spysmart
Established
I am going to wait another couple of years for digital to mature a little bit more .. and for the Zeiss Digital RF. None of the cameras on the market, or those expected this year, seem to hit the right spot, though Pentax's 21/31/40/43/77 lens line did catch my attention. The M8 will be too expensive and unproven.
I tried the Ricoh GR-D and was underwhelmed - full manual control was nice, but the results I get from my GR1s with NPH and NPZ are far superior. The real killer with the GR-D was the 15 second write time (during which the lens will not retract). Shutterflower's GRD mkII specs sound just right to me.
I sold the GRD after 2 months and just picked up a s/h M6 0.85, a ZM50 lens, two bricks of Tri-X and some Rodinal - so affirming my committed to film.
I tried the Ricoh GR-D and was underwhelmed - full manual control was nice, but the results I get from my GR1s with NPH and NPZ are far superior. The real killer with the GR-D was the 15 second write time (during which the lens will not retract). Shutterflower's GRD mkII specs sound just right to me.
I sold the GRD after 2 months and just picked up a s/h M6 0.85, a ZM50 lens, two bricks of Tri-X and some Rodinal - so affirming my committed to film.
jonasv
has no mustache
Nachkebia said:
I'd have to disagree - what about the people who shoot b&w and prefer the look of grain over noise? What about dynamic range? And a really good 35mm film still beats the lower-end DSLR's as far as resolution goes (let alone the digital compacts).
Not trying to start something anti-digital, I am using film now but I would use digital as well if I could afford it because for some of the work I do (not all, but about half) digital would be a better medium than film. I just don't think it's right to generalise.
amateriat
We're all light!
Well, even a dedicated film shooter like me can't see dissing digital that much. Having gotten very nice results from such sub-megabuck "prosumer" (ugh...still hate that word) cameras as Olympus' C8080, I would say that you're setting your sights rather low with your choice of digicam. I also think you were likely a bit rash in junking your film kit for the digital New World (you can have both, unless finances are quite strapped, in which case you should hang on to what you've got). And people here who have gotten hold of Epson's RD-1/1s can't stop talking about how great those cameras are. They aren't hallucinating, even if I choose not to get one. 
- Barrett
- Barrett
ywenz
Veteran
Fastfashn said:
Looks like you learned the hard way. The Oly E500 is an average or below average performer in the digital world. Had you gone with Canon or Nikon you would have felt differently..
Chuck A: My 20D + alien bees kick ass. It is capable of extremely high quality images.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ywen/175981217/in/set-72157594157125670/
Last edited:
S
Socke
Guest
I too don't like the viewfinders in affordable dSLRs besides that one in the Pentax *istD which was too small for me. To be true, I don't like the grips on all new fangled SLRs. In this regard I like my Contax RTS best.
That is probably the reason why I didn't feel tempted by any of the D60s successors, they didn't improve on what I feel is important, the viewfinder. Higher ISO with less noise, more frames per second, more AF sensors etc.pp are not important to me. Ok, I'd like to have higher ISO with less noise, yesterday I didn't take many usefull concert shots since I brought the wrong lens and nothing to bounce the flash from into a badly lit club with a black ceiling
And to add insult to injury, I wasn't there for the first time so I should have known.
I don't bet on digital rangefinders anyway, the R-D1 viewfinder is probably much better than the D60 peephole but it doesn't accomodate my wideangle needs. The Leica M8 will be far out of my financial reach and so I stick to film as long as I can get that somewhere, which will be a couple of decades, hopefully.
On the other hand, I feel no need for drum scanned slides, first of all my computer would be hard pressed to handle that amount of data, a 150MB 48bit tiff would just crash the maschine. And the prize for drum scans is absolutly prohibitive for an amateur like me.
At that prize point I just give the slide I want to have printed realy big, say more than 11x17, to a specialzed lab and don't care how they print it as long as the result is to my liking.
When my D60 breaks some day, I intended to allow it one shutter repair but don't think so anymore, I might just get the 5D, which is some 2000 Euro cheaper than a Leica digital M will be, or whatever Canon has in this class then and use it with the 50/1.4 and 35/2 I already own.
You can have my Contax Gs when you get my cold dead fingers from them
That is probably the reason why I didn't feel tempted by any of the D60s successors, they didn't improve on what I feel is important, the viewfinder. Higher ISO with less noise, more frames per second, more AF sensors etc.pp are not important to me. Ok, I'd like to have higher ISO with less noise, yesterday I didn't take many usefull concert shots since I brought the wrong lens and nothing to bounce the flash from into a badly lit club with a black ceiling
And to add insult to injury, I wasn't there for the first time so I should have known.
I don't bet on digital rangefinders anyway, the R-D1 viewfinder is probably much better than the D60 peephole but it doesn't accomodate my wideangle needs. The Leica M8 will be far out of my financial reach and so I stick to film as long as I can get that somewhere, which will be a couple of decades, hopefully.
On the other hand, I feel no need for drum scanned slides, first of all my computer would be hard pressed to handle that amount of data, a 150MB 48bit tiff would just crash the maschine. And the prize for drum scans is absolutly prohibitive for an amateur like me.
At that prize point I just give the slide I want to have printed realy big, say more than 11x17, to a specialzed lab and don't care how they print it as long as the result is to my liking.
When my D60 breaks some day, I intended to allow it one shutter repair but don't think so anymore, I might just get the 5D, which is some 2000 Euro cheaper than a Leica digital M will be, or whatever Canon has in this class then and use it with the 50/1.4 and 35/2 I already own.
You can have my Contax Gs when you get my cold dead fingers from them
Nachkebia
Well-known
Il say like this, as long as forums like this exist, as long as people like as see the beauty of film (not only technical) film will exist and we will support it!
rvaubel
Well-known
shutterflower said:
You sound like the marketing department for the Epson RD1.
Rex
MCTuomey
Veteran
At the risk of stating the obvious ... (it's what my poor mind does best)
Fwiw, it seems to me that, except for the steadfast few who wet print, we're all digital at some point in our "light capture to finished print" process, aren't we? So isn't this "debate" just over preferences as to when and how we digitize our images? Just individual decisions about when the image gets digitized - on one end, within the camera or, on the other, after a film negative or positive is developed?
As someone pointed out above, this thread isn't about film v digital, it's about digital tools vs film tools. So, pick your pleasure - and then digitize as you prefer. Unless you were smart enough not to discard your darkroom gear ...
Fwiw, it seems to me that, except for the steadfast few who wet print, we're all digital at some point in our "light capture to finished print" process, aren't we? So isn't this "debate" just over preferences as to when and how we digitize our images? Just individual decisions about when the image gets digitized - on one end, within the camera or, on the other, after a film negative or positive is developed?
As someone pointed out above, this thread isn't about film v digital, it's about digital tools vs film tools. So, pick your pleasure - and then digitize as you prefer. Unless you were smart enough not to discard your darkroom gear ...
aad
Not so new now.
Humanized form, my sentiments exactly on slides. They're the only way to get the best out of a film camera these days. My current wallpaper is a Velvia/Mamiya C330 shot of our flowerbox-yowza!
akptc
Shoot first, think later
I have a Pentax DS and use it mainly with the 77mm Limited and the 50/1.4 AF and I must say, it's a superb cominbation. the viewfinder is fantastic, the camera controls are easy to use, and the 2 lenses - well, let's just say they are not for sale
kmack
do your job, then let go
.akptc said:I have a Pentax DS and use it mainly with the 77mm Limited and the 50/1.4 AF and I must say, it's a superb cominbation. the viewfinder is fantastic, the camera controls are easy to use, and the 2 lenses - well, let's just say they are not for sale
Nice to hear, I have been considering the Pentax *ist or the new K100D. I have been using a Oly 4040 for a few years when I want to photograph in color or just for convienence sake. I fully intend on being capable in both digital and film.
tetrisattack
Maximum Creativity!
I don't have much to add to this thread, except that modern cameras make me feel like I'm hunting bunnies with a machine gun.
I'll go back to my sheet film now.
I'll go back to my sheet film now.
MCTuomey
Veteran
Re: the issue of digi expense -
Speaking from the less fortunate side of funds availability, I think digital cameras present as many frugal ways to equip oneself as film gear. The screaming rate of obsolescence of digi bodies all but ensures it. All due respect to other brands intended, one example - a Canon 10D in great condition with a 50/1.4 AF can be had for about US$500 and US$300, respectively. Quiet, unobtrusive, very high image potential, and not much more money than the current crop of digi P&S's.
Speaking from the less fortunate side of funds availability, I think digital cameras present as many frugal ways to equip oneself as film gear. The screaming rate of obsolescence of digi bodies all but ensures it. All due respect to other brands intended, one example - a Canon 10D in great condition with a 50/1.4 AF can be had for about US$500 and US$300, respectively. Quiet, unobtrusive, very high image potential, and not much more money than the current crop of digi P&S's.
ampguy
Veteran
i like digital, took about 300 shots yesterday, mostly with a lumix.
S
Socke
Guest
akptc said:I have a Pentax DS and use it mainly with the 77mm Limited and the 50/1.4 AF and I must say, it's a superb cominbation. the viewfinder is fantastic, the camera controls are easy to use, and the 2 lenses - well, let's just say they are not for sale
I just looked up the lenses, not cheap :bang:
neilsphoto
Established
I have a foot in both camps as well. Been a film shooter since the 60's. Photography was my FT job for 22yrs, no longer is. While my wife was out of FT work for 2.5 yrs after her job disolved when the company was sold I dumped alot of stuff for cash. I sold off all my medium and large format stuff.
I was very happy shooting with my M's and TX and scanning and printing. No complaints from me or anyone who wanted a print. Every now and then I'd use a Nikon. Leica lens' look better, not starting a war here.
Why then did I decide quite out of the blue that I should have a digital body for all the Nikon lenses? I got a D70S. I had lenses and was very comfortable with post processing already so it was just time to try digital capture. Later added a D2HS. Excellent low light high ISO shooter. Focuses better than my 50yr old eyes in any light. BIG viewfinder. No complaints but large and heavy.
I shot no film for 8 months instead doing everything digital to see if I could get what I wanted, and when I did shoot film, XP2 in the M, M5400 scanner, Epson 2200 w/UT7 for output I was thrilled and disappointed.
Thilled by the results. Thrilled to be back to the little Zing the Leica glass has that Nikon doesn't, thrilled the the PP is sooooo easy.
Dissapointed because I saw that for sure digital is missing something. I do a good job, I have good equipment, good SW and good PP habits. Prints are great, good tones etc............ Just something not there.
There is no reason I don't just shoot film. I have no deadlines etc.. I can do what I want. The freakin' digital is convienent. Can I be doing this for convience? Well I may be.
I shot one roll of XP2 of the 4th. With no chemicals mixed for as often as I am shooting film XP2 is easy and scans really well.
That roll looks great. I'l scan 6? frames at most. So I have 6 frames on the HD instead of god knows how many if I shot digital. I never seem to delete really anything.
My point if any? I don't hate digital. If I was still in the biz it would be all I'd use. But film and the look of good scanned film and ink jet printing assuming most of us no longer wet print is very special. Others do see the difference and they comment on it when they see my prints. Got to be something to it doesn't there.
I was very happy shooting with my M's and TX and scanning and printing. No complaints from me or anyone who wanted a print. Every now and then I'd use a Nikon. Leica lens' look better, not starting a war here.
Why then did I decide quite out of the blue that I should have a digital body for all the Nikon lenses? I got a D70S. I had lenses and was very comfortable with post processing already so it was just time to try digital capture. Later added a D2HS. Excellent low light high ISO shooter. Focuses better than my 50yr old eyes in any light. BIG viewfinder. No complaints but large and heavy.
I shot no film for 8 months instead doing everything digital to see if I could get what I wanted, and when I did shoot film, XP2 in the M, M5400 scanner, Epson 2200 w/UT7 for output I was thrilled and disappointed.
Thilled by the results. Thrilled to be back to the little Zing the Leica glass has that Nikon doesn't, thrilled the the PP is sooooo easy.
Dissapointed because I saw that for sure digital is missing something. I do a good job, I have good equipment, good SW and good PP habits. Prints are great, good tones etc............ Just something not there.
There is no reason I don't just shoot film. I have no deadlines etc.. I can do what I want. The freakin' digital is convienent. Can I be doing this for convience? Well I may be.
I shot one roll of XP2 of the 4th. With no chemicals mixed for as often as I am shooting film XP2 is easy and scans really well.
That roll looks great. I'l scan 6? frames at most. So I have 6 frames on the HD instead of god knows how many if I shot digital. I never seem to delete really anything.
My point if any? I don't hate digital. If I was still in the biz it would be all I'd use. But film and the look of good scanned film and ink jet printing assuming most of us no longer wet print is very special. Others do see the difference and they comment on it when they see my prints. Got to be something to it doesn't there.
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
rvaubel said:
Indeed he described the RD-1 pretty well
Frank K
Member
The new Leica C-Lux 1 is the camera I carry in my shirt or jacket pocket, something I cannot do with my OLY8080 or my film cameras. There are times when it comes in very handy. For serious shooting though I shoot film.
Iggy
Member
"Hate" is too strong but...
"Hate" is too strong but...
Fell on hard times and had to sell my 3 month old R3a, 90 apo lanthar & 35mm color skopar. No regrets coz them's the breaks. Fast forward 6 months, hard times recede and I`ve reasoned myself into getting a 30D with sigma 18-50 f2.8. You know how it is... "Think of the money I'll save on d&p. I can delete failed shots as I go along..." and all of the blah, blah, blah. The moment of purchase comes but something stops me. I convince myself it's best to wait & see what Photokina brings.
For my daughter's 1st Holy Communion I make do with a battered old Fujica slr & 55mm f1.6 loaded with XP2 and my GR1 loaded with superia 200. I look at the results, laugh at my stupidity and start thinking 35mm film scanner.
Simply put, I don't want chunky, engineered plastic, autofocus & dim viewfinders. I've got nothing against digital per se, indeed the next camera I buy will probably be some superzoom digi-compact for the whole family. Looking for one today I got distracted by a Leica MP which felt perfect. MP plus 50mm f1.4 'kit' only £3,000 and no need to wait for Photokina.
"Hate" is too strong but...
Fell on hard times and had to sell my 3 month old R3a, 90 apo lanthar & 35mm color skopar. No regrets coz them's the breaks. Fast forward 6 months, hard times recede and I`ve reasoned myself into getting a 30D with sigma 18-50 f2.8. You know how it is... "Think of the money I'll save on d&p. I can delete failed shots as I go along..." and all of the blah, blah, blah. The moment of purchase comes but something stops me. I convince myself it's best to wait & see what Photokina brings.
For my daughter's 1st Holy Communion I make do with a battered old Fujica slr & 55mm f1.6 loaded with XP2 and my GR1 loaded with superia 200. I look at the results, laugh at my stupidity
and start thinking 35mm film scanner.Simply put, I don't want chunky, engineered plastic, autofocus & dim viewfinders. I've got nothing against digital per se, indeed the next camera I buy will probably be some superzoom digi-compact for the whole family. Looking for one today I got distracted by a Leica MP which felt perfect. MP plus 50mm f1.4 'kit' only £3,000 and no need to wait for Photokina.
Attachments
Nachkebia
Well-known
Great pictures Iggy!