switch to dslr what was your experience

[XCR]

I have been toying with switching 100% to dslr but have not made up my mind 100%. I have both rangefinders and dslr but would rather sell off one set to fund the other.

I know the D700 is fairly small and not much larger than an M6 so the size is not a main concern. Just thought I would say this in case someone wanted to chime in on the size issues between both types of cameras.

Has anyone done this and been totally satisfied?

 

[easyrider]

I was for years a Leica screwmount and Rollei TLR shooter. Mainly TLR. Then i went through a downsizing period and shot only with a Rolley 35 -- one of the first ones made in Germany. I added a Canon EF in the 1970s.

In a misguided moment I bought a Contax T3 and also began to play with digital -- a Kodak 4800 (I think). The T3 is an excellent camera but everythibng is menu driven and the automatic focussing drove me nuts. I never really got used to it and sold it to someone on this board. But I shot more and more digital, switching to a Canon G2. Got excellent results and i still own it.

Then came a Nikon D70s that I still use. It took me a while to get comfortable with the menu and I am still learning things.

A friend has the D700 and it's excellent. Full frame and a large LCD. My D70s does what i need.

If I add anything, it would be a Canon G10. But the DSLRs are work horses and I think there is no going back once you have used one.

But do allow for some learning time.

Good luck!

 

[dfoo]

Of course, it depends on your use case. For my uses I beg to differ. I have a Canon 5D and I've gone the other way. I dislike DSLR size, the cannon sized lenses and I hate the ergonomics. Plus I find the film very hard to load in that thing!

 

[kuzano]

my ROT on sensor size rules out the G-series canons

my ROT on sensor size rules out the G-series canons

I made myself a promise not to buy another digital camera with a sensor smaller than my thumbnail (after unlimited hours of scientific research)

The G10 sensor is 7.6 x 5.32mm. That dimension will fit 4 plus of the G10 sensors on my thumbnail (the right one).

By contrast the 4/3 sensor ( Panasonic G1 and the upcoming Orange carrot Olympus Micro 4/3 rds at 12mp) is 17.3mm by 13mm. which fits one on my thumbnail (clipped close).

No Canon G's in my future.

 

[Sam N]

The D700 is much bigger than an M6.

One idea is to keep your fav. 1 camera + 1 lens from the RF system.

 

[rover]

Well, I have been shooting a lot with my Pentax DSLR. My comments though are not specific to Pentax.

DSLRs are the tools of the devil. Man do they suck. The little f'er has a mind of its own and it argues with me all the time. Photography is simple, time and aperture. Why does the damn thing want to make it more complicated than that? It screws up focusing all the time, and even with a split image screen manual focusing is no joy. Here is the deal K10d, I am the boss. Got it?

Ok, opinion over.

 

[furcafe]

Indeed. So is the 5D. And their lenses. And this is true even compared to an M Leica w/the biggest lenses mounted & an accessory grip attached, so I don't know how the OP can write that they're "not much larger." He may not consider the difference enough to impede his photography, but it is definitely significant.

The D700 is much bigger than an M6.

 

[Sam N]

If only there were a Pentax MX or OM-1 sized DSLR w/ a 5D sized-sensor (or at least a 5D-style viewfinder)...

Anyway I'm not sure you'd find a lot of people who have dumped RFs completely in favor of SLRs on a rangefinder forum. I like to use both. Sometimes I feel like one is distracting me from the other, but more often I think they are both great tools that I wouldn't want to give up.

 

[sojournerphoto]

I use and enjoy both.

The Ikon is an ideal size for me, but the 5D is not too big in comparison to a 1 series canon. The biggest issue is the size of lenses, and the cost of good wide glass. Also manual focusing wieds on a dslr is not as easy as an rf. But, I don't have nay issues with af - it's just a case of learning the tool as with an rf.

Digital wins hands down for convenience though, and the files can make stunning prints.

Mike

 

[emraphoto]

for what it's worth... i am of the opinion that the d700 is the absolute best camera i have used to date. at a big labor rally today i dropped it, with a 180mm f2.8 from over my head to the pavement. everyone around me gasped! i picked it up, gave it a quick look over and went back to work. not a hiccup.

i accept the size difference for what it can do. i have sold all my rf gear except an m6ttl and 35 'cron that sits on my shelf and looks pretty.

 

[RF-Addict]

I have been shooting digital (in addition to film, not instead) since 2006 and I love it. I have the Canon 5D and the 40D. The 5D gets used most of the times, the 40D is exclusively for wildlife shots. I happen to shoot lots of landscapes and wildlife, so for me this was a no-brainer. The 5D easily beats my Mamiya 645 in IQ and resolution.

Having said all that, I also enjoy film and the wet darkroom process. For me this is not one or the other, but really both. That way I get the best of both worlds. If I had to chose only one camera, it would be the 5D - I wouldn't even have to think about it twice.

 

[Phantomas]

Two totally different systems and, most importantly, styles of shooting. Comparing the two is really up to personal preference (and the subject-matter of photography).
I come from DSLR background. I started "seriously" getting into photography from a digicam, quickly switching to DSLR and using it for a few years. With DSLR I started to realize that photography was quickly becoming a big part of my life. I shot a lot (admittedly still not "great") and dedicated a lot of time to researching equipment, styles and techniques. Then I realized I wanted to upgrade and quickly sold off ALL my gear including lenses in hopes to start buying less stuff but GOOD stuff. While I was waiting for an update in Canon's DSLR line and saving money for it I picked up a couple of old FSU rangefinders on a fleamarket and............

Canon DSLR never happened. All of a sudden I discovered how much RF system fits me and how much, if I may be so bold, my photography improved in one simple step. RF and film. I also realized how affordable good film gear can be and subsequently contracted the so called GAS.

I also started to realize little nuances about gear that I have sometimes heard about but never paid attention to, like how RF viewfinder gives you whole different feel for framing, being in the scene, no mirror blackout, focusing style, etc.
Then there's this distinct look to rangefinder results, photos. It certainly has character that fit and even make some scenes. And it's a different style of shooting that is partly result of, what I find, psychological effect carried by the style of use of the gear.

All in all, right now I have a 50D sitting next to me with a couple of "L" and a tilt-shift lenses (thanks to where I work I have easy access to variety of good DSLR gear, although I'm not a photographer in a professional sense of the word). It all sits here collecting dust. Everytime my hand reaches for a camera I just can't pick up DSLR over a rangefinder or the Hassie. There's no going back 🙂


Oh, and any DSLR with a lens is certainly larger than an average Leica).

 

[FrozenInTime]

My dual Leica outfit weighs almost exactly the same as my SLR zoom kit and fits in the the same size of bag.

The digital is better for color and stitched images, but is by no means discrete, and compared to the dual Leica outfit, a single SLR has no redundancy.
But digital did open my mind to long and macro lenses.

After a year of digital 90% (24K activations), I'm currently using film and darkroom printing again 70% to 30% digital ( once it was repaired ).

Selling the M6 and lenses would have been a massive mistake as would now going back to all film.

 

[Warren T.]

I shoot and enjoy both digital (Nikon D100 and Canon A570is) and film today. Six years ago, I bought the D100 brand new for $1995 for the body only with the idea that I was going to transition to 100% digital. As it turned out, I never transitioned 100% because I still prefer the attributes of film, and I still enjoy shooting with film cameras (rangefinder, slr, and medium format). I actually have more film cameras now than I did six years ago 😀.

--Warren

 

[Nikon Bob]

I was a film SLR shooter before being waylayed by rangefinder cameras. I have kept and used both types side by side. My first DSLR is a D700 because Nikon finally made what I wanted and that was a FF sensor that could meter with my old MF lenses. Let me tell you I have not regretted that decision one bit but to say there is virtually no size difference between it and my M4 I would not. I would have gladly bought DRF that was FF and took my old lenses at a price with a slight premium over the D700 for when I travel. I don't think that combination of wants is going to be satisfied anytime soon though. In short I have been totally satisfied with the D700 so far and have the luxury of keeping my film gear too for when I want the RF experience. Never think that size is not an issue though because it is and using a DSLR is also a different experience from using even a DRF.

Bob

 

[Kevin]

I wouldn't even dream of owning a new Canon system after what they did to us FD lens owners!

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

I can't comment on a switch from RF to DSLR, but I've really enjoyed using my new-to-me Nikon F100 for the past few weeks. If you've already got a DSLR why not put the RF on ice for a bit and see how you get by without it?

 

[35photo]

I had an D70 which was my first D-SLR it was ok, sold it got a D200 much better, but I hated not being able to use my lenses the way they were designed to which is full-frame. Also I have way too many good film cameras to have them sitting and collecting dust. Leica M6, Hasselblad, Nikon N90....I just like the way film looks and I don't mind scanning. I don't shoot professionally much and if I did I could borrow one my friends D300. I also don't like all the upgrading with digital, with film if you don't like the film you just try something else at 3-6 dollars depending on what it is instead of spending serious money on another camera. A D700 sounds like the type of camera that interests me, if it had come out when I got my D200 I probably would still have it. So I got a D-Lux 4 as my digital camera for the time being and its served me well so far. Just got a used M2 which has been great to work with so far. Maybe one day I'll get a D-SLR, but I'm really happy shooting film, scanning, and doing inkjet prints...

Marko

 

[dee]

I went a comparitively painless way from Minolta SRs to Leica M 8 and Leica Digilux 3 , both of which operate with conventional [ by 1970s standards ] controls .
I can use all my Rokkors [ 2x conversion ] and vintage Leitz lenses on the M 8 .
I love both - and my Kievs etc .

 

[noimmunity]

for what it's worth... i am of the opinion that the d700 is the absolute best camera i have used to date. at a big labor rally today i dropped it, with a 180mm f2.8 from over my head to the pavement. everyone around me gasped! i picked it up, gave it a quick look over and went back to work. not a hiccup.

i accept the size difference for what it can do. i have sold all my rf gear except an m6ttl and 35 'cron that sits on my shelf and looks pretty.

Wow!
Both for the fortunate ending to that drop-crash episode, and for the (nearly) complete switch to a D700.