Frank Petronio
Well-known
I do both, I usually want a slow, formal, large film camera and a fast, light digital, one lens each. I've used everything from a GRDII to 8x10, I like the challenge of adapting. I change to something totally different every three to six months. Sometimes I get hardcore and have nothing but a Leica 35mm or a Nikon DSLR for a spell.
It helps prevent Alzheimer's, I hope.
And it is just fun, it's not a lot of money usually and I can trade-swap and mostly break even with my gear. Heck it makes more sense to pick up a bargain Leica than to put your money in a short-term CD these days, if you shop carefully you can still make 10-15% interest ;-)
The large format images have semi-accurate film borders (I do them in Photoshop, I crop and cheat) and the smaller format/digital just have a simple black border, no fake film.
If I were absolutely practical I'd get a Nikon D90-300-7000 with the 35/1.8 AFS DX, that is probably the best bang for the buck. But I've already had that combo a couple of times now. I might well do it again since the D7000 seems pretty nice at high ISO and isn't too big. I will probably end up with the Fuji XF100 eventually too but you guys can Beta test it and sell me yours for half price next Summer, thanks.
I should probably search out a Pany G2 or GH2 to see how "improved" they are. IMHO the G1 is a great camera with significant handling flaws... and Panasonic made them worse in later versions! But I really like the EVF being nearsighted, I don't need my reading glasses with it, unlike most other cameras.
I also am investigating the Sony A55 because it has an EVF with no mirror black out (pellicle)... but I'd like to hear how dirty it gets and which Sony lenses are OK?
I've used an M8 and like it, the issue is whether I really want to tie $2500-$3500 into it with a decent lens. I hate having too expensive stuff and I keep coming back to the fact that the M8 files don't look ~that~ much better than my old Nikon D80 files, (which now sells for $300 used).
There is actually a perverse side that says to buy a $200 Nikon D70s and shoot the Hell out of it.... I have old files from one mixed in with everything else and they are indistinguishable from the other DSLR images in my 11x14 print portfolio.
Usually the digital and large format are so different that you get very different kinds of images. Digital and 35mm are a little too close and scanning is a pain, whereas scanning 4x5 is much easier and more forgiving (to get a good file). But if I can force myself to put the digital down (or sell it) then I like shooting 35mm again.
What little work I do, the clients aren't hiring me for general purpose commercial photography so I can use my choice and people know I use old, funky cameras.... Although showing up with only a GRD2 puts people off when they are paying me a lot of money, so I try to have a little common sense sometimes. In the old days I had to have 3-4 lenses for 35mm, 120, and 4x5 systems, plus a lot of lights, for general work.
It helps prevent Alzheimer's, I hope.
And it is just fun, it's not a lot of money usually and I can trade-swap and mostly break even with my gear. Heck it makes more sense to pick up a bargain Leica than to put your money in a short-term CD these days, if you shop carefully you can still make 10-15% interest ;-)
The large format images have semi-accurate film borders (I do them in Photoshop, I crop and cheat) and the smaller format/digital just have a simple black border, no fake film.
If I were absolutely practical I'd get a Nikon D90-300-7000 with the 35/1.8 AFS DX, that is probably the best bang for the buck. But I've already had that combo a couple of times now. I might well do it again since the D7000 seems pretty nice at high ISO and isn't too big. I will probably end up with the Fuji XF100 eventually too but you guys can Beta test it and sell me yours for half price next Summer, thanks.
I should probably search out a Pany G2 or GH2 to see how "improved" they are. IMHO the G1 is a great camera with significant handling flaws... and Panasonic made them worse in later versions! But I really like the EVF being nearsighted, I don't need my reading glasses with it, unlike most other cameras.
I also am investigating the Sony A55 because it has an EVF with no mirror black out (pellicle)... but I'd like to hear how dirty it gets and which Sony lenses are OK?
I've used an M8 and like it, the issue is whether I really want to tie $2500-$3500 into it with a decent lens. I hate having too expensive stuff and I keep coming back to the fact that the M8 files don't look ~that~ much better than my old Nikon D80 files, (which now sells for $300 used).
There is actually a perverse side that says to buy a $200 Nikon D70s and shoot the Hell out of it.... I have old files from one mixed in with everything else and they are indistinguishable from the other DSLR images in my 11x14 print portfolio.
Usually the digital and large format are so different that you get very different kinds of images. Digital and 35mm are a little too close and scanning is a pain, whereas scanning 4x5 is much easier and more forgiving (to get a good file). But if I can force myself to put the digital down (or sell it) then I like shooting 35mm again.
What little work I do, the clients aren't hiring me for general purpose commercial photography so I can use my choice and people know I use old, funky cameras.... Although showing up with only a GRD2 puts people off when they are paying me a lot of money, so I try to have a little common sense sometimes. In the old days I had to have 3-4 lenses for 35mm, 120, and 4x5 systems, plus a lot of lights, for general work.
Last edited:
