I hate my new D700 gear; ergo, I really do hate digital

[pixelatedscraps]

It's beautiful; it's rugged; it was my dream DSLR setup. And yet I hate it. Apart from the drop-while-drunk-$500-repair debacle, I can't think of a bigger regret. I just don't get anywhere near the same joy taking photos with it as I do with my M4, Mamiya or OM gear.

It's like eating McDonalds when I know I'd prefer to go to the market, buy tomatoes, minced beef and pork, herbs, spices, select my own cheese (gruyere, perhaps) and make the damned burger myself. Every time.

My close photographer friends rib me for this: they know what I'm like. A Hasselblad 500 C/M was my dream camera too, at one point. I had it for about 6 months before I sold it because I couldn't convince myself I had the patience to be a composed, methodical kind of shooter. I'm not: it's all straight-from-the-hip, hell-bent-or-nothing with me. Testing it out in a store while taking photos of other customers staring blankly at giant LCD screens isn't enough of a litmus test for me, it seems.

Has anyone else had this? Gone through this? Regretted it all? Painted a douche-target on their forehead after dropping close to $6k on something that sort of, kind of, makes their skin crawl? (and 6k is a lot of money for me - I don't own property, a car or have savings of any significant value)

(And yes, my D700 gear will go up on RFF Classifieds as soon as I get some photos done)

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Wouldn't it be more fun to shoot photos than buy and sale cameras?

If you enjoy your M4, Mamiya and OM gear, why spend thousands on Nikon DSLR gear? I don't know how old you are, but if you are young, and can't be happy with digital, though, you are facing an uncertain future with your photography hobby.

 

[Keith]

Comparing the D700 to a big mac is a little harsh IMO! 😛

But I can see where you're coming from ... life and prgression costs ... it's no free ride!

 

[pachuco]

Have you tried using manual focus lenses? They may give you just the spark you need. I also prefer my Leica to my Canon DSLR but each one has pros and cons.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I'm beginning to think digital angst needs its own speciality in psychiatry! We are surrounded by digital stuff. I'm not sure what plunges folks into a metaphysical abyss when it comes to digital cameras.

 

[Keith]

Actually after reading your original post again I think you went the wrong way in getting the D700 ... maybe you should have got a 5D which would have allowed you to use your Zuiko lenses and have some tangible connection between digital and analog within your gear.

I considered this myself before buying a D700 and in some ways I wish I had actually gone in that direction.

 

[sper]

Don't sell it. A DSLR is like a hammer. You're GONNA need one for SOMETHING.

And use it they way it's meant to be used, at night.

I 2nd the notion of picking up some AI or Pre-AI lenses. They'll give you some of that old feeling.

You might hate digital, but you shouldn't. It has it's own aesthetic and it's slowly getting better.

 

[pixelatedscraps]

Well, I'd owned a 2nd-hand D200 and a couple of lenses about 3-4 years ago when I tried to move photography out from a hobby into a side-profession. Did a few product photography shoots and was second shooter on a couple of high-end fashion shoots for magazines here, but at the end of the day, it was my passion that was suffering the most by being told 'this is what shot you need to take, etc'. I pretty much quit and went back to my other day job(s), sold my D200 and picked up my film cameras again.

Don't get me wrong: I love taking photos and I have at least one camera with me every time I leave my home. I suffer no illusions that I spend more time reading reviews on DPreview than I do actually taking photos. I am blessed with the sort of day-job that affords me that much time to spend outside of the office.

Someone suggested using manual-focus lenses on my D700 - I have a 35/2 AIS which I usually leave on it, but I think I enjoy the entire process of film photography: from measuring (or estimating) light to the anticipation of 'did I get the shot?' when you develop (or pick up) film. I'm under no hurry; there is no urgency when I take photos - certainly I don't need the instant feedback of an LCD screen. Maybe I like keeping the somewhat primitive mystery of using film, the light around me, my eyes, fixed prime lenses and the very real likelihood that I may have missed the shot (if it was meant to be, I would have got it!) - I have no idea. Just speculating...

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

i still keep my first and only DSLR, the 40D. As sper said rightly, " You're GONNA need one (DSLR) for SOMETHING." I use it to take photos of my film cameras that I sell on the local classifieds, eg..

http://retro.ms11.net/familyone.jpg
http://retro.ms11.net/familytwo.jpg

 

[ebino]

has it occurred to you that maybe you're not fit for D700?

Almost of all of these winning photos were shot with a D700 or a D300. The winning shot of the ants is with a D700.

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/categoryGroup.do?group=4


So, if its good enough for winners of such prestigious award, it should be good enough for everyone.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I love film as well. I'll never get rid of my M4. That said, I know that digital is definitely the mainstream way now and into the future for as long as the electricity doesn't stop flowing.

If you want to give digital a chance, you can still do it with either a Leica or an Epson RD1. The RD1 is so analog that you can just leave the screen flipped over & never think about what you shot until you take the SD card out. With just a little more automation (winding) you could get a used/refurbished Leica M8. This is what I did after I moved from owning 2 RD1 bodies and loving them but wanting more in the way of viewfinder options (and a few other very small advantages of shooting a Leica over an Epson). Just a week ago today I received my M9. It's got me shooting a ton and once again loving photography almost as much as with my M4. It's just as manually operated as the old Leica. Takes the same lenses with no crop factor. It's amazing.

BUT...
If I had the ability to shoot exclusively film (the time and the ability to process then scan fast) I would just own an M4 and a few lenses. I hear what you're saying though.

If you find that digital capture isn't for you, that's fine too. Sell that body sooner than later because it won't appreciate in value. Lenses will hold their value much better, so there's not as much of a rush to sell in case you have an optic that you love. You could always try an F4 (the greatest AF film camera ever made IMO), they are cheap these days.

Either way, keep shooting what you want. It's your art, not anyone else's.

Phil Forrest

 

[Keith]

Keith: I agonized over the decision for a long time. I tested out a friend's 5D MKII for a few days, decided it wasn't for me. I have never liked the feel, fit or menu system of Canon bodies. Plus, I had a couple of old Nikon lenses lying around, too. I did also toy with the idea of an OM->Nikon converter, but they were prohibitively expensive.

I know what you mean about the Canon ... I just hate the look of the things! LOL

I only use primes on my D700 ... I don't care how good autofocus is I just plain don't like it ... not for the type of stuff I'm shooting anyway. I'm sure action/sports photographers feel differently! 🙂

 

[pixelatedscraps]

but when the chips are down and an image must be made the D700 has a certain usefulness above and beyond charm. 🙂

Ahh, but here's the difference for me: I don't need to take photos of anything. My livelihood does not depend on taking photos, I do it because I want to. Therefore there is no urgency or great need. I guess I had Kenyan safaris at the back of my mind, along with that nagging thought 'I must be missing something by not using digital'.

For the kind of photography and the type of joy I get from it, it would seem digital is a little redundant. That's not to say the D700 isn't almost perfect: is it. It's an awesome camera in almost every way, I just don't think I have any great need for digital photography.

Anyone interested in trading Leica M gear for a D700 kit? LOL

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Anyone interested in trading Leica M gear for a D700 kit? LOL

You should have caught me a year ago...

Phil Forrest

 

[Keith]

A little OT but does anyone here have any info about the Leitax adapters that allow you to put Zuiko lenses on a Nikon body. I can get an adpater for 62 euros that will allow me stop down metering on the D700 and I would seriouly love to see the Nikon IQ interpreted via my 50mm f1.2 Zuiko ... the mind boggles because I call this lens my SLR Noctilux for it's wild OOF areas in certain conditions and I think digitally the Nikon would really do it justice!

 

[cgiff]

Yeah, from your last post I wouldn't think you'd love a D700. It's a great workhorse -- the only way I've ever shot an assignment since taking ownership. The flexibility of the files is great, it's crazy fast, etc. And I agree that it might be the "M4 of digital" (though the original 5D suits that role.)

If you shoot for the experience and like the results from film, the Mamiya 6, M4 and OM-1 are perhaps the ideals in their respective categories. I don't blame you at all for wanting to get rid of it, though I'd have probably rented first. Whatever works.

edit;

A little OT but does anyone here have any info about the Leitax adapters that allow you to put Zuiko lenses on a Nikon body. I can get an adpater for 62 euros that will allow me stop down metering on the D700 and I would seriouly love to see the Nikon IQ interpreted via my 50mm f1.2 Zuiko ... the mind boggles because I call this lens my SLR Noctilux for it's wild OOF areas in certain conditions and I think digitally the Nikon would really do it justice!

I have adapted the Zuiko 100/2 and 28/2 (which I actually converted back for use on my OM-1.) The Leitax adapters are made well, you'll be really happy with it! My 100/2 on digital is awesome.

 

[retro]

I totally agree with the OP. For my tastes I don't see any reason to
buy a DSLR that is beyond, say, 6-8 MP which one can find
for a few hundred bucks used (which I have). Preferably one that
uses the same lenses as film SLRs I already own. I just don't see
any reason for going beyond that and spending thousands on
zillions of mega-dots that I don't need.

So, I spend most of my photo time shooting film and picking up
more bargain film equipment. My modest DSLR is fine for quick
snaps of family and friends, etc. but I take no particular pride in
anything it shoots. It's just for expediency in certain situations.

 

[andredossantos]

And use it they way it's meant to be used, at night.

I agree 100%

I was digital-less for a couple years before getting a DSLR again about 6 months ago. It took a while for me to get along with it that is until I attached a f1.2 lens and brought it down into the subway and other dark places.

DSLR's kick royal ass in low light. Plan and simple. That's when I have the most fun shooting with mine.

And I still love my film cameras just as much.

 

[Taynt3d]

I love my rangefinders, but you'd still have to pry my 5D2 out of my cold dead hands...

 

[Ted Witcher]

Rule #1 .. remember that digital cameras are like laptops.. in 6mo they have lost a lot of value.

Actually, as of 2009, Rule #1 is ignore this advice whenever it comes up, which is often. The D700 is not a laptop computer, it is a specialized tool. As long as it turns on, it will be of value, because it will do that which you want it to do: take pictures. And those pictures will have IQ comparable to 35mm film, which cameras under 10-12 MP did not. So once that threshold was crossed, the game changed. I'm speaking about digital cameras in general, but as far as that camera goes specifically, used D700s are very close in price to new ones. There is a reason for this.

Can't help you like shooting digital, though. Keep the lenses and pick up an F6.