Does buying a film camera make sense anymore?

Lets look at this logically. The $300 film camera has interchangeable lenses and if you choose right you can get one who's lenses will fit on a DSLR later. You get the opportunity to learn how to expose, develop and print your own images. The so-called decent digital camera has no facility for changing lenses or learning the techniques used by both professional and amateur photographers for decades. You are still back to the point and shoot mentality (Instamatic) ... with not much creative latitude built into the camera. If you are a point and shooter, then it does make a whole lot fo sense to go that way. If you are an artist or have even the slightest thought of going further with true photography, the film SLR is a good choice.

personal preference

For the average joe shmoes like U and I,and if U happen to own a decent computer,yeah digital is the way to go.

Disagree. I'll spend $20.00 on a 70's rangefinder and do better than any POS ( oh I meant P&S) digital camera....

For the amateur photographer, the digital camera is just fine. But they still can't match the level of detail that a traditional film camera can capture, and most digital cameras aren't as flexible in terms of filters, macro lenses, etc.

This depends on whom you ask. I do believe that it makes sense for those who still use it. I wouldn't go so far as to imply that digital has taken over, there are still photographers who use film to achieve certain effects. For example, the use of IR film is something not easily reproduced digitally and there are many photographers who prefer higher speed B&W film over digital for the effect, especially at night. Digital makes sense for me, as I mostly use digital and still a bit novice in some respects as I've not yet learned many techniques used with film. Good thing I still have my 35mm canon rebel Ti, because there's always something to learn in photography that carries over to digital in some way. I say they both go hand in hand in terms of photography as an artform. My opinion...

For the beginner class, we had to have access to a film since we also printed our own pictures. Tell you the truth, I loved it and am glad that I have the film camera. While digital is great, the film has a more personal feeling to me. Besides, I bought lenses that are compatible with both. I have more discipline from the using film camera now. I take lighting into more consideration. I keep my lenses cleaner, especially after having to spot 5 pictures. But $ wise, yes, digital would probably be cheaper in the long run.

In generaly I agree with you - a digital camera has all the amenities of a traditional manual film camera. However, I think a film camera introduces a person to more fundamentals of photography. You really have to understand shutter speed, aperture, exposure time, etc. with a manual camera b/c there are no "smart" functions or auto-adjust features. It also allows a lot of flexability (which I know digital cameras have now too - but not quite the same). In addition, a film camera also teaches you how to develop the photos, and how to "burn and dodge" and create better photos post-shooting. With a film camera, you are more likely to print out the shots you shoot as well - with my digital camera I just keep them on my computer mostly. A digital camera is a great deal, great features, and overall a better buy - but I cant say there arent advantages of getting a film camera. Hope this helps.

i dont know very much about cameras but i love my digital cam and its way easier thats for sure...plus i can erase the crap ones without paying ....