|
Post by GeneW on Dec 2, 2006 18:50:14 GMT -5
Well put indeed, Mickey. Once you give digital an honest try with a good digital camera it can change you.
I still shoot lots of film but not because I think there's anything superior or purer about it, it's just that I really like my film gear.
It's all good.
Gene
|
|
paul7
Contributing Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by paul7 on Dec 2, 2006 23:13:34 GMT -5
Okay Mickey, you talked me into giving it a try. My wife and I are leaving for Bermuda tomorrow for 5 days to get in some much needed R&R. I'll swing by Circuit City and pick up a digital camera on the way to the airport. When I get back I'll share my thoughts.
Paul
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Dec 3, 2006 1:08:13 GMT -5
Hey, I wasn't proseletizing. Just voicing my opinion. Here are two caveats: 1. Before you buy find out about shutter lag. 2. If you haven't used a digital camera before, the massive manual can be intimidating. Mickey
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Dec 3, 2006 7:17:06 GMT -5
Manual, don't need no stinking manual. Yea right. Mickey you sure are correct that the manuals for these digi cams can be intimidating and thick too. I don't think that I would be inclined to pick one up on the way to a holiday. I did that once and got a little frustrated trying to get the cam to do what I wanted it to do. It is an entirely different way of working with those menus and all the options to boot. You really need some break in time with the new gear to get comfortable with it.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by Randy on Dec 3, 2006 9:16:26 GMT -5
I have one of the more expensive Kodak Easyshares. The price I paid for it could have gotten me 5 or 6 classic cameras, and I can't see spending what some of the DSLRs cost, it's just too much money for me. I use my digital camera for model shots, ebay, and to take pictures of my cameras to show here. I've also used it to shoot some video. I love my film cameras, and like someone else said, they will be still working long after that digital camera gives up the farm.
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Dec 3, 2006 13:37:01 GMT -5
Randy
Like jennyandernie in another post here, I have decided to go digital on an upcoming trip with lots of air travell involved. The idea is to loose weight and minimize airport security hassles associated with carry film. I hope it works out. I view my digitals as disposable cameras that will die long before my film gear does. I don't get the same satisfaction from the digis that I get from using my film cams. a tactile thing I suppose. They all have there uses though.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by lulalake on Dec 3, 2006 22:57:38 GMT -5
Just one comment. I do a lot of digital then convert to B&W. I practice a lot and attempt maaaaany different conversion techniques.
I really like it when folks see the work and comment that it really looks like B&W film.
It's funny, but you never hear a person complimenting a B&W film print with, "Wow! That really looks like digital!"
Cheers
Jules
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Dec 4, 2006 0:23:04 GMT -5
Ron,
"Mickey...I did not realize you are 10 years older than I...you do not look such in your avatar."
Thanks Ron. I am not really that old. I just say that I am so that I can reap the benefits of being a "senior citizen". Benefits such as Canada pension, Old age security, arthritis, diabetes, free knee replacements, etc., etc.
Mickey
|
|
bobm
Contributing Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by bobm on Dec 4, 2006 4:12:45 GMT -5
Probably because film has been around for so long that its characteristics have literally become engrained in folks' consciousness and so is still the benchmark for many - as witnessed by the many film emulation plug-ins for the likes of Photoshop and other editors.
Myself being one of them even though I'm fortunate enough to also own a very very good DSLR....
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on Dec 4, 2006 8:30:34 GMT -5
... my sense is that a new $3000 digital camera will probably not be in service 60 years from now. I doubt heavily that the life span of a digital camera is more than 4 to 6 years. It might be impossible then to find an computer that has an USB stick. You might be confronted with a rigid copyright control system, that would not grant You control over Your own pictures. Some more years later the picture format (i.e. jpeg) will have become obsolete. Software patents might be the key factor in rendering now standard formats like jpeg unusable. Digital archiving methods are currently under research for the great national libraries. But I doubt, that some downgraded solutions will ever be available for amateurs. So I fear, one must accept the limited usability of both the camera (shorter lifetime) and the picutures (longer, but still limited lifetime) for longer term application. I am also a bit sceptical on the cost argument. Over the last year I took about one film per week. On holiday times more, on working and bad wheather times as now a bit less. I spent for the photos maybe 400 to 500.- €. I spent another 1000 .. 1500.-€ for a very good analog equipment. I got glass ranging from 17 to 400mm (I already told You, that I am a lens addict :-( ) and fast glass ranging from 1.2/50 to 2/135 (I prefer available light over flashlight). It would cost me at least 5000.-€ to buy a digital equipment, that could offer me all the options I have now. But this actually is much more expensive than my analog equipment. In fact that much more expensive I were not able to take that approach. Moreover I suspect that the limited lifetime of the digital cameras plus the bad habit of the camera makers to change the lens mount more often than we find it pleasing do not tend to make digital cheaper in the future. I concede that the calculation changes, when someone takes much more pictures than I do. The fast and ubiquitious way of getting the results is real advantage of the digital image technology. So my decision was to get a digital P&S at a lower cost, accept its upcoming obsolescense - and use my old manual focus gear when going out in the nature. I do most writing with one of my fountain pens - and I use cameras and lenses made out of steel and brass to take my pictures... that is the amount of snobbery I do allow myself. Sorry to post that into the digital forum. But there needs to be an advocatus diaboli, too. Best regards Peter PS: I am an engineer, earning my money with designing _digital_ communication systems, at the moment a radio at 60 GHz for a point to point connection. So I can't say, I would not like digital technique.
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Dec 4, 2006 13:29:58 GMT -5
Peter
You make some very good points about digital. Especially the one about the calculation on wether or not it makes personal economic sense to go digital. That is why I am half and half on it and still concerned about what the future will bring with it. I find that this site is very good in that there seems to be no polarization by members re: digital vs film. That is very refreshing. Most seem to use both to some extent and recognize the pros and cons of both.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by herron on Dec 4, 2006 16:54:49 GMT -5
... my sense is that a new $3000 digital camera will probably not be in service 60 years from now. I doubt heavily that the life span of a digital camera is more than 4 to 6 years. It might be impossible then to find an computer that has an USB stick. You might be confronted with a rigid copyright control system, that would not grant You control over Your own pictures. Some more years later the picture format (i.e. jpeg) will have become obsolete. Software patents might be the key factor in rendering now standard formats like jpeg unusable. Digital archiving methods are currently under research for the great national libraries. But I doubt, that some downgraded solutions will ever be available for amateurs. So I fear, one must accept the limited usability of both the camera (shorter lifetime) and the pictures (longer, but still limited lifetime) for longer term application. Perhaps. I have been involved in my company's photo (and other media) archive effort for many years now. Our effort was to make the historic material (whether it was 100 years old, or two) available to all the far-flung parts of the enterprise...no small task. We've gone to a digital format (which means ultra-high resolution scans of the old, flat art) that can be viewed online, and downloaded at high res via FTP portals. It has also changed digital type and format requirements twice in the past 10 years alone. It's a new field, and still evolving...much like traditional photography evolved from tintypes to 35mm film cassettes. About the cost of five 4GB memory cards...20GB is a LOT of reuseable photo space! Not really. You can get a really nice Canon 350-D 8-megapixel camera body for less than $580...PLUS a great many analog analog lenses are usable with a digital body. I do it all the time. I bought one 42mm-to-EOS adapter and can use ALL my old analog threaded lenses on my Canon DSLR! Amen...it is so much faster than processing film, plus you can see ahead of time if a shot is worth keeping or not! Peter: I am by no means advocating the abandonment of film for digital (I have more than 150 film cameras, after all)! But I do think there is room in the world for both. I enjoy the feel of a good fountain pen, too...but I am delighted they invented a nice rolling ballpoint! Who knows? The future may prove you right about the obsolescence of P&S digitals. IMHO the higher end of the digital scale will only become more widespread...and less expensive...eventually becoming the low-end entry area!
|
|
|
Post by byuphoto on Dec 4, 2006 20:17:12 GMT -5
I love both. I tend to use film for my own uses and digital for my work. Most of my weddings and all sports photography are done digitally. My portrait work and bridal shots are done on MF. My hobby shooting of Civil war re-enactments are done on LF cameras. For me the digital just makes sense to remain competitive in todays markets. I did do an event shoot where time was not a factor and yes I shot film with my A2 and the EOS1, because these two cameras have many more pro features than an entry level digital. I still am uncomfortable in paying $3000 to $8000 for a camera.
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on Dec 5, 2006 8:01:26 GMT -5
Yes, this is exactely what I wanted to point out: it is feasible for a large company, but not for a Joe Doe. And I see no change coming up since "long term" means those 3 .. 5 years in the computing industry, which powers digital photography. I found that unlikely as the board offers both analog and digital sections. ;-) OTOH I can hardly imaging a camera collector without at least some addiction to old, hence analog cameras. Today I did select this one... since I have to make a presentation on our project. (there is no better pointer than the golden tip of a fountain pen ;-) ) Btw, it would have been impossible to post that picture, if I hadn't a digital camera. So I join the club of the ana-digitals... Hm, I think I expressed myself misleading. I wanted to say, that I accept the obsolescense of _this_ P&S, i.e. the Olympus C8080WZ. I presume, there will always be P&Ss, and those will all be digital, since film is not really appropriate for P&S photography. In fact I think, that for 99% of photography both analog and digital were equally well suited. There are certain, different strong sides for both - but I feel that doesn't matter much most of the time. And let aside the technical ability of a camera it is the craftmanship of those high end analog camera's form the last century that gives me inspiration. Maybe the current high end models could do this, too - but I never had one in my hands. Best regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Dec 5, 2006 9:25:39 GMT -5
And let aside the technical ability of a camera it is the craftmanship of those high end analog camera's form the last century that gives me inspiration. Maybe the current high end models could do this, too - but I never had one in my hands.
That is it exactly. The Leica M8 may change that but at a price I cannot bare. Nice to see another Oly user. The C5050 was my first digi cam and it still is going strong. BTW I just had the sensor replaced under warranty recall.
Bob
|
|