Digital Cameras (not a rant)

[mfunnell]

While it is possible to take wildlife photos with an RF:

...it's far from ideal.

I'll keep using my dSLR and big white zoom for that, and sports and lots of other things. And I'll keep my pocket digicam as my go-everywhere camera. But for those things that RFs do well, I'll keep using and enjoying them.

...Mike

 

[RObert Budding]

I use a Nikon D200 to capture shots of my kids' sports games. I'm new to sports photography, so the delete button is handy. But I'll probably add a F100 eventually.

 

[mjflory]

While I've read many posts scorning macrophotography, I am quite taken with it. I've tried close-up lenses on RF's, but my film setups usually consisted of a macro lens (possibly with a 1:1 extender) on a bellows on an SLR, sometimes with a ring flash, and I just hoped I'd guessed right on the exposure compensation. A few months ago I bought a Sony DSC-T5, with its tiny Zeiss lenses that focus to within 1cm, and I've had loads of fun sneaking up on bees and the like. The camera fits in my shirt pocket and takes several hundred pictures of quite acceptable resolution without reloading or recharging. It's all but useless handheld in low light and I wouldn't want to make huge prints from the images, but for that I've got my CL (which feels big by comparison).

 

[GeneW]

I have a Canon S3 IS that is relatively compact (like a mini-DSLR) and very handy. It has a zoom equivalent of about 35-420mm + image stabilization. It's very lightweight and easy to carry around and a fun shooter. It accounts for maybe 40% of my shooting.

The rest goes to film -- RF and SLR. Although digi is more convenient, I like my film cams better from an aesthetic point of view. Maybe because I grew up using manual focus cameras ...

Gene

 

[IGMeanwell]

My main event shooter is my D50 (compact and great in low light) ... then my everyday carry with me camera is the F30

haven't been disappointed at all with those

yes I am highly involved with the Digital shooting at this point

 

[andersju]

I sold my Leica M4-P and got a Ricoh GRD w/Voigtländer 28/35 mini-finder instead and I don't regret it one bit. As is often mentioned the noise looks very good, the camera is virtually silent in snap mode (which I use most of the time), it's quite small & discrete, I can take it with me all the time.. perfect stealth camera? Perhaps.

I've used it for all the photos at http://2038.cc/ (recently started, more to come; pardon my not-yet-so-good post-processing skills). Most are ISO 800, no noise reduction.

 

[jody]

I use my panasonic fz20 for any photo I have to zoom for, sports where I feel digital is best, and to check exposure at times kinda like a polariod back. I shoot film rest of time because I like the challenge. I don't develop my film yet. I like rangefinders for low light and street. All my SLRs have prime lenses on them now because the zooms are crap. (that I own). The panasonic has 2.8 apeture thruout the whole zoom and is made by Leica. I also have a small minolta dimage x60 for fitting in my front pocket so that I can always have a camera if needed.

 

[swoop]

I use two digitals. A canon 20D SLR and an A700 P&S. The A700 I use for little things. Like pics of my camera's. Out with some friends. I loan it out occasionally. I bought it primarily to bring with me while mountain biking. Because I'll often run into interesting stuff. The video function comes in handy also.

The 20D I use for studio work and that's about it. I hardly ever take it out. I honestly can not take a digital camera seriously even if it is of professional caliber. I'll admit in a studio enviorment it comes in handy a great deal. The preview LCD is equivlant to using polaroids to check one's lighting. Also, it's an SLR, and they're simply too bulky to carry around with me for photojournalism work. Which is my major. I imagine I might be ble to cope with a digital rangefinder. But I still have my doubts.

 

[pvdhaar]

For me it's 50/50 between a Nikon D50 and a Bessa-T. They complement each other wonderfully. For multiple flash and/or macro, the DSLR is the way to go, and for portability it's the T with a 25/4 or a collapsible 50..

For as far as digi P&S are concerned, I've had 3 and have found them lacking in all kinds of respects. Image quality, build quality and handling.. they're just not worth the money when compared to a DSLR or a decent film RF..

 

[kuvvy]

For as far as digi P&S are concerned, I've had 3 and have found them lacking in all kinds of respects. Image quality, build quality and handling.. they're just not worth the money when compared to a DSLR or a decent film RF..

I think the quality of at least some digi P&S are pretty good. Here is an example from my F30. Taken of an ornate ceiling in York Minster two weeks ago, it was taken by lying the F30 on the floor and firing, the next is a 100% crop of the original. Taken on Auto, camera chose 1/15th, f2.8, 200 iso.

I don't think it's too bad.

 

[pvdhaar]

I think the quality of at least some digi P&S are pretty good. Here is an example from my F30. Taken of an ornate ceiling in York Minster two weeks ago, it was taken by lying the F30 on the floor and firing, the next is a 100% crop of the original. Taken on Auto, camera chose 1/15th, f2.8, 200 iso.

I don't think it's too bad.

No, the resolution is there, and the noise characteristics of some models is fine.

What I miss, is being able to work DOF and the smoothness of bigger formats.. but of course, this is all a matter of taste.

 

[IGMeanwell]

No, the resolution is there, and the noise characteristics of some models is fine.

What I miss, is being able to work DOF and the smoothness of bigger formats.. but of course, this is all a matter of taste.

That is my biggest complaint about working with P&S ... I love control over depth of field and as we all know digital P&S have seemingly infinite depth of field but little control over it

This is why my Fuji F30 isn't my first choice when taking a photo... but of course its great at what it does so its certainly not the last

 

[markinlondon]

I have a Fuji F11 which I bought earlier this year when the end of line price cut kicked in. I chose it for its long battery life, close focus and high ISO capability. I'm slowly coming to terms with it, soon I may even be able to say I like it. I really, really hate not being in charge of the camera.

 

[ZeissFan]

The Canon G7 was recently reviewed by Amateur Photographer. Basically, the problem of tiny sensors continues. The primary criticisms were noise at all ISO settings, now RAW, lens distortion at wide and telephoto and narrow dynamic range.

I'm using an Olympus E-500. Nice camera, although it has a lot of creaks when you grip the body tightly. But it is what it is -- mass produced digital camera that serves a purpose -- turn out photos quickly.

The camera struggles in low light and the noise above ISO 640 isn't pleasant. I don't find digital noise to be like film grain. I really find it be quite objectionable.

My wife loves the camera with its quick zoom and ability to pop off several shots at once. So she's happy. We had to take some photos for her column, and so we popped off about 90 of them roughly 30 minutes. She was glad she could run through them all and find the one that she liked.

Quality was quite good, and the ability to white balance made a big difference.

I still have a Sony 828 and a couple of Nikons. Those are good for closeups and of course photographing classic cameras.

 

[femto]

same to me!

beside the Olympus 35 SP I'm regular using now, I own an Olympus E-500 with some fine lenses from Olympus, the 50mm/2.0, which is a wonderful lens for macros and portraits, the 14-54mm/2.8-3.5 zoom for everyday (and holiday 😉) use and last but not least the marvelous 50-200mm/2.8-3.5 zoom, which is great for taking telephotos. the E-500 by it self is a small and decent digital SLR with a quite mirror and shutter noise. the low light abilities are a little bit limited, there's too much noise with higher ISO ratings.

~HD

 

[MelanieC]

Macro photos can be fun. I took these with my old Nikon Coolpix 950 (2 megapixels). It was the shizz in 1999.

 

[mjflory]

Macro photos can be fun. I took these with my old Nikon Coolpix 950 (2 megapixels). It was the shizz in 1999.

I love the blue beetle -- especially the red coating on his lenses!

-- Michael