camerart

Hi, Thanks for those really good answers. Regarding the snapshot, where a moment in time is captured, such as sunsets, parties, friends, locations etc etc. I agree that most cameras including smartphones are plenty good enough. I have a 1/2 smart phone, that I've been using for years, with a 5MP camera, that I whip out for those situations. My most fun period with a camera, was my 70s Pentax ME Super, with a pancake lens, and a 70-150 zoom lens. I think I enjoyed the taking more than the viewing, and did every experiment possible!! Occasionally though, I would get a really good and interesting bits of art, when I wished they were better detail quality. Years later I bought a DeVere 1/2 plate enlarger, I told my mate. He had just bought a Kodak 1/2 plate camera. Talk about coincidence! Anyway, he lent it to me, and I studied Ansel Adams and his zone system. These cameras/film and tripod are heavy, so a day out in the forest with 6xfilms, was a trek, but it certainly made one concentrate before pressing the button. So I now have lots of B/W colour and colour transparency, large negatives. In the above replies, film/digital detail comparison was discussed. I gathered that a good DSLR camera would be more or less fine, for copying 35MM film. I have a 35mm film transport from an old shop processing lab, that's been followed me around for years, that I could adapt for copying. (I also have a 35MM one that I am adapting for 8MM film copying) When it comes to 1/2 plate copying, using the same DSLR, it seems I would have to make an XY plotter to make a matrix of 25 plus overlap, shots, for one film. I once cut a film into a 5X5 matrix, and made 25 prints, which looked really effective when pasted on a wall. When I get time, I'll post a copy of a large print, with an accompanying, small section, to illustrate the detail, when detail is needed. (for those who haven't already seen what large format can do) Thanks for all of the input. C.

Hi J I appreciate that, 'most people' probably haven't seen different qualities to compare, so are quite happy with with what they get, but I'm interested in comparisons of old and new image quality, that some of may have, so I can find out the differences. I think you may be missing a point thinking about how many hairs on someones head, when detail can enhance an image in other ways. C

Hi, I have a Canon EOS D600 camera plus one of my lenses being a Canon 10mm Glass macro. (Also lots of other smaller digital cameras) I used to have my own Lab (home made) I could process 35mm to 1/2 plate film and print 24Inch wide prints, B/W, colour and transparency, I had the most brilliant time. I did this privately, but did make some money near the end. I moved house and never got the lab going again, sadly. I still have lots of negatives, which I hope to copy one day. I was talking to my friend the other day and he was extolling the virtues of new smart phone images. As I don't know what the smartphone quality is, i couldn't add anything. My question is how do all of these mediums compare, especially when it comes to detail? Camerart.

Hi All, I've been comparing and looking at options, following your suggestions. I just took my camera out and with a lens is connected, the slight difference in body size, won't make much difference. I've come to the conclusion that I will stick to my well looked after Eos600D and two lenses, and try to not get annoyed, by all of the buttons etc, that I have forgotten how to use. I also have Canon A670 and A460 smaller cameras which I use all of the time, but and if I want a better quality FUN camera, I should buy a modern compact one. Thank you. C.

Hi M, Did you read that I don't want a camera with any auto features, apart from a light meter? C.

Hi, My first proper camera was Pentax ME super film camera (I still have a couple of them). I really enjoyed using it, it was perfect for me, and I took 1000s of photos. I studied photography, including the Zone system and had a 1/2 plate camera and enlarger, a weston light meter, and processed my films/paper, which I really enjoyed. I then bought an EOS600 film camera, and hardly used it because it was too complicated. Not learning my lesson, I bought an EOS600D plus two nice lenses, and the same happened, although it takes lovely photos. What would suit me better is to have the same type of technology of the ME super, but will take my EOS lenses. Is there a simple digital camera, I assume Canon, that is as small as possible, while also having a light meter, and minimal extras with either an APS-H or better 35mm sensor, please? Cheers, Camerart.