Let's hear it for the dslr!

T

Thardy

Veteran
Local time
11:01 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
2,174
I've been on a kick of using my film based RF and digi compact over the last few weeks. Going to my daughter's graduation today I, however grabbed a dslr from the table and made sure I had an SD card inside. It had a older type kit lens on it, which I figured was good enough.

At the graduation when the action was a little quick I marveled at how the camera really kept up. Quick, decisive focus and exposure, flash , no flash, etc. However my friend with his expensive looking p and s seemed to be having a hard time making an exposure every ten seconds.

No real revealation I know, just my confession that dslrs are great tools. And you know what? It was small and quite handy. Not so bulky like I'm always thinking.

Just have to now convince my friend that some great cameras can be had for about the same price as a compact.
 
I normally use my 1953 Zeiss Contaflex I as my daily camera, and it's a pretty awesome little camera. But today my little cousin was born, and I decided to take my Canon 10D instead, together with a 50mm 1.8 and a 28-105 USM, no flash. I was able to take some great pictures of her thanks to the versatility of digital cameras. I would have had a harder time with my other cameras. (Although I also used a Canon A2E for B&W film)
 
I totally hear ya .... I love RFs and the experience they offer, but I want FF, and the M9 price is a joke: Im looking at a CaNikon dSLR using vintage lenses using adaptors offered by Fotodiox and Leitax, offering me more than enough options to use great old lenses with ease of use!
 
I'm going to a birthday bash at a restaurant tomorrow with around twenty people there ... the birthday boy is going to be eighty seven and although in their later years the crowd will be unruly for sure ... I know them all well. :D

I'm taking the D700 with an auto focus 35mm on it and I'm going to shoot it in aperture priority, intelligent auto focus and leave exposure up to the matrix metering system. Every shot will be perfectly exposed, in focus and I can just relax and enjoy the occasion.

I thought about a nice little Leica screwmount with a squinty little viewfinder, 50mm f2 Summitar and a roll of Tri-X ... for about ten seconds! :p
 
I just bought a 5d II. I feel dirty!!!

Not sure if I'll dig the 5d, but I'm settling into a nice workflow of digital for color and tri-x for b&w.
 
Sure, they take nice pictures, but am I the only one who's not impressed by the DSLR? This is an evolutionary dead end- digital cameras could be so much smaller and simpler, and still have full control and give the professional results if they were built from the ground up, rather than engineered around this out-dated optical gymnastic system. I'm encouraged by micro 4/3's and Sony and Samsung's attempts to build a mirrorless camera that still can give professional results, but we're not there yet- and the longer design remains hamstrung by outmoded technology, the longer it's going to take, apparently.
 
drewbarb said:
Sure, they take nice pictures, but am I the only one who's not impressed by the DSLR? This is an evolutionary dead end- digital cameras could be so much smaller and simpler, and still have full control and give the professional results if they were built from the ground up, rather than engineered around this out-dated optical gymnastic system. I'm encouraged by micro 4/3's and Sony and Samsung's attempts to build a mirrorless camera that still can give professional results, but we're not there yet- and the longer design remains hamstrung by outmoded technology, the longer it's going to take, apparently.
Click to expand...


I agree to a point but this 'evolutionary dead end' has dominated photography for near on fifty years now ... and sure it's run will come to an end when someone comes up with a system that works better than the mirror and prism! In the meantime we have cameras that are at the pinacle of their evolutionary journey and we'll probably miss them when they're gone. :p
 
Last edited:
Thardy said:
I've been on a kick of using my film based RF and digi compact over the last few weeks. Going to my daughter's graduation today I, however grabbed a dslr from the table and made sure I had an SD card inside. It had a older type kit lens on it, which I figured was good enough.

At the graduation when the action was a little quick I marveled at how the camera really kept up. Quick, decisive focus and exposure, flash , no flash, etc. However my friend with his expensive looking p and s seemed to be having a hard time making an exposure every ten seconds.

No real revealation I know, just my confession that dslrs are great tools. And you know what? It was small and quite handy. Not so bulky like I'm always thinking.

Just have to now convince my friend that some great cameras can be had for about the same price as a compact.
Click to expand...

not exactly on the small side but you should try the eos 1dmkIIN for a giggle one day. with a usm prime it is bewilderingly fast!
 
I really like my D2x too. For its uses. When taking pics of kids in motion, or other action shots they are invaluable. When I need to bracket exposures, wildlife photos, and now macro too. I got an M to F converter yesterday. Will allow me to use M/LTM lenses on my Nikon for macro use. That should proove to be fun.
 
Whoops ... in a complete RFF style flip flop I've abandoned the DSLR D700 idea and am now taking my film N90s with a roll of Fuji Pro 800Z to the birthday bash tomorrow!

Pretty much the same functionality but with high speed colour film ... yum!

:p
 
A hulking DSLR can be just the ticket, but so can a petite film RF. Sometimes, I want to use them at the same time!

ouago3.jpg
 
Praise of DSLRs reminds me of the famous theatre review: "People who quite like this sort of thing will find that this is the sort of thing they quite like."

Cheers,

R.
 
drewbarb said:
Sure, they take nice pictures, but am I the only one who's not impressed by the DSLR? This is an evolutionary dead end- digital cameras could be so much smaller and simpler, and still have full control and give the professional results if they were built from the ground up, rather than engineered around this out-dated optical gymnastic system. I'm encouraged by micro 4/3's and Sony and Samsung's attempts to build a mirrorless camera that still can give professional results, but we're not there yet- and the longer design remains hamstrung by outmoded technology, the longer it's going to take, apparently.
Click to expand...

I am just waiting for one of our RFF mad-scientist-brethren to stuff the innards of a 5d II into an MP, then we'll be on our way!
 
I do love the ease of use with my D700 and for action and speed of use it's just the best camera I have for that. The M's for me are for a completely different use and I still like the images that summicrons and 'lux's produce. I like using manual Nikkors but for speed and ease a CaNikon with good auto focus glass is IMHO unbeatable. I'm still debating in my head whether to sell my primes and get a 24-70 2.8 but it's just so BIG! i have seriously been considering an M9 but do wonder if I would get 5K worth of use out of it.
 
I will use my DSLR for the parade Monday..... but I still will have arguments with it because it doesn't know what it is doing. Stupid computer. But it has it's uses.

I do get along much nicer with my film bodies, all manual focus and simple meters, at this time, because they know who the boss is.
 
I love my 5d.

It's so ridiculously reliable and trusty I couldn't do without it. I always know what results are going to be like, and it always pull through abuse like nothing happened.

Workhorse.
 
rover said:
I will use my DSLR for the parade Monday..... but I still will have arguments with it because it doesn't know what it is doing. Stupid computer. But it has it's uses.

I do get along much nicer with my film bodies, all manual focus and simple meters, at this time, because they know who the boss is.
Click to expand...

That's the way I feel. I can't see the appeal of a camera that focuses wherever it pleases, and disagrees with me about exposure. Most of the shots I've ever taken with my Nikon DSLR have been with manual focus lenses, and many (perhaps most) have been exposed manually too, often with the screen and histogram as a 'Polaroid'.

Do I get better pics by relying on cameras with auto-everything (or indeed, auto-anything) than with manual cameras and 40+ years of experience? No. So why change?

The picture is one thing. The pleasure of taking the picture is another -- though the more I enjoy the process, the better the pics tend to be.

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom