment for 35mm (which I still shoot quite a bit too). It is simply another choice in an imaging world that hopefully will see fit to use both analog (film) and digital in a variety of formats, whichever best suits the needs of the photographer.
    BTW, nice to see your photo in the latest Sterophile. If I'm ever in your neck of the woods, I might try to invite myself for a listen to your surround system. Though I am a real 2-channel music fan, I can be very open minded about hearing new things.
    Have fun, tke pictures,
    Steve L.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

You can not post to an archived thread.