THSCC Forums

Trying to decide between unloading all my old Canon lenses or getting a new body (old body is broken, Canon TX, max shutter speed of 500, manual everything, but it took great pictures). Of course these are before the days of auto-focus (over rated) and certainly before the days of digital (not so over rated).

It looks like there is much better demand for the bodies (Canon A-1, AE-1, T-50, T-90) than for my old lenses (Vivitar Zoom, 2X converter and Canon fixed 50mm). I'd guess I could get into one of the models I listed for $100-250 depending on the condition.

Will I be wasting money if I get a film based camera? I do like the new digital SLR's, and even use my cheap digital a fair bit for documenting car stuff.

For those of you with *real* digital cameras (Kevin, Shawn, etc), would you go back to prints?

The biggest let-down with my "cheap" digital camera is how slow it is. You push the button and it takes the picture later. That's fine for stills, but not so good for action shots (over 50% of the useage). Of course the pathetic zoom on my digital camera isn't real good for a lot of things either.

I assume the fancy digital SLR set-ups are just as instant as an old fashioned camera.

Comments?

Edit: The A-1 was the camera to have back when I was serious about this stuff. The AE1 Program was easy to use, but I'm concerned they dumbed it down too much. I have no idea how the T-50 and T-90 stack up to the earlier models (the T series was a short run right before the EOS auto focus stuff came out). Comments about A-1 vs AE-1 Program vs T series?

Scott

Until July 9th, I work for Qualex, which is a subsidiary of Kodak, so I can probably tell you where the business is going. Four years ago we had around 90 processing labs, by the end of the month, we'll be down to around 13. There just isn't the printing volume there once was.

That said, my suggestion would be to do what Kevin and most of america is doing. Get a good digital, and take tons of pics. Sort out the ones you want, don't want, and the one's you want to print. From our estimates at work, people are spending about the same amount of money on development with digital as they were with film. The kicker is that they're just not getting as many prints, so you're paying more for each print, but by only printing what you actually want printed, you may end up saving in the long run.

Most folks are spending about $300-$400 on their digital camera, not the 1k+ that a digital slr will run you.

You can pick up old AE1's cheap and they're readily repaired as well. Can't beat the durability, the batteries last eons longer than that of a digital, I've got an AE1 if you want to borrow it and try it out. I think I paid $200 for my AE1 body, three lenses, autowinder, and case. I paid like $500 a few years ago for my nikon N80 with two lenses... just for comparison.

FYI, I was told (at least for nikon) that the digital lenses and the non-digital lenses don't work together, but I haven't verified that. I believe that Kevin is using his old lenses with his DSLR.

Good luck and let me know what you end up with.

p

I bought my first digital camera about a year ago and I had very similar concerns to yours. I owned an SLR years ago and was mildly into photograpy then, but after it was stolen, I kind of lost interest, so I'm not exactly a photography expert but know a little about it.

All the digital cameras I used in the past I found very annoying because of the delay. To me this was compeletly unuseable for any auto-x photography. So I did a bunch of research before I bought mine. I ended up with a Fujifilm Finepic S602zoom. Which I'm sure has been superseded by some other model now. However, the main selling point for this camera was that it was the fastest on the market at the time. It is considered a near-SLR, it is not a full digital SLR, but it was priced much more reasonably in the $600 range. It offers most of the features of an SLR except lens interchangeability, but comes with 6X optical and an additional 4X digital zoom and I bought an adapter that will allow me to use standard tele and wide angle lenses adpaters if I feel the need. The camera is indeed fast, the only delay is the auto-focus, which is about 1/4 second in most cases. You can change it to manual focus and it will have a nearly instant shutter. It will not take pictures as fast as you can push the button because it has a 1/2-1 second delay between pictures. You can also use the burst mode and it will take 5 per second if you want to get a sequence.

Anyways, I've been happy with it, it works reasonably well for my needs. They probably have a new-improved version that is even better/cheaper now. I found the reviews on www.cnet.com very helpfull when I was looking.

I have a cheap digital SLR - Canon Digital Rebel. Used to have a Canon EOS3. If we compare the Rebel to a Kia (as far as functionality & general sturdiness go), the EOS3 would be an STi. I've been renting a backup film body for shooting weddings & stuff. I haven't been shooting any film at weddings & stuff. I think I've shot one roll of film since I bought the digital rebel, and I don't really feel like I'm missing anything.

If I was super-serious about making money with photography, I would buy a nice high-end digital body (especially if I wanted to shoot in rough conditions like rain or where the body would get knocked around). But the rebel is "good enough" for just about anything I want to do at this point.

The coolest thing about digital is the delete button. The next coolest thing is not ever having to purchase film or get it processed again. The downside is that if you want it to look REALLY good, you have to photoshop it. Which takes lots of time if you shoot a lot of photos - for example at Kevin Hoff's wedding.

Now for the money side of it...

Canon Digital Rebel = $1000 including cheap (but decent) lens
17-40mm f/4L lens (equivalent of 28-65mm on 35mm camera) = $800
Canon 80-200mm f/2.8 lens (equivalent of 130-320mm on 35mm camera) = $600 used
512MB CF card (the minimum size you'd want; 130-180 shots at full resolution jpg) X 3 (I shoot a lot of photos in a weekend) = $400
Photoshop LE comes with it, and isn't really too limited if you're not a pro
you'll need lots of CD's to backup the photos that are filling up your hard drive

Canon film Rebel = $250 (?)
same lenses would work on it
film for one year = 200 rolls (?) = $3000 for film, processing, driving around to photo labs, etc.

I wouldn't say that digital is really better, it's just different. I prefer digital, but there's nothing wrong with film.

I think it all comes down to what you want to do with the camera.

For snapshots etc, I carry a small Nikon digital. All of my real work is shot on real film (black and white silver). I am also moving far away from 35mm into medium format. It is really quite amazing to see the difference between even something as small as an 8x10 print from 35mm and 120. The medium format just fits what I shoot better.

Where do people shop for their digital cameras?

I figure I will just hold onto my Canon A1. It is not even worth selling it. I remember a couple of years ago it could bring over $500. Now they are going for $150 on eBay

_________________
Jim Pastorius
2008 Silverado VortecMax
1992 Camaro CMC#92
2002 BMW R1150R

2009 3rd Place CMC Mid-Atlantic Championship
2009 CMC Hyperfest Winner

I shoot some portaits on the weekend to pay for my car habit. Started with a trusty nikon 8008 I've had for years, then I changed to a Nikon coolpix 5000. Was a 5mp camera, and was pretty fast, but the lens was too small and needed a lot of light. Last year I upgraded to a Nikon D100, digital SLR. Lets me use all my nikon lenses, is over 6MP, and is super fast. I've seen many a pro use the same camera.

I've had great service and pricing with a dealer I found through ebay, http://www.cameta.com/. I use them for all my equipment purchases now.

_________________
John Helgesen
76 911
http://members.rennlist.com/screamin_yellow/

Oh yeah, I looked at selling some of my old film equipment. I had and old Nikon FA manual focus and my 8008. The FA sold for about what I paid for it 20 years ago, the 8008 was worth about $100, so I kept it, not worth selling.

_________________
John Helgesen
76 911
http://members.rennlist.com/screamin_yellow/

For what is it worth, I have decided to switch from film to digital. This is from a guy who REALLY enjoyed processing and printing my own B&W years ago. I have an old Canon AE1P that I just can't seem to part with (ah the memories ), but I never use it anymore. I also have a 35mm Canon SLR that is a few years old that I also don' t use anymore. I need to sell it at some point. Probably not worth much these days.

A few years ago, I was ->this<- close to buying a Canon D60 or D30 which is the grandfather of the Canon Digital Rebel/300D that Kevin has. The cost was just more than I could deal with. I instead purchased what I think is the same Fuji model that Les has, but returned it within days due to it's inability to focus well in low light conditions (I have kids, so indoor photography is big thing for me). I then purhased a 4MP Canon Powershot G3 which at the time was Canon's top of the line point and shoot. If the Canon 300D was out at the time, I would have bought it in a second. But I am also extremely happy with the G3. It has been a great camera.

You should be able to find a digital that will not have problems such as "press button now, photo is taken later". The Fuji that Les mentions (if I am thinking of the same model) even had a feature that you could continuously fire and then when you stopped shooting, it kept the last five frames. Great for dealing with action shots that you 'expect' to happen. Fire away and stop when the action is over!

These cameras are getting better all of the time. You just need to do some research and do some test photos at stores using your own memory card. This gives you a chance to handle the camera, print some test photos, etc. I personally tend to not like looking at equipment at one place and then buying online. It's also nice to be able to return something locally if it doesn't work out. For some stuff like the Canon 300D the demand is so high, I don't think there is many online "deals" on the camera. But if someone had a super deal online on a 300D tomorrow, I would probably buy it anyhow.

Depending upon how serious you are, I would either look at a high end point and shoot as an interim camera (until the DSLR prices drop into a rang that you are OK with) or just go all out and buy a digital SLR.

If you like to live on the wild side, there are reports of people using tweaked Canon 300D firmware to enable features that are availabe in the $500 more expense Canon 10D.

Another point to make. It is very easy these days to take a memory card (CF, or whatever) into a Wal-Mart, etc. and have nice prints made. I have long ago given up on printing my own prints at home. So don't equate raw image quality to what you get on basic "photo quality" inkjet printers if you are trying to do test prints at home. Maybe at some time in the future, I may look at dye sub printers again.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

I still have my first camera and every lens I've ever owned for it. It's a 20 year old Pentax ME Super and it's bulletproof. I still use it for some of the documentary and fine art stuff I shoot. There's some things/some markets that film is better for. That and aside from the sentimental value, I'd rather bring a camera that can be replaced for about $200 into some dive blues shack in 20 minutes outside Memphis than my newer equipment.

At the other end, I have a Canon EOS 10D. The big brother to Kevin's DigiRebel. It's been great. It's the Digi SLR Canon sells before you get into serious bank. I made the leap to Canon for autofocus about 3 years ago so I had an A2 and pretty healthly complement of lenses for EOS bodies already.

If you want to hear it, I'll run through my gear send me a note, but to be honest I'm guessing that a digi SLR might be over kill off the bat. Not diluting what you'll be doing with the camera, but I've talked to pro photographers who have shot assignments with P&S Olympus gear. P&S have come a long, long way.

Personally, I wouldn't recommend Olympus. The camera interface and the software leaves much to be desired. Like a Canon or Nikon camera.

I'd go to Southeaastern Camera on Peace Street in Raleigh. Support the local shops. Go check out any of the Nikon Coolpixs or whatever Canon is calling their current line up. I've heard good things about the Fuji's as well. Look at all the camera's that fit the bill. Take some test shots and see how the shutter response is. Fast enough for you? If not move along. How does the camera fit your hand? Is it comfortable? Can you see holding this thing for 2 hours straight?

Make a note on the optics. Digital or film the lens is the most important part of the process. Can't really go wrong with Canon or Nikon (even consumer grade is pretty solid) I think the Fuji's are getting Carl Zeis optics on the nice stuff. That's more than good enough.

If Southeastern isn't convenient. (Where do you live? I need to rummage through that pile of harnesses.) Go tie up the counter at Best Circuit Buy City and do the same thing. Find the camera you like and then check the prices here. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ I've ordered more camera equipment from them than I should tell my wife about and have always gotten top service and very competitive pricing.

Feel free to email me if you have more questions.

EDIT=
Prints. Not an issue. Most labs can print genuine silver based prints from a variety of media: CompactFlash, CD, USB flash, SD/MMC, whatever. if you really want to get into it, you can get a printer and do your own work.

Speaking of media, on principal I can't recommend a Sony product since they force you into the MemoryStick™ option. That's fine I guess if you've already got a slew of MemoryStick™ devices. But the CF equivalents are almost always available for less money.

_________________
Not spectacular just decent.
I'm not sure what I'm driving.
Maybe an ITR in DS.
Or half-assed STX prepped 330.

I've had galleries display work from my inkjet an Epson 1280 with third party ink. They've come a long way with archival inks (150+ years as rated by MIT on the right paper) and everything else. And then there's the quad and six tone black and white printing which delivers tonal range comparable to platinum printing from the same printer with an ink swap and software change.

I don't think dye sub is going to make it much further. Even in the commerical print proof field.

_________________
Not spectacular just decent.
I'm not sure what I'm driving.
Maybe an ITR in DS.
Or half-assed STX prepped 330.

Just to follow up on what David said...

I have purchased from B&H Photo/Video as well and have had good luck. It has been a few years since my last purchase from them. Also like he says, the current Point and Shoot cameras are really nice. That is why I am so happy with my Canon G3. But I really want a 300D or 10D.

Regarding research... I have found http://www.dpreview.com to be a good site. There are others such as http://www.steves-digicams.com/ that are good as well.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

I think you can get good results from inkjet. Especially ones like the Epson you mention that has a strong following. But I think that there is a number of people who buy what are labeled as "photo quality" printers and either the printer just doesn't print as well as something like your Epson, or they have problems with software, etc. and they get discouraged and blame the lack of results on the entire "digital" camera concept.

People just need to know that you can get GREAT digital prints at the same place that you drop off your 35mm film.

_________________
Richard Casto
1972 Porsche 914
2013 Honda Fit Sport
2015 Honda Fit EX
http://motorsport.zyyz.com
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.