35mm Film or Digital
Posted by: Martin D on 04 January 2004
Hi Guys
I’ve been out of photography for about 15 years due to young family, time, moving house etc. and at the time sold my Nikon FM body 24mm 50mm and 105mm lenses which I regret BIG TIME. However, I’m in the market for another camera / system now but would appreciate anyone’s comment as I’ve seen some interesting film and camera threads already. Basically I was tempted into the digital age but am put off completely now and am considering things like:
Buy 2nd hand the sort of thing I had and loved at the time.
Similar to the above but maybe go a little up market - 2nd hand like Nikon F3 and a few lenses ( are the older “pro” items still easy to get fixed or serviced?)
New type quality kit like EOS 1 or 3 and a couple of their zooms – are they now as good as fixed primaries ?
Bearing in mind it would be nice if the said stuff didn’t plummet in value should I ever want to sell or change it (which I wouldn’t want to, but you know what I mean)
And finally film v digital. What got me thinking against digital was reading 2 things one, that a top quality film likes one of the slow Fuji’s (50 ASA?) was roughly equivalent to having a sensor with the resolution of 30 Mega Pixels plus and two, the fact that some prints can fade in only a few years.
Maybe I should go for one of those strange Leica range finder items but I’m very used to the SLR format.
Confused from the West Country
Martin
Posted on: 11 January 2005 by graham55
Sorry to disagree with the digital crowd, but you can pick up a Nikon F3 (in my view, the best camera ever made - individually, by hand, by specially chosen Japanese maidens, or so I understand) on eBay for £250 to £350.
No digital camera ever made since can match the images that this camera can achieve.
G
Posted on: 11 January 2005 by Joe Petrik
Graham,
quote:
No digital camera ever made since can match the images that this camera can achieve.
The F3 is a great film camera and an incredible bargain secondhand, but in what way is it superior to every digital camera ever made?
Joe
Posted on: 11 January 2005 by Roy T
Can someone please tell me why most dslrs mentioned in this and other dslr threads seem to be either Cannon or Nikon kit and the Olympus E-1 is hardly if ever mentioned, why is this?
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by Derek Wright
Roy
The Olympus E1 is a great camera and gives great results - it is not spoken about by the C and N heard because they have legacy glass from their film SLR camras and have been seduced into sying with C or N
Olympus developed the 4/3rds system from the ground up - selecting a sensor size and designing lenses specifically for this system. This has the advantage of needing a shorter focl length to achieve the same image as a 35mm camera. Resulting in smaller and lighter lenses.
I have an E1 with a 14to 54mm lens ad a 50 to 200mm lens, this giving me the coverage of 28mm to 400mm in 35mm speak.
The E1 and lens combo tends to be smaller and lighter than the equivalent function C or N combo.
Four Thirds explanation web site Some web sites of samples of E1 work
Samples of 4/3 pics from around the globe And some humble samples from my Round Squirrel collection - sent out as a substitute to sending out a Christmas Round Robin letter (not that I ever do)
Round SquirrelMost of the 26 images have the Exif data available, some are cropped to increase image size
Derek
<< >>
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by Matthew T
quote:
Originally posted by Derek Wright:
Matthew T - re cold conditions and digital camers
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=11792000
Derek
<< >>
Derek,
I guess the weeks of cold nights with some warmth during the day might be viable but still lots to go wrong. At least I can stuff my Leica CM close to my skin, a little harder with a SLR, the Nikon is a little to large for that but the predominately manual operation means it keeps working ok. When it comes down to it on the extreme stuff you really can't be bothered with a SLR thus the Leica.
Matthew
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by Roy T
Derek,
many thanks for your reply, it all seems so obvious.
I intend moving from an OM SLR based kit to a DSLR firstly because of my advancing age auto focus will I think be a big help to me and secondly the idea of moving into the digital world appeals to me. As I no longer treck through the cold parts of the world a 100% manual film based bit of kit is not now needed so a good look at the E-1 and a couple of other makers kit is called for.
Thanks for your help.
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by Joe Petrik
Derek,
quote:
The Olympus E1 is a great camera and gives great results - it is not spoken about by the C and N heard because they have legacy glass from their film SLR camras and have been seduced into sying with C or N
If you've been doing 35mm photography for years, it's likely that you've spent a lot on lenses, so there's an obvious incentive to stick with the past, so to speak, than to dump it all for a new system, however good or sensible that new system may be. Over the years, for instance, I've spent a king's ransom on some of Nikon's best primes and I'm reluctant to sell them all and start from scratch. I have far more money in Nikkor glass than it would cost to get a D-SLR that can use them.
The other thing -- and it's strictly a personal issue -- is that I prefer the 3:2 ratio of 35mm photography to the 4:3 ratio of most digicams.
Joe
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by Nigel Cavendish
For most people, in most situations, for what they want from a camera, digital is now the better option.
People who spend huge amounts on hi-fi will, of course, argue long and hard to justify spending huge amounts on their preferred choice of image reproduction - the realism of analogue versus digital hash.
Like what you like and be happy.
cheers
Nigel
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by Joe Petrik
Whether you're considering an amateur or pro D-SLR, those with extremely high (16MP) or moderate resolution (4MP), or camera made by Canon, Fuji, Nikon, Pentax or Olympus, this
site is a good place to start. Click on the digital camera of interest and it'll bring up a page with its specs and yet more links to PDF brochures, sample images, professional reviews, and user comments.
Joe
Posted on: 12 January 2005 by BrianD
The camera has arrived. First impressions are good, although still to use it, just been going over the functions so far. More comment later.
I suppose next it's going to be questions on how to use the thing, lenses, flash guns, filters blah blah blah.
Posted on: 14 January 2005 by count.d
Brian,
Check your PT again, I've got more info for you again.
Posted on: 19 January 2005 by Roy T
Joe,
many thanks for your advice. I have looked at the
E 1 and the soon to arrive
E 300 (with the new mirror system) and both systems seem worthy of consideration. As I am in no hurry to purchase a dslr so I will spend a bit more time browsing the worlds according to Cannon and Nikon.
I would love to hear from an E-1, E-10 or an early e-300 user as to what they think about the Olympus kit.
Posted on: 19 January 2005 by Derek Wright
Roy T
Do I count - I used to have an E20 and now have an E1 - if you want to talk we can talk - just pt me
also take a look at the
www.dpreview.com forum section at the Olympus SLR Talk Forum
Forum quite a lot of similar questions and answers on there that might help you
Posted on: 19 January 2005 by Roy T
Derek
That forum sure is fast moving and such a lot to read. It should keep me busy for a good few days.
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Huwge
Am new to the forum but here is my sixpence worth.
You'll take more pictures with a digital camera, but you'll end up with more keepers on film. Well I do at least.
I shoot Canon d-SLR with L glass and the pictures are great, given a bit of patience in Photoshop with Unsharp Mask. Depending on your budget and based on personal preference (given legacy Canon glass), I would go for 10D or 1Dmk11 - my only reservation is that Canon have still not resolved the dust issue on their CMOS and that really sucks when you consider that these cameras are supposed to be semi or full pro. The dust issue is particularly important if you change lenses frequently. Don't forget the crop factor either (1.6x with 10D and 1.3 with 1D).If money no object then 1DsMkII is just jaw dropping.
For film, having sold all Canon SLR bodies, I use a Leica M7 - yes it's a badge, but the glass is unbelievable. The pictures that get the most comments are my Leica shots. It's small, silent and unobtrusive. These are genuine keepers and even though you have more automation, I still find I set exposure manually. There are some good 2nd hand prices for M6 bodies (w/o E-TTL) but, regrettably, the glass is always dear. Scanning Kodachrome is tough, but hey nothing good comes easy
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Derek Wright
So sad to hear of DSLRs that get dust on a regular basis on the sensor <g> they are probably not rain shower proof either
Disagree about the numbers of keepers - digital enables you to take more and so experiment and also to refine during the taking process so that the overall quality improves
I have taken pictures that I would not have taken with film because of the wasted cost reminder of binned slides or prints. The last picture of the shoot has often turned out to be the best and that can be several shots after the film inhibition factor would have crept in and stopped me taking pictures
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Huwge
Derek - agreed, it's always subject to YMMV.
With film, I thínk about composition more; with digital its P&S, but that's just me. A buddy of mine said that digital is where you learn (cheaply), film is where you practice. That will change pretty quickly - if it weren'f for imminent CDX2 puchase, I would be sorely tempted by 1DsMkII - so long 35mm, so long medium format. Also, with rangefinder you can take shots that are not possible (balls of brass notwithstanding) with a hulking great SLR and lens (be it digital or film)
All the Canon D-SLRs have a dust problem, but the 1 series are all very robust / weather-proof when the lens is on.
I was not happy having to fork out 100 euros for a sensor clean recently - still searching for a reasonable, non-sensor threatening cleaning option. No idea if Nikons have same issue.
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Roy T
Derek,
the Olympus system charts have all that I may ever need so sometime soon one of my credit cards may take a hammering. After talking to a few photographic retailers in my area the only problem seemed to be the quality of the customer support offered by Olympus but if the kit performs as well as my old OM kit then I may have no need of customer support good or bad.
Thanks for your help and advice.
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Derek Wright
Roy T
There has been some very good reports of good support from Olympus on the forum I pointed too
I think the main thing is to have a good relationship with the dealer and then they "will go in to bat" for you
Huwge - Olympus E1 has an automatic sensor cleaner that operates every time the camera is switched on
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Joe Petrik
Derek,
quote:
Olympus E1 has an automatic sensor cleaner that operates every time the camera is switched on
Built-in windshield/screen wiper? Nah, that would be too wonky. Does the sensor cleaner work using a dust-elimination algorithm, sort of like digital ICE?
Joe
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Derek Wright
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Joe Petrik
Nifty. Does it do the job as advertised?
Joe
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Derek Wright
Joe
Yes - There has only been one report on the DPREview Olympus forum where a user had a dust problem and he removed it with a blower brush - it was speculated that the foreign body was too light to shake off - I have swapped lenses in dusty conditions Arizona desert etc and no problems, other more adventerous people have swapped lenses in very dusty conditions and no problems.
HOwever in the Nikon and Canon forums there are quite a few threads on sensor dirt removal, both pre taking (in the camera) and post taking (using Photoshop).
The camera has a good track record for survivng wet conditions eg heavy rain (not submersion) however one or two users have claimed that they rinsed them under a tap (faucet) to remove mud without any problem.
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Joe Petrik
Sounds like the cleaner works a charm. Kudos to Olympus.
Joe
Posted on: 20 January 2005 by Huwge
Derek - thanks for that. I had so much old Canon glass I just went down that path, not that I'm complaining - I think it's great kit. Will have a look at Olympus, might be a nice to have in the bag for those bad weather days.
