But not film B&W, which has a different colour and contrast response to "let's remove all the saturation" viewfinder B&W.
Personally I'm happy with a 100% digital workflow. In fact these days I take most photos on an iPhone, and leave the SLR at home.
But I also know that film and optical filtering look different..
You can produce an imitation of a film look with digital processing. But it's an imitation. There are subtleties of colour, grain, contrast/brightness response, and differential colour resolution that are very complicated.
And different films respond in different ways. Everyone can see the difference between digital, budget Kodak, and a roll of Fujifilm Velvia.
And if you're shooting medium or large-format, that's a different ballgame again.
Don't believe me? Take some pictures of a fire. The film and digital versions will look completely different.
Is it worth the effort? For snappy snaps, certainly not. Digital kills it for convenience.
But if I worked as high-end commercial landscape, architectural, or art photographer, I'd certainly consider film for at least some projects.
also, modern digital cameras with EVF allow you to see B&W through the viewfinder.