Sorry gang but film remain superior to digital. Yes, digital is easier. If you are not satisfied with the results you can correct the problem in most cases and reshoot on the spot. So for probably 99% of railfan photos digital is adequate.

First: Film resolution is many times higher than the best digital imaging devices today, typically equivalent to 18,000 dpi or higher. If you want to enlarge a small detail to study something, the information often is there on film. With digital you will get a pixilated image that reveals little. No digital manipulation will bring out detail that is not on the original.

Second: Film will record a much wider range of light levels than digital. Even though you may not be able to see it on a print, details in full shade or full sun often are on the negative. If you need to see details in full shade, you can make a special print to reveal them.

In railway museum restoration work often we must use old photographs. For example, to determine what type of stove was used in a car, a typical fan 3/4 view shot in full sun was used. A car door was open. On the negative the stove inside the car was visible although it was in deep shade. Thank goodness that was not a digital photo; nothing except black would have been visible inside the car.