Selling DSLR Outfit for an M - Any Regrets??

[MartinP]

Why does the SLR need to be digital, if you are already tuned in to a film work-flow ? Find a nice oldish film SLR (maybe even medium-format) and get a cheapo digital p+s for holiday snaps or whatever, that would be my recommendation.

 

[matt335]

Mike,

I have exactly almost that same dilemma. I have a 1DS Mk2 with nice lenses. Like a friend once said, "I Use the DSLR for work, and I use the Leica M for personal use". That being the case I was horrified at the quoted re-sale value of my DSLAR gear, only 2 years old in perfect condition. I knew I wasn't comparing like to like. Maybe I would get a nice leica lens if I sold all my digital gear? I have chosen to hang onto my DSLR gear for now....once I sold 2 Gibson guitars to finance a wedding, car, honeymoon once. I miss those irreplaceable guitars :bang:

good luck !

 

[kywong]

I had a M and a EOS 20D, decided to sell the 20D before I have money for a replacement because it just depreciates too quickly. I thought I would buy a replacement once the 5D MkII came out, but I ended up with a couple of lenses for the M instead. I still have a EOS 3 only for the wide end of my 17-40, but I'm thinking about getting a Zeiss 18mm and getting rid of all my SLR gear altogether.

All that said, I am not a professional so it's quite a minor decision for me.

 

[Tim Gray]

kywong: I sold my 17-40 for my Canon 1V and purchased a CV 15/4.5. No regrets. It's funny to see those two lenses next to each other.

 

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

No matter what the equipment and the format: my heart doesn't beat digital, it throbs FILM.

Although I also use digital for convenience or necessity, I keep prefering my film gear by far, be it Leica or whatever.

I mostly love manual/mechanic cameras. They don't allow me to be so much lazy, as when I use auto-everything (film or digital).

They are themselves not so much lazy too: problems and failures have a much lower rate.

The build quality of good film cameras and optics is usually much better than what they serve us in these days, with very few exceptions. (Compare for ex. an older Leica 50mm lens, or an older Zeiss Planar, and a "plastic" Canon 1.4 50mm... ).

I could say the same about an older AIs Nikon lens and the new AF generation. Etc, etc.

Most cameras today are full of idiotic gimmicks, bells and whistles, that I don't need.

If I were you I would go the rangefinder route, at least if you don't want/need to earn money with your equipment.

I have a special joy using my Leica M's, that I can't get from my Canon digital. There are worlds in between!

Have fun,

Rui

AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY

 

[maitrestanley]

I say keep a hybrid system of both dSLR and film RF.

Personally, I choose the D300 or M7 depending on the job. If I'm doing a car shoot for a client, the D300 comes out. In fact, if ANY flash-work is involved, there is no question about what to use: I will always use digital. I simply can't afford shooting a billion polaroid tests, choosing what you hope is the best exposure based on those tests, and hope that your final image turns out the same as the polaroid.

Actually, I would use my D300 99% of the time when it comes to a paid job. I might bring out the M7 once in a while to shoot a portrait or two or maybe a model.

Other than work, I use my M7 90% of the time (I shoot primarily BW. If I want colour, I'll pull out the D300). The M7 is much smaller, less invasive, and just a pleasure to use. Also, as weird as it sounds, for me, it's waaaaaaay easier to travel with a film kit.

When I toured ecuador last summer, I had to lug around my body, grip, lenses, memory cards, extra batteries, a laptop, an external hard drive, and cables for everything. It was probably 25lb in total.

With my M7 and 50, all I need to take is maybe 30-40 rolls of film and I'm set. If I decide to process along the way, then it is only an extra 1-2 lb in developing chems and tools. In all, the kit would 10lb MAXIMUM.

Anyways my thoughts are mad scattered.. sorry : D

 

[rphenning]

I sold my Mark III for a m4 and 35 summicron and I am planning on selling the rest of my digital setup for a 50 summilux, film, and travel funds.

 

[WDPictures]

Recently sold my old, back-up dSLR and an old digital P+S. More because they weren't being used but also before their trade-in value is worthless. Due to the original cost vs. current/replacement value I can't seem to part with my D2x which is gathering dust, depreciation sucks especially for digital gear. My Nikon glass can also be used with an F100 so that is my reasoning for keeping some dSLR gear. Along similar lines I've seen a few "getting back into... after many years away" posts so could that another reason to keep what you already own?

 

[Doug]

...Along similar lines I've seen a few "getting back into... after many years away" posts so could that another reason to keep what you already own?

Yes, I think so... And even if you keep your hand in, you may go through phases where you pick up using gear unused for a while. I think it's been a couple of years now since I used my Bronica RF645... It's not "out of favor" really and I'd not think of selling it as I know there's a Bronica phase out there waiting to happen. 🙂

 

[Haigh]

I enjoy using my LX3, also my D80 but if I'm taking photos that I will print in my darkroom then it is my M4 and Tri-x.