Photography is my bread and butter, so I'll chime in here....
I'm glad I learnt and shot with film. It makes you understand the full process. Expose, develop, print. You really learn how exposure effects shadows and development affects highlights so that the print will contain the full range of tones.
Many of the techniques still apply to digital. I'm really glad I learnt on film, it has made my digital files much better. You really learn how to light and expose to make the most of the RAW file's capabilities, and you learn to perform a high quality RAW conversion with great dynamic range with both shadow and highlight detail.
Many photographers today wrongly believe that you simply shoot and adjust and re-shoot until it looks right on the LCD. There's far more to it than that! And if you're shooting JPEGS, you're really not getting the best quality, especialy if you want to do fine prints.
I think film will always be available, but it will become a niche product and therefore expensive. I don't believe the argument of "film look" any more, and there are some very high quality actions that will give your files a certain look and feel (e.g. Tri-X grain)
I agree - the megapixel race is over. It has been proven that a compact camera with more than 6MP is useless - you'll get bigger files but no more actual detail - the sensor is simply too small.
My Nikon D3 is "only" 12MP but the quality, especially in low light, is awesome. The 35mm size sensor helps.
I used to shoot Leica M6s. I really wish I could afford an M9. There really is something about rangefinders!
John
