I have no desire to debate the point. Film was what it was, but simply loses out to contemporary digital image capture in absolutely every respect.
I also don't know a single serious photographer, either commercial or fine art, who still shoots film, except in special circumstances.
Michael
Ps: If anyone, back in the days of film, was able to really become familiar with the tonal and palette characteristics of a particular colour film without shooting 50 or 100 rolls, then they simply hadn't spent enough time and money. Dissing me for the inverse simply shows a lack of appreciation of the subtleties that were involved with working with film in anything other than a casual hobbyist basis.
Film still has a place if one enjoys the process and materials. But I know of absolutely no one that thinks that there is any aspect of image quality, convenience, or cost where film is superior to good contemporary digital.