GeneW
Veteran
I'd do the same. I have the Canon G2 and still use it a lot. Love the tilt&swivel LCD display. A very versatile cam. You can use it like a RF with eye-level viewing and like a TLR for waist-level viewing. I find it great for shooting pics of flowers in our garden. Don't have to lie on my belly to get closeups of those low blossomsdigitalox said:
Gene
JohnL
Very confused
For less than $400 you could get a mint (or new, if you can still find one) Canon G5. Might not quite match the 35mm in every respect, but you'd rarely be able to tell the difference.digitalox said:
back alley
IMAGES
i'm not anti digital as much as i used to be.
i had on loan my buddy's oly digicam and it was very cool to take shots of everything i owned. great for the net to show what i could not explain.
if i had the cash i would probably get one. i vacillate from thinking about a small point & shoot, mostly for net use, to getting something a bit better.
i'm in no rush though.
joe
i had on loan my buddy's oly digicam and it was very cool to take shots of everything i owned. great for the net to show what i could not explain.
if i had the cash i would probably get one. i vacillate from thinking about a small point & shoot, mostly for net use, to getting something a bit better.
i'm in no rush though.
joe
g0tr00t
Well-known
Kris said:David, how about trading your 1D with Bessa R2 + 50/1.5 + 35/2.5 + 75/2.5?
LOL!! Would be nice....
My 1D is my workhorse. I shoot locally at college sporting events.
Also, model homes...The 1D is a VERY capable camera when it comes to color and clean images...
http://www.davidsavkovic.com/bf/BF20041111/images/699G7513.jpg
http://www.davidsavkovic.com/bf/BF20041111/images/699G7671.jpg
http://www.davidsavkovic.com/bf/BF20041111/images/699G7385.jpg
EDIT: I do love my B&W film though. I carry my QL17 everywhere and leave the digi's at home.
Last edited:
T
That Guy
Guest
Dance with the devil,
the devil don't change,
The devil changes you...
the devil don't change,
The devil changes you...
Well,
Kris, sorry. But I dont think it will burn very well. Its like one solid piece of metal.
If only I had some sunlight here today I would snap a few shots to show. But I think it will take me a good part of today, tomorrow and Sunday to read and understand the manual.
Kris, sorry. But I dont think it will burn very well. Its like one solid piece of metal.
If only I had some sunlight here today I would snap a few shots to show. But I think it will take me a good part of today, tomorrow and Sunday to read and understand the manual.
S
sfaust
Guest
Welcome sinner I danced with the devil a long time ago. Got totally frustrated with digital due to shutter lag issues, 2,000 preflashes before it took each exposure, very slow and inaccurate auto focus, poor picture quality, etc. At one point I migrated to a higher end fixed lens SLR, and felt it was better, but still had issues.
Then I tried a friends D1x, and anothers D100. All those issues were solved, and it took all the expensive Nikon lenses I use with my Nikon film cameras. I dod my research and got a Fuji S2. Digital nirvana, I could close my eyes and handle the camera and it felt like any other film SLR I shot. All the controls in the right spot. Instaneous shutter release, very fast and accurate auto focus, and I could turn it all off and shoot like I could my Nikon FM2 manual SLR. And the quality was excellent all the way up to 11x14. So I continue to dance with the devil, and film largely went aside except for work when film as needed
But while dancing with the devil, I looked over my shoulder and saw these cool rangefinders from the 70's. Decided to get one as my car camera, and to use strictly B&W film for it. Its funny how they multiply like rabbits!! Now I have a slew of them, including a R3a on order. I've got to stop feeding them, or they will continue to breed.
Anyway, while I still shoot mostly digital, I now shoot much more B&W film that I have in the last 5 years. Mostly for my own personal enjoyment, and as an excuse to use the RF's. Most of my equipment budget goes toward DLSR's, but I always make room of another RF in the bag.
Whether you're a die hard film or digital guy, its easy to do both! So I guess the dark side isn't that dark, probably more like 18% gray
I danced with the devil a long time ago. Got totally frustrated with digital due to shutter lag issues, 2,000 preflashes before it took each exposure, very slow and inaccurate auto focus, poor picture quality, etc. At one point I migrated to a higher end fixed lens SLR, and felt it was better, but still had issues. Then I tried a friends D1x, and anothers D100. All those issues were solved, and it took all the expensive Nikon lenses I use with my Nikon film cameras. I dod my research and got a Fuji S2. Digital nirvana, I could close my eyes and handle the camera and it felt like any other film SLR I shot. All the controls in the right spot. Instaneous shutter release, very fast and accurate auto focus, and I could turn it all off and shoot like I could my Nikon FM2 manual SLR. And the quality was excellent all the way up to 11x14. So I continue to dance with the devil, and film largely went aside except for work when film as needed
But while dancing with the devil, I looked over my shoulder and saw these cool rangefinders from the 70's. Decided to get one as my car camera, and to use strictly B&W film for it. Its funny how they multiply like rabbits!! Now I have a slew of them, including a R3a on order. I've got to stop feeding them, or they will continue to breed.
Anyway, while I still shoot mostly digital, I now shoot much more B&W film that I have in the last 5 years. Mostly for my own personal enjoyment, and as an excuse to use the RF's. Most of my equipment budget goes toward DLSR's, but I always make room of another RF in the bag.
Whether you're a die hard film or digital guy, its easy to do both! So I guess the dark side isn't that dark, probably more like 18% gray
g0tr00t
Well-known
sfaust - you sound like me! I did the same thing. In a matter of 4 weeks, I have 5 rangefinders!!!
I use them for B&W only and only for myself and some small jobs. My digital does the rest.
I develop and print my own B&W's so it is my break from life. I disappear into the darkroom and life seems to stand still.
I use them for B&W only and only for myself and some small jobs. My digital does the rest.
I develop and print my own B&W's so it is my break from life. I disappear into the darkroom and life seems to stand still.
K
Kin Lau
Guest
The 1Ds is very nice, if a little hefty, but the full-frame sensor will make it an easy adjustment from RF's. Get the 50mm 1.8 and try some shots at 1600iso. The 1Ds has the lowest sensor noise of all the dslr's.
I only have a lowly 300D, but it makes possible many wildlife shots I would have never even tried on film.
I only have a lowly 300D, but it makes possible many wildlife shots I would have never even tried on film.
P
pshinkaw
Guest
A couple of weeks ago I shot a wedding using color negative film. A few days before the wedding, I received a call from another photographer who was married to the official performing the ceremony. He asked if I minded if he shadowed me and photograpged the wedding as well. he need the practice for a family wedding he planned on shooting in a few months. I agreed.
He then explained that he had been a professional photographer for some 20+ years, but that he shot exclusively wildlife pictures. I recognized his name from my previous job, as a very well know wildlife photographer. Apparently he shoots only digital now. His digital work is superb. I don't think he even uses film for anything anymore.
I were trying to make a living from photography, I would seriously consider going digital for photographic as well as business reasons. However, money only flows one way in my photography...out. So I'm sticking with film.
-Paul
He then explained that he had been a professional photographer for some 20+ years, but that he shot exclusively wildlife pictures. I recognized his name from my previous job, as a very well know wildlife photographer. Apparently he shoots only digital now. His digital work is superb. I don't think he even uses film for anything anymore.
I were trying to make a living from photography, I would seriously consider going digital for photographic as well as business reasons. However, money only flows one way in my photography...out. So I'm sticking with film.
-Paul
g0tr00t
Well-known
Hey Paul, I know what you mean. I was at a wedding recently. There were 2 photog there all digital plus 1 assistant in a room. While they were shooting, she was grabbing the CF cards for them. At the end of the night, she had a proof album completed and handed it the bride and groom prior to them leaving for their honeymoon.
She said, "Here are your proofs, while on your honeymoon, pick what you like and get back to me when you return."
Man, I tell you that was a killer deal. When our friends came back, I asked how they liked taking the proof album with them....they both loved it. Both of them said it was nice to be on their honeymoon away from the office, phones, etc...and browse through the album of their wedding. Once they got back, it was back to the hectic grind...
Nice eh?
She said, "Here are your proofs, while on your honeymoon, pick what you like and get back to me when you return."
Man, I tell you that was a killer deal. When our friends came back, I asked how they liked taking the proof album with them....they both loved it. Both of them said it was nice to be on their honeymoon away from the office, phones, etc...and browse through the album of their wedding. Once they got back, it was back to the hectic grind...
Nice eh?
P
pshinkaw
Guest
As an amateur, I can't begin to justify buying the kind of digitial equipment I would need to replace my Mamiya C330 and Nikon F's. Just the thought of having all that equipment become obsolete in 18-24 months and not even supportable with spare parts after 5 years is mind boggling. An then there is the additional costs of upgrading my computer and printer!
But, If I were able to capitalize the costs and depreciate it over it's relatively short useful life, I can see where it would be hard NOT TO digitalize a professional studio just on an economic basis.
My one-time wildlife photographer colleague said that one of the reasons he went digital was that the best custom labs would occassionally scratch his negatives or lose them. His shots were truly once-in-a-lifetime shots, penguins in the antarctic etc.
He can now verify on-site that he has a good shot, never lose control of his originals, and submit his photos to his publishers electronically. No more third parties service providers, no more U.S. Mail.
Meanwhile, I'm happily chugging along with my 30-35 year old film cameras, my wife is happy with her F3 and 500CM, and my youngest daughter puts down her FE and serves as her mother's magazine loader.
-Paul
But, If I were able to capitalize the costs and depreciate it over it's relatively short useful life, I can see where it would be hard NOT TO digitalize a professional studio just on an economic basis.
My one-time wildlife photographer colleague said that one of the reasons he went digital was that the best custom labs would occassionally scratch his negatives or lose them. His shots were truly once-in-a-lifetime shots, penguins in the antarctic etc.
He can now verify on-site that he has a good shot, never lose control of his originals, and submit his photos to his publishers electronically. No more third parties service providers, no more U.S. Mail.
Meanwhile, I'm happily chugging along with my 30-35 year old film cameras, my wife is happy with her F3 and 500CM, and my youngest daughter puts down her FE and serves as her mother's magazine loader.
-Paul
g0tr00t
Well-known
pshinkaw said:
Hmm....I disagree.
The wife said that if my 1D becomes obsolete, then I will go out with it....
I am keeping my 1D until it dies. Once that happens, I was told to use it as a hammer...
Look honey, see I told you I would keep the 1D for more than a year! :angel:
Last edited:
JohnL
Very confused
This question of obsolescence in digital cameras has been a very valid sticking point for many film users. I think that phase is beginning to come to an end, however.
Until quite recently, digital quality could not compete with film. Now it can, and the real need for the latest technology is fading. Of course, the perceived need may still be just as alive and strong as ever.
Digital cameras in the 6 to 8 MP range can compete with 35mm. At the top end of cameras that look like they are 35mm, you can get digitals with 10 to 16 MP. These are more or less competitive with medium format. Adding pixels from now on will be the same in effect as moving to a larger format.
Then there are the questions of ISO and noise. The latest generation of serious digitals is at least competitive with film in this regard. You can get 400 ISO with noise that is generally considered less obstrusive than the grain in 400 ISO film, and tolerable noise levels up to 1600 or even 3200 ISO.
Also, I don't think that the users of older digital cameras that are worth keeping (i.e. fairly recent ones) are going to be left in the lurch for maintenance. There is a huge number of these cameras out there, probably as many already (or perhaps more) than there are (say) working Leicas of all vintages, so the economics are in place for supporting this equipment for years to come.
None of this would have been true just a few years ago, but the situation has really changed.
Many pros are now selling off their older high-end gear (e.g trading 1D's up to the Mk2), and while even used prices at this level are still higher than new film-based cameras, the gap is closing fast. At the rate prices are falling, you'll probably soon be able to get a recent-but-not-current top-of-the-line digital SLR in good condition for about the same price as a used M7 in similar shape.
Food for thought. Hey - even Jorge has succumbed!
Until quite recently, digital quality could not compete with film. Now it can, and the real need for the latest technology is fading. Of course, the perceived need may still be just as alive and strong as ever.
Digital cameras in the 6 to 8 MP range can compete with 35mm. At the top end of cameras that look like they are 35mm, you can get digitals with 10 to 16 MP. These are more or less competitive with medium format. Adding pixels from now on will be the same in effect as moving to a larger format.
Then there are the questions of ISO and noise. The latest generation of serious digitals is at least competitive with film in this regard. You can get 400 ISO with noise that is generally considered less obstrusive than the grain in 400 ISO film, and tolerable noise levels up to 1600 or even 3200 ISO.
Also, I don't think that the users of older digital cameras that are worth keeping (i.e. fairly recent ones) are going to be left in the lurch for maintenance. There is a huge number of these cameras out there, probably as many already (or perhaps more) than there are (say) working Leicas of all vintages, so the economics are in place for supporting this equipment for years to come.
None of this would have been true just a few years ago, but the situation has really changed.
Many pros are now selling off their older high-end gear (e.g trading 1D's up to the Mk2), and while even used prices at this level are still higher than new film-based cameras, the gap is closing fast. At the rate prices are falling, you'll probably soon be able to get a recent-but-not-current top-of-the-line digital SLR in good condition for about the same price as a used M7 in similar shape.
Food for thought. Hey - even Jorge has succumbed!
P
pshinkaw
Guest
There is a small town near here with a slogan painted on its water tower.
"(name of town)....Gently resisting change"
I just don't want to do it.
-Paul
"(name of town)....Gently resisting change"
I just don't want to do it.
-Paul
I have used Digital cameras for a long time; fine for work but not really any joy in using them.
A pro these days needsa digital setup. I use my digital cameras for documentation of custom prototypes and lab experiments. At home I use an old Kodak DC50 (circa 1996) for taking pictures of cameras for sale.
Jorge, just buy the M7 (or an MP) whether you keep the digital or not.
Have I danced with the Digital Devil and has it changed me? I am as deep into Digital Imaging as people can go and I am still the same lovable guy that I have always been!
A pro these days needsa digital setup. I use my digital cameras for documentation of custom prototypes and lab experiments. At home I use an old Kodak DC50 (circa 1996) for taking pictures of cameras for sale.
Jorge, just buy the M7 (or an MP) whether you keep the digital or not.
Have I danced with the Digital Devil and has it changed me? I am as deep into Digital Imaging as people can go and I am still the same lovable guy that I have always been!
Last edited:
g0tr00t
Well-known
pshinkaw said:
Good for you. Don't do it. I am having more fun with fim, than I ever had with digital. I am starting to "see" in black and white. I see my shots before I take them. I am having a blast!
My son also joins me in the darkroom. He is 5 years old and watches me remove the film from the camera, bring it out in the tank, process it and dry it then print it. He loves it!
He asks me if we can do the magic pictures again. Plus the 1 on 1 time I spend with him in there could NEVER EVER EVER be replaced by sitting infront of a monitor with PS. Its just not the same.
S
sfaust
Guest
Jorge, if you do get around to shooting with a fast lens at ISO1600, I would love to compare notes. I've been wandering around the streets of Boston over the last month or so with a 85mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, and a few f2.8 lenses pusing my S2 Pro at ISO1600 to see what it can do. I've been very pleased with the results overall. While I expect to see noise, as long as it appears to like film grain, I'm more than happy. But, if it looks like digital noise, thats a big issue for me. The 1Ds is supposed to be better in high ISO shooting, but how much better is better. I have no samples. If you grabed a number of exposures for me, I could compare apples to apples.
If you are interested in what the S2 can do hand held for night shooting with fast lenses, check out my gallery here... Most of these are shot at ISO 800 or ISO 1600, and all hand held. Mostly with a 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8, or a 70-200 2.8 VR .
http://www.photozo.com/album/showgallery.php?cat=3807
This shot here always blows me away when I see it. Its at ISO800, but the colors are vivid and alive. I don't usually expect that with film, let alone digital. In the high res version, there isl grain but its very minimal and acceptable.
Here is the 100% crop from the camera original of the image above, which was only a 4MB Jpeg image.
If you are interested in what the S2 can do hand held for night shooting with fast lenses, check out my gallery here... Most of these are shot at ISO 800 or ISO 1600, and all hand held. Mostly with a 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8, or a 70-200 2.8 VR .
http://www.photozo.com/album/showgallery.php?cat=3807
This shot here always blows me away when I see it. Its at ISO800, but the colors are vivid and alive. I don't usually expect that with film, let alone digital. In the high res version, there isl grain but its very minimal and acceptable.
Here is the 100% crop from the camera original of the image above, which was only a 4MB Jpeg image.
Last edited by a moderator:
S
sblair
Guest
As Jorge has seen, my 6m Fuji does a very good job on 11x14 prints. I can also go to 12m if I need to go larger. Since Jorge and I work together it will be interesting if he goes digital or back to film. I shot film for over 30 years and still have to Nikons. But I do like digital. One thing is that you have to 6m at a minimum.
Ok, I took some pictures and had to delet them all. Man I suck at this. There are 175 pages in the manual and I guess I am going to have to read them
However, this site gives me hope
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&thumb=1
However, this site gives me hope
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&thumb=1