Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

OT: Giving up digital photography


The Geoff

Recommended Posts

When I was in Eire recently, I was using my digital camera - an Olympus 750 SuperZoom. In less than perfect conditions, I lost pics because the camera took so long to work out what it wanted to do, the moment passed. I was left with a perfectly exposed non-picture.

 

I've decided that for time-critical snapping I'm going back to my good old all manual Nikon FA in future.

 

What's your experience?

 

Geoff

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the World will know Peace": Jimi Hendrix

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=738517&content=music

The Geoff - blame Caevan!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well, I think there are better digitals available now. Mine is now about 2 years old and was bloody expensive new, so I'm not going to get another.

 

I've had my FA for about 15 years & know it backwards. Manual speed/aperature/focussing.

 

If something goes wrong it's my own fault - but there's no delay when I press the shutter - I get what I see.

 

Geoff

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the World will know Peace": Jimi Hendrix

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=738517&content=music

The Geoff - blame Caevan!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm; I've spoken to journalists/news photographers that report the same problems and they usually still carry "traditional" cameras but also bring digital cameras for when they're appropriate. I assume that's what you intend to do Geoff?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The all-in-one and "point-and-shoot" digitals are plagued with shutter lag problems. I use Canon digital SLRs and have no issues. Plus my lenses from my EOS film cameras work just fine on the digital bodies...same lenses, two media...

"And so I definitely, when I have a daughter, I have a lot of good advice for her."

~Paris Hilton

 

BWAAAHAAAHAAHAAA!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Nikon D50 that I like a lot. I usually use it in auto mode. But I can switch it to full manual with a single switch. I can focus, set the F-Stop and the exposure, and turn the flash on and off, manually. The D-50 also has a "fill-flash" setting so that it meters what needs to be filled and only flashes enough to fill rather than washing out the foreground.

 

It's not exactly cheap but I got my D-50 kit for $599 US. The 2GB SD card was another $119. I also bought another battery for mine which was another $75 (I think).

 

I haven't bought any other lenses for it. But I don't take that many pictures. Not like I used to anyway.

 

I still have a Nikon F3 with a bunch of lenses for it, autowinder, etc. But I haven't used it in years. It's not an autofocus camera and most of Nikon's newer lenses won't work with it.

 

I really like the convenience of being able to get my pictures straight out of the camera, fix them up in Photoshop and then post them or email them. I don't have to pay anyone to process the negatives/slides or print them.

 

We don't really get "keepsake" pictures with the digital camera but I can send any of the ones I take with the D-50 off to be printed. So we still get prints. But now only of the ones we want printed andI can "edit" (crop, burn, dodge, etc) them before we get them printed.

 

I don't know that I'll ever go back to using film. My medium format camera hasn't seen the light of day in about 8 years. The F3 probably hasn't been out of its drawer in 4 years. Film just seems so limiting, now.

Born on the Bayou

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have the same problem with my coolpix, especially in low light conditions. And outdoors pics always have this blue tinge that I have to fix up manually.

 

Still, I'm one of those guys that was always photographing things but never got around to going to the photo shop (were they called "developers"..? :confused: I'm drawing a blank here)

 

So I'll hang on to the digital... it's less hassle than film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Starcaster:

Hmm; I've spoken to journalists/news photographers that report the same problems and they usually still carry "traditional" cameras but also bring digital cameras for when they're appropriate. I assume that's what you intend to do Geoff?

yes, that's exactly what I want to do. The Digital is excellent in good light - it's only when it gets a bit murky it gets befuddled. Even with Flash On, it still takes its time.

 

It's for those low-light situations I'll use a manual the next time.

 

I wish I could afford a Nikon digital body, as I have lenses which would work with it - I have both AIS & AF lenses. Phillipa & I have 4 Nikons between us - 2xmanual & 2Xautofocus.

 

PS Why do so many people spell 'lens' as 'lense'?

 

(This is the current bee in my bonnet - I'm joining the Global Brotherhood of Grumpy Old Men :0)

 

Geoff

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the World will know Peace": Jimi Hendrix

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=738517&content=music

The Geoff - blame Caevan!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought a "top of the line" (for 2002) Sony DSC-F707 that I still use a ton and absolutely love. Have you tried framing your shots ahead of time and then simply completing the shot when the subject comes into view? For instance, when photographing my kids on a merry-go-round I estimate the range where the kids will be when I shoot, then I focus on an object that far away and reframe the shot on the carousel. Then all I have to do is wait for the kids to come around and depress the shutter all the way. Another way to fix this problem is by using the manual focus.

 

One thing I love about my Sony is it's Carl Zeiss lens...a standard 58mm. I fit it up with a Hoya I filter for some pretty awesome Infrared shots. I never would've done this with a film camera, because I would've spent weeks and tons of rolls of film figuring it out, but when I can see the shot ahead of time, it's worth the tradeoffs, if any, of a digital SLR.

 

You all have hit on one of my other hobbies: digital photography...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were discussing this on Boggs thread about his photo-contest submission.

 

My Nikon Coolpix drives me absolutely nuts for this reason. I'm constantly missing action shots as well as certain, fleeting looks when photographing people.

 

My wife uses her Chinon CM-4, a very old, basic film SLR she originally received for her 8th grade graduation. (1982) It uses the ubiqutous Pentax K-mount lenses. I broke the winder and we were without it for a few years. I bought a Nikon 6006 (film) that drove me nuts because what I really wanted was a simple, manual SLR. Instead, I was sucked in by photo-GAS for something with bells and whistles. I never use the damn thing. A few years later we discovered Ebay and bought two more CM-4's. Got a 120mm telephoto with one of them. Both cost about $70 each. :thu:

 

The quality of our SLR photos is so much better than the digital, but I would not be without a digital snapshot, for convenience and sharing. Of course, a new digital SLR would be fantastic, and I understand the new digital snapshot cameras are better, but I'm holding out for a digital SLR. I can't justify $600 - $1,000 for a "low end" digi-SLR. As I said in the other thread, I wish someone would make a digi-SLR with manual controls, a la the Chinon. The photo analog of a guitar amp with no effects. Just volume and three tone controls. ;)

It's easiest to find me on Facebook. Neil Bergman

 

Soundclick

fntstcsnd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by A String:

I like the Russian lenses. I have an old B/W darkroom kit/developer that has Russian Lenses.

I think after a while the Russians decided to make a lens ring that could use lots of other 3rd party lenses. That was just before I was given my first Zenit so I'm not too familiar with the original Russian ones.

 

Good, were they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an Olympus E-500; it's a digital SLR. You can see some of the pictures I've taken with it on my blog via the link at the bottom.

I like my Olympus; there are problems with auto focus in low light, but then again manual focus is hard enough when the light's bad. I just ramp up the f-stop and generally grab what I want in the depth of field.

I'm tempted to buy a replacement for my old Pentax Super ME, but I take so many pictures (about 750 in the past five days) that if I were developing film I'd be broke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old russian lenses were pretty good *except* they didn't have MultiCoating, which meant they were a bit subject to flare. Judicious use of the lens hood could make this manageable.

 

G.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the World will know Peace": Jimi Hendrix

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=738517&content=music

The Geoff - blame Caevan!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Geoff Byrne:

When I was in Eire recently, I was using my digital camera - an Olympus 750 SuperZoom. In less than perfect conditions, I lost pics because the camera took so long to work out what it wanted to do, the moment passed. I was left with a perfectly exposed non-picture.

 

I've decided that for time-critical snapping I'm going back to my good old all manual Nikon FA in future.

 

What's your experience?

 

Geoff

Oops!

Fernando

 

If you can't say it in 12 bars... then it can't be said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Geoff Byrne:

When I was in Eire recently, I was using my digital camera - an Olympus 750 SuperZoom. In less than perfect conditions, I lost pics because the camera took so long to work out what it wanted to do, the moment passed. I was left with a perfectly exposed non-picture.

 

I've decided that for time-critical snapping I'm going back to my good old all manual Nikon FA in future.

 

What's your experience?

 

Geoff

Second Oops!!

Fernando

 

If you can't say it in 12 bars... then it can't be said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love taking shots with my Pentax K1000. However, it's not the greatest social camera. My friends are nervous about handling it, even when I use the settings I know will work for snapshots, esp. with the flash on.

 

Mostly, I use the K1000 for more 'experimental' stuff and shooting practice. I am currently testing the newer stock of Walgreens Studio 35 400 on it. (I've read in various forums that it's probably the leftover stock of Konica Minolta film. We'll see when I get the negs and prints back later this week.) Usually, when shooting film, I shoot with either Fuji Superia (color negative print), or Kodak's b&w chromogenic film. I don't develop film at home, but I'd love to learn to do darkroom technique sometime.

 

All of the $600-$1,000 dSLR's aren't full frame 35mm, but I'd love to get my hands on a Pentax K100D (around $700 with kit lens). It has auto sensitivity up to 3200 ISO(!) in the auto modes, and image stabilization that works with every lens that can be used, including older manual focus K lenses. My mf lenses won't lose any light metering capability, so it's perfect. Plus, the stainless steel chassis is quite rugged, so it'll stand up to my abuse... not much to speak of there in my case, but it's good to know that it can take some knocks.

 

Most of my digital shots these days are done with a Canon PowerShot A520 point and shoot. It's surprisingly versatile, as it has the advanced modes that normally are in the dSLR models, and advanced 35mm/medium format SLR's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...