eclecticism

More camera ramblings

Photography 03/12/2004 |

11 Responses to “More camera ramblings”

1. DeAnna Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 6:04 am

   have you considered going with a film camera instead? You can get a nice, SLR for around $200. I have a nikon F2 that is a wonderful camera and develop my own film and use a film scanner to post pics.

   Keh camera brokers is where I spend way too much time drooling over cameras and they offer really nice used bodies and lenses (important for me since I am using a body from the early 70s that newer lenses won’t fit) and B&H is where I pick up other supplies like film and paper.

   But if you are serious about photography, an SLR is the only way to go. And the jury is still out with digital. I have found shooting on film and then going digital by scanning the negatives to be a nice middle road and pretty instant gratification compared to spending hours in the darkroom to make prints. photo.net is full of forums on digital vs. film.

2. Dan Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 6:33 am

   I gave my wife an A80 for Christmas and she loves it. It’s a great little camera with lots of flexibility—plus it has a swivel LCD. In my opinion, the swivel LCD screen is the single greatest invention since the CCD. I have a Nikon Coolpix 5700 that I’ve had great success with. In fact, after using it I’ll never go back to an SLR again (I previously used a Nikon F100 with a half-dozen Nikon lenses). The small, lightweight form factor is capable of the vast majority of task the SLR is for a fraction of the weight.

3. Shelley Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 8:59 am

   I have Nikon film and digital cameras. As with Dan, I can my negatives and slides in, but I do like the digital. I found it helped me improve because I could get immediate feedback. I also freer to experiment because there was no cost of development and film with digital.

   I love the Nikon optics, and my Nikon lenses. My digital is a 995, which is a nice camera, but not an SLR, and limited on resolution. I’ve been wanting the D100, however, that D70 is a really good option for people without a lot of money, and who already have an investment in Nikkor lenses, such as myself.

   But for yourself, I can’t help thinking the Minolta is a better option. I’ve heard good things about the cameras, and my Minolta scanner has been a real value, for what that’s worth.

   Fun shopping, isn’t it?

4. Michael Hanscom Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 10:34 am

   DeAnna — I do occasionally think about going back to film, but for the moment, I’m thinking digital is the way to go for me, for a few reasons.

   I’m getting more interested in photography, but haven’t had any real exposure (pun not really intended, but there it is) to rules/techniques/tips since high school, when I took a quarter (maybe a semester) of photography at Bartlett. So I’m dealing with a lot of experimentation right now — trying to learn what might work and what might not, looking at objects or scenes from different angles, and occasionally taking a ton of photos in the hopes that a few will turn out.

   Because of this, while digital may have a higher entry cost than film, the long-term cost will likely be cheaper, both because I’d have to re-learn how to develop my own film and purchase all the supplies for doing so (and possibly try to find a spot for a workable pseudo-darkroom in a studio apartment), and because digital allows me to take a ton of photos without worrying about using large amounts of film on photos that may not turn out.

   Down the line, if and when I’m a little more confident I may look more into film cameras again, but for now I think digital is the best bet while I “play”.

5. Michael Hanscom Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 10:35 am

   Dan — I do waffle a bit on the size and weight factor. While my “dream cameras” would allow me a lot more flexibility in my experimentation and learning, I do like being able to have a camera with me at all times, which a smaller point-and-shoot would be very handy for (especially as they’re now about half the size of the one I lost, with far more capabilities). Ideally I’d like to eventually have one of each — a smaller, more portable camera to keep with me at all times, and a larger, fancier model for planned photo outings — but right now, my budget is going to limit me to just one.

6. Michael Hanscom Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 10:51 am

   Shelley — it is indeed fun shopping, though a little overwhelming at this point. There’s just so many different cameras out on the market now that in almost any price/feature bracket I look at, it’s a bit difficult to keep all the various models and options straight in my head as I bounce around.

   DPReview’s preview of the D70 indicated that though it has a smaller number, in many respects it may actually be a bit better than the D100, for about $500 less (list price)!

   People’s first reaction to the D70, especially existing D100 owners was that it doesn’t appear to be a downgrade from the D100. Indeed, this is also my reaction. Yes, the D70’s design is simpler than the D100 and the menus have larger type face, there are some custom functions missing and you can’t add a vertical hand grip. But in all other respects the D70 is as good as and in some cases better than the D100. This then makes the naming convention a little odd. This also raises another note of interest, the D70 is already looking better than Canon’s EOS-300D.

   As the EOS-300D (Digital Rebel) had been my “drool-factor” camera for a while, that definitely caught my eye, and the camera itself is supposed to be released this month, so hopefully I’ll be able to go take a look at it within the next couple weeks.

   I just stumbled across that Minolta because my friend Tim said that he uses and loves his DiMAGE 7i, so I figured I could take a look even if it was more than I wanted to spend. Once I found the A1, though, it’s giving both the Digital Rebel and the Nikon D70 a serious challenge for wish-list space — while it’s ‘SLR-like’ rather than a true digital SLR, the feature set is astounding, especially given that it’s a few hundred dollars less than either of the other two.

   If I can find the money, I’m really leaning towards that one…

7. D Says:
   March 12th, 2004 at 6:35 pm

   I don’t think I need to tell you which camera I prefer. I might be biased, but not by much.

8. jon Says:
   March 13th, 2004 at 7:16 am

   My advice is to look to the lens system. The lens is the most important part of you camera, so make sure that whatever system you go for has quality lenses and room for you to grow. You’ll probably upgrade your body every 5 years or so. but will keep your lenses. I would recommend a Canon or Nikon SLR because they have such a large good-quality lens range. Also, it is more convenient when you need to hire/obtain a lens on these systems.

   Spend what money you can on the body, but make sure you keep some money to buy some good glass to stick on the front of it!

   If you decide to go for a compact then the A80 is nice. You might want to look at the A60 which is a little older, but may suit you.

9. CPS Says:
   March 13th, 2004 at 11:34 am

   Wudi, I’ve got the A70, if you’d like to come over and try it out. It’s very comparable to the A80, although 1 megapixel smaller and no flip-out screen. You can see the results at http://www.gudbier.org/kas (shameless plug intentional… ;-)). My co-worker just got the S400, and it does look like it takes better pictures than the A70, plus it plugs in directly to the photo-printer, which wasn’t important to me.

   Lastly, my big reasons for avoiding Olympus, Sony and other cameras was memory types. xD might be fastest, next the sony memory stick, but they’re proprietary systems that might go ‘betamax’ any time. I’m a big fan of Compact Flash and SDIO because they are open standards that will be around for a while. Keep that in mind.

10. Tim Who? Says:
    March 13th, 2004 at 3:08 pm

    Digital or film…please. I’m sorry but film will be dead in ten years. Even the CEO of KODAK says film will be dead in ten years. For who you are and what you do Digital is the only way to go.

    I consider myself a Semi-Pro photographer. While I would be the first to admit I’m no Pro. I do shoot a lot of film. My average for the last 3 or 4 years is over 1,000 images a month. I had my own color dark room, I do shoot film (4 Minolta X700’s) But I can do more in 15 minutes in Photoshop than I could do in a day in the darkroom at >10% of the cost.

    Unless you want to make prints larger than 8x10. Digital is king. Only get interchangable lens if you must. A good 30-180 fixed zoom will do 95% of what you need.

    The best way to increase the quality of your shots is to tape the pop up flash closed and use a hot shoe flash with a swivel and tilt head. And a tri pod to keep your shots steady. A flash that works remotely off camera is even better.

    I use a Minolta 5600HS flash on my Minolta Diamage 7i And a SunPak 555 off camera flash with the X700’s

    Have fun, take lots of pictures…

11. Tim Who? Says:
    March 13th, 2004 at 3:28 pm

    “The industry is being transformed by digital, and this transformation opens a world of opportunities for manufacturers and retailers who embrace the technology and develop digital products and services that consumers will want. The opportunity is there for companies that seize it. Those who do not will go the way of the dinosaur.”

    Kodak CEO Daniel A. Carp

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Note: This post is over 4 years old. You may want to check later in this blog to see if there is new information relevant to your comment.