Digital...or film?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Fuzzy Orange, Aug 24, 2006.

  1. Fuzzy Orange macrumors 6502

    Fuzzy Orange

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    #1
    I recently developed a big interest in photography, and I'm getting my first camera soon. The only thing is that I'm not sure which format to go with. Yes, I know digital is the future, but I can actually get a nice Canon SLR for a nice price, too:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/...178&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

    I can get a nice L lens with it (maybe 2) also. Or I can get either the Nikon D200 or the Canon EOS 30D. I want a camera that can last a particulary long time (3-4 years),too. Aren't all 35mm film SLRs full-frame? I think a full-frame sensor would be a nice addition, since I plan on photographing landscapes, among other things. Something that the DSLRs provide is that I can use Photoshop and don't need a Darkroom. I know it sounds dumb, but....can I hook a film camera up to a Mac?[/COLOR]Any help is appreciated.
     
  2. jova007 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    #2
    Fuzzy:
    I would recommend getting and entry level DSLR.. a Canon Digital Rebel.. you can get a used one for probably $300. Digital vs Film is an ongoing debate.. probably worst than PC vs MAC.. so you'll never get a straight answer.

    I guess from what your saying is you want pictures without developing them. Then I would go digital. Film is great also but you still have to develop, scan, etc.. with Digital you can just plug in your memory card..

    *And no.. you cannot plug a film camera into a computer.. hope this helps.
     
  3. Fuzzy Orange thread starter macrumors 6502

    Fuzzy Orange

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    #3
    I did try out a Rebel at Best Buy the other day...didn't like it. It seems like a nice camera, but I HATED the feel of it. The grip seems like it was designed around an 8-year old's hands. It also felt...cheap.
     
  4. spicyapple macrumors 68000

    spicyapple

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
  5. extraextra macrumors 68000

    extraextra

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #5
    :eek:

    I like film, although I just dabble in it since I don't have the money to buy/develop film on a constant basis - which is where digital comes in handy. Film has great dynamic range which DSLR's don't have at the moment. I'd recommend digital for starting out because it's much easier to learn from, you can go through the whole "trial-and-error" phase without burning a hole in your pocket. If you want a full-frame DSLR, only Canon offers it currently with the 5D and one of the 1D models, I think.

    With a film camera, you'd either have to get them to a disc (if you develop it at someplace like Walgreens), use a generic scanner and scan your photos to get them onto the computer, or buy a negative scanner and then you can have enormous 25MP (maybe not that high, but pretty high) high-res pictures.

    You can't hook a film camera up to anything. If you could hook it up to a computer, what could you do with it?
     
  6. FrankieTDouglas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #6
    Both have their perks. When I go out on all-day shoots of people or locations, I shoot digitally because I'll usually go around 500 shots or so. And then to edit them, I just upload the files onto my computer and start rating.

    But I also like to use my film SLR sometimes, too, because the experience of using a fully manual camera can't be replicated on a DSLR. I don't shoot a lot with it, but it's fun when I do. But I can't afford the $8 for 24 shots, or $2 for the negatives and then spending all night scanning them one at a time into my computer.

    Plus there's always Polaroid instant cameras, which are still slightly different than the other two I mentioned.

    Basically, there's no rule that says you have to only use one. But know the positives of each. I'd recommend digital because while the upfront costs are larger, the costs afterwards aren't as large as with film. What you learn from "disposable" shots on digital can be applied to shots on a film camera, where you should be more precise on each click. Plus, you can find old film SLR bodies for not much at all... less than a hundred dollars. So get both?
     
  7. Poeben macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
    #7
    I would get a 20D or 30D, unless you want to spring the bucks for a full-frame model. I had the same experience with the Rebel -- way too small for my hands and very cheap feeling. Then I picked up a 20D and was instantly sold on it. I couldn't be happier with my 20D and I am VERY tough to please. If you can afford some decent lenses don't bother with the kit. I can't comment on the Nikons, but I am sure they are very good as well.

    Good luck.
     
  8. beavo451 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    #8
    I'll be the lone Nikonian in this thread so far and suggest you try a D50, D70, or even D200 if you have the money. The new Nikon D80 and Canon 400D both look to be promising cameras if you want to wait.
     
  9. Clix Pix macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #9
    Second Nikonian here supporting Beavo451's suggestions! Yes, IMHO the Digital Rebel DOES feel cheap. I personally have never been impressed by the feel of the other Canon DSLRs either. This is an individual and personal decision, though: what feels "good" or conversely, what feels "cheap" to one person may not feel that way at all to another. Take a look at -- and more importantly, actually handle, the Nikons: D50, D70, D70s, D200 and of course, when it actually hits dealers' shelves, the new D80.....and handle all the Canon offerings.....

    If you have not really done serious photography in the past and are not even sure of what to buy at this point, I would suggest something a little less expensive and/or complex until you figure out what it is you want to do. The D200 is not a beginner's camera. Neither Nikon's D200 nor Canon's 30D is a full-frame camera, either. Do you really understand the full ramifications of "full frame" vs APS? "Full frame" vs 1.5x or 1.6x FOV?

    I think you really need to do some homework, work with a few camera bodies and lenses (both 35mm film and digital) before you go plunking down any money. You really need to have a pretty good idea of what you want to accomplish with your camera and lenses and have a pretty clear understanding of how you're going to achieve that before you begin putting out the dollars.....
     
  10. seenew macrumors 68000

    seenew

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    #10
    I'd go digital.


    As said, film is dead.

    But they're still making me learn it to major in digital photography.
    LAME.
     
  11. macdaddy121 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Location:
    Georgia
    #11
    Nikon....if you are just getting into it I will suggest the D50 or D80. You commented on the feel of the Canon and you said it didn't feel good. Well you need to try out the Nikon. They feel just right.
     
  12. FrankieTDouglas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    #12
    Oh, I'll suggest a Nikon, too, if we're suggesting specific DSLRs. But as for film or digital, as the topic originated as, I thought the most important thing was being aware of the differences but still knowing that neither is horrible, just different ways of doing things.
     
  13. seenew macrumors 68000

    seenew

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    #13
    Canon has the best selection of lenses. I mean, going all the way back to the late eighties, all of their EF lenses are compatible with their newer DSLRs. The library is too huge to ignore. If the Rebel felt too small for you, then go with a 20d or 30d.
     
  14. beavo451 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    #14
    The thing I have always wondered is what does Canon have that Nikon doesn't? 6 or 7 lenses that cover the same focal length while Nikon only has 2 or 3 or the same focal length?
     
  15. maxi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Location:
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    #15
    Why not both?

    I'm going on holydays to the US this sunday and I'm taking my D70 and my FM2 with a 105 f2, the D70 kit lens and probably a 50 f1.4.
    I'm probably gonna be shooting slide film, velvia if I can get some or some tri-x for fun.

    Plus, I'm trying to get ahold of a cheap medium format camera to experiment a bit.

    If I were you, I'd buy a D50 (since you felt the rebel too cheap) and a film SLR (or even medium format). You can go totally manual for real cheap (a new nikon FM2, FM10) or an auto focus (N65) too.
    Then, get a slide scanner (nikon coolscan V), shoot in B&W and develop yourself and there you have it. :)


    I'm attaching a pic I took with the FM2 and the 105 (manual focus at night is not easy though...:mad: )... the film is a fuji Superia with a best before date of 1999 (the pic is from this last may) and I was just testing the coolscan. The pic is 25% of my original scan (I scanned at about 6mp). Film and computers can go hand in hand, it takes a bit more work... but it's FUN!!!

    Still, if I were to choose only one, I'd go with a DSLR. my dslr actually made me interested in photography again, after which I ended up with wanting to try film again. Digital is so easy to play with that you will get better in no time.
     

    Attached Files:

  16. Cloud9 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Location:
    between flesh and thought
    #16
    Your So Wrong!

    Film is not dead, its hibernating!

    I just started into photography with a 20d. I love it. I love how digital gives me instant feedback, I love how the learning cruve shortens dramaticly, I love how cheap it is to get to work with images. BUT the more I shoot in digital and play with exposure with its many facets, the more I cant wait to get my hands on a film camera. With film you have to develop your intuition and gut further,(you do with digital, but its more forgiving and so not as much), and thats what makes photogrphy an artform. A chef that cooks with her gut will always make better meals.

    I recommend you start with digital like I have. And when you understand more and more how to play with exposure make the leap into film and start playing around. Its so much more fun. Each picture becomes more special, you are forced in a stronger way to sharpen your skills further, and your mistakes might bring you the best surprises. But you might get discourged if you are learning on film, as your lesson will co$t more and be time consuming.

    And Honestly, I think this is whats going to happen with many of the people getting into photography right now. Digital photogrpahy is everywhere, its sold next to computers and its on out phones. More poeple are getting into D. Photography because it is present in their minds. Some of those people will then migrate into film, to further their hobby as they appreciate it more as a craft. It wont be everyone of course, nor the majority ever again i expect. But very serious hobbyists will do so, and we might see some more amazing artwork in the future.
     
  17. beavo451 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    #17
    There really isn't any reason to shoot film these days. Those reasons are very limited and very specfic. It sounds like you are saying that you want to shoot film because it makes you feel more pro or cooler.

    Heck, I upgraded from film to digital. I didn't want to deal with development times, remembering what specific film to use, worry if the film was being advanced correctly, storage issues, x-rays, harsh conditions, refrigeration, testing film batches, etc., etc.
     
  18. Pistol Pete macrumors 6502a

    Pistol Pete

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Location:
    So Cal
    #18
    very true, yet films potential is tempting but it is too much work.

    nikon for life ;)

    D50 or D80....
     
  19. Fuzzy Orange thread starter macrumors 6502

    Fuzzy Orange

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    #19
    I'm starting to think about getting the Nikon D80 when it comes out. Is the body made out of plastic? I would like a camera that's durable, as I plan on taking my camera with me EVERYWHERE when I get it.
     
  20. Cloud9 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Location:
    between flesh and thought
    #20
    1. Then you do not have a reason to shoot film.

    2. I did not use those words, pro or cooler. Infact if you look closely I mention hobbyists not those who make money with film. Coolness is more of external thing, I feel cool when I where shades, or look at me I am Cool. Thinking oneself is cool in doing an activity is empty compared to satisfaction with ones work and fruits there of. Film is more work as you mentioned and the fruits can be sweeter because of it.

    You are onto something though with the word feel. It is the feelings one has and listens too in any creative endeavor that make it art, almost like meditation manifested.
     
  21. rockandrule macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    #21
    And where exactly are you getting a used Rebel for $300? I'll take one, if you can find one!
     
  22. seenew macrumors 68000

    seenew

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    #22
    Wait till the XTi comes out, and you can get an XT for less than $500, I bet. New.
     
  23. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #23
    Yeah, the new model will put that 350D down into the $500 range, I think.

    I'm glad you figured this out early. ;)
     
  24. Marneus macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #24
    Not true. Canon changed their lense mount to the EF standard in the 80's. Nikon has always used the F Mount, so all Nikon lenses will fit all Nikon cameras.

    That is physically fit, compatability is another issue but it's a good lesson in manual focusing and manual exposure setting if you really want to learn photography ;). Good idea to actually learn this on digital actually as you can see the results straight away and look at the histogram to see where you are going wrong and how to fix it, rather then wait for a roll of film to come back and try and remember the settings you use.

    Actually, I stand corrected...because of certain couplings, there are some lenses that can't be used on most bodies.
    http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/compatibility.html

    As far as the film vs. digital argument...well, plenty of people still paint, right? Film was seen as a big threat to that art form...DJ's are still spinning vinyl as well.

    Albeit film does require more specialised equipment then painting, but still, it will be with us a lot longer.
     
  25. virividox macrumors 601

    virividox

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    Manila - Nottingham - Philadelphia - Santa Barbar
    #25
    i own a d70 and d200. but use a canon 30d and mark II from time to time. either way both nikon and canon are pretty good. if ur just starting i say got for a d50 or a d80 or a canon 30d. i dont suggest u get the 5d because its just too expensive for a beginers camera, plus it doenst have a built in flash - which you may need for the time being until you buy an external flash unit

    as for lenses

    i suggest getting ultra wides 10-20 (canon) or the 12-24 nikon (or the 3rd party ones)

    a 50 prime (100 or so usd)

    in adition to the kit.

    if ur go nikon get teh 18-200 vr if you can find it.
     

Share This Page