Jump to content

digital or film?


helen_manton

Recommended Posts

There are lots of threads on this topic - do a little searching and you'll come up with some.

 

I just did five days in the Southwest with a D100 digital camera, three prime lenses, a portable hard drive and battery recarging equipment. I've sworn that I will not again travel with a digital SLR again until they are smaller and lighter.

 

I assume your primary occupation is not a photographer. If this is the case, then you are traveling for pleasure. If traveling for pleasure, remember that it's no fun to be weighed down by a heavy equipment. In my experience the more stuff I bring along when traveling only takes away from the relaxing nature of a pleasure vacation. I don't want a heavy photo bag around my shoulder when I'm walking around a new city. I don't want to worry about expensive equipment when I'm toting bags around a crowded airport. And I don't want expensive possessions sitting in a hotel room while I'm away.

 

I vote for a film SLR camera - the lighter, the better. On my next trip I'm taking my Nikon FM3a with a couple prime lenses. Light, reliable and simple. I think this serves a traveler well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will need more than camera and memory card. What are you going to do when it fills up? You need a few cards, rechargeable batteries, a digital wallet or laptop to store files, etc etc.

 

I advocate DSLR but if you do not have a some background there I suggest you keep to film until your next trip. Good Luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a beginnner, you might have better success and reassurance with a digital camera.

You'll know straight away whether what you've envisioned is roughly what you've

captured. There's certainly nothing difficult about film, but if you're unsure about

your skills digital might be your best bet. Trips like that aren't ones on which you

want any suprises. Do you have a laptop onto which you can transfer your images?

Otherwise some type of portable hard drive (ipods work if you purchase a card

reader) might be a good option for you. That way you don't run out of memory on

your cards, and you have the piece of mind that they are securely backed up. Memory

card catastrophes happen in the digital world.

 

Film will certainly do the job as well. As for which is better, they are both valid

solutions to creating your end result. Some people prefer one over the other based on

what their needs are in the end (personal prints, editorial reproduction, fine art prints,

etc.) Given that you're a beginner, and you seem to have a nice trip ahead of you,

digital might make sure you get what you're looking for. You could certainly just

bring a camera memory cards with you if you have no other options. Just make sure

you have more than enough space, and take into account that depending on where

you are you might not have access to purchase another card if the need arises. Also, a

back up battery might be a good idea if you are backpacking and won't have regular

options to charge up. The latest digital SLR's have good life to them, but you don't

want to be caught drained if you can avoid it. A second battery is fairely cheap.

 

Either route you go, allow some time to learn your camera before you set off!!! You

don't want to be fumbling with settings on your trip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I answered your last 2 questions by suggesting a small rangefinder. I'll answer this one by suggesting one of the many 5-8 mexapixel digicams with a decent zoom range. Same reasoning as before (SLRs = weight, which is the enemy) but in the more affordable, digital realm.

 

Note that you'll need some kind of portable device to transfer the files to -- these seem to run $2-400 and can be recharged when you're near power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figure that Helen is going to keep asking this question until she hears what she wants to hear - ie. "Buy a digital SLR".

 

Truth is, you would be crazy to buy a digital SLR for this purpose. You will spend probably 5 times the cost of an equivalent film body to get the digital SLR, before counting cards, batteries etc. You need to carry a laptop with you, or some other storage device (extra cost and weight). You are at the mercy of differing power cable requirements/voltages. Your digital SLR will attract more risk of theft. There are a number of other key resons why a digital SLR is not suited for extended O/S travelling, but if you are not going to listen to the advice of more experienced people, just get the digital SLR and find out for yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i>I've sworn that I will not again travel with a digital SLR again until they are smaller and lighter...On my next trip I'm taking my Nikon FM3a with a couple prime lenses.</i>

<p>

Nikon FM3a + 28mm f/2.8 + 105mm f/2.5 = 2.77 lb. Film = about an ounce a roll.<p>

Canon Digital Rebel + 18-55mm zoom (29-88mm equivalent) + battery + CF card = 1.84 lb. X Drive II (portable storage) = 0.66 lb.

Total = 2.5 lb. + chargers (I don't know the chargers' weight.)

<p>

If you're only carrying a handful of rolls of film, it's a toss up, both weight and size. (For digital, you won't need the portable hard disk drive storage, just compact flash card(s) and the battery charger.)

<p>

If you're carrying a lot of film, digital wins (even after adding portable hard disk drive storage & charger), both weight and size.

<p>

Too much weight? Go pocket digital.

<p>

I've done Europe (2 1/2 week trips) all the above ways - film SLR, pocket digital (Canon S30) and digital SLR (Canon 300D). Never again with film.

 

It's a toss up between pocket digital and digital SLR. Pocket digital is lighter and, well, it fits in your pocket! It's less conspicuous, so I got pictures I may not have taken with an SLR. Digital SLR, on the other hand, has MUCH less noise at higher ISOs, allowing handheld pictures in those castles and cathedrals, so it was much easier to take the pictures I wanted inside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you are a beginner then get a pocket digital. you can review. you can also set to manual and learn it. you don't need to splurge on a digital slr and the lenses and so forth. nor do you need to think about the canon 1ds with top lenses!

 

what else? if you want film. a low cost nikon or canon is fine. use print film as its easier for a novice than slide film.

 

yeah .. a repeated question. you are not going to a jungle in the middle of nowhere. you are going to developed nations. so choose whatever you like. some pple may be with just digital for everything from family candids to hiking summits. some may take a autofocus film and do the same. some may do the manual camera way like those cameras used in the 1970s or earlier. the question is whatever you like. digital looks great. film look just as good.

 

some pple also use both flm and digital.

 

mem cards? well. 6MP digital SLR can give you 60 pix abouts in a 512MB card. that is about two rolls of film. if you are doing that big trip for 2yr of your you asked before. consider putting them on a CD everyday or so. or each half day depending how much you do shoot. or carry a portable HDD like a walkman.

 

if i was you i take a cheap high MP pocket digicam and a portable HDD. or I take a lowcost nikon or canon film SLR with two lenses or i just take a pocket film camera like a yashica t4.

 

if you do carry slr and you are beginner you may hate it. would not be be more relaxing with one pocket cam in your pocket. i am not a pro, i was in japan with so many pple. i just did not feel comfortable pulling out my SLR. i wished i really had a pocket cam that time.

 

the question is if you are a beginner like you said, why are you considering a SLR?? you a bit like my friend. he knows nothign about cameraa at all yet he bought a s5000 with 10x zoom digicam then now wants a film SLR and buy the cheapest lenses of 300mm (8x) and also want a DSLR. all he does is set it to auto mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the trend of pple are going to digital. so if that is what you like, go for it. there's nothing wrong.

 

on the other hand, if you like film. do that. lots do.

 

digial needs 2nd batt, more recharging and a portable HDD. film also needs a 2nd batt but no recharging and no portable HDD.

 

seriously for a novice, i suggest pocket digital.

if you love film then pocket film or film slr.

 

why pay $1000 for dslr when film slr is $150.

you are a novice. how are you going to use it? full auto all the time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is what i tell friends:

get a digicam. that is what everyone is doing and its the future. any megapixel is fine. get a model that looks great and trendy and sexy that you like. friends do not even know what is SLR, i never touch onto this or mention it.

 

Helen, if you have money left over just treat yourself at a nicer hotel, restaurant, buying clothes or whatever you like doing. Personally I would have no qearms abotu using a pocket camera be it digital or film on travel. Capturing moments is better than obsessing about pixel or quality.

 

So Helen really if you are like the masses of pple, go out and get a pocket digicam that you like. Its so small you can caryy it in the pocket, the wallet in the other and you can hit the attractions, the restaurant, the pub, the nightclub with ease ......

 

So yeah, just take your time stroll around, relaxing .. see some cafes, get a squirt of that water bottle .. its a holiday. Yeah get the pocket digicam. Some pple even use their cellphone to take a photo ... heck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first question I would ask is: "What is your budget?" We know that digital cameras are more expensive than their film equivalents. (for example the Olympus Stylus Digital 410 runs about US$350 while the film Stylus is US$100. The Canon Digital Rebel kit is around US$880 while the film Rebel GII kit is $195). If your budget is limited, then a film camera will allow you to take pictures just as well as digital.

 

The next issue is weight. You are planning to backpack and so you probably don't want to have to carry 60 lbs. of camera gear while you are travelling. This argues for a point and shoot with a decent zoom lens. In that case, digital cameras can be significantly smaller and lighter (but whether film cameras like the Yashica T4 zoom or a Olympus Stylus 115 is a 'burden' to carry is debatable.) However, you stand a better chance of having a camera that offers a greater degree of control in a small package if you lean towards digital. I have seen some smaller digital point and shoots that provide aperture priority, shutter speed priority or ful manual modes. In any case, you won't be lighting up the Sistene Chapel with a little built-in flash on either a digital or a film point and shoot.

 

On thing that I would be concerend about is battery life. All electronic cameras (digital or film) are completely dependent on battery power and if the battery dies there are no pictures at all! Battery life on the best of the digital cameras is measuered in hours (or x number of shots) while film camera battery life is measured in weeks (or months). You could complete your entire tour without ever changing the battery in your film camera and, if you want to be safe, having a second battery in your pack will guarantee it. Digital, on the other hand is much more tied to a power source. You will need to recharge your batteries frequently and regularly. You will need to carry several battery packs with you each day to ensure you can freely take pictures when you want and, you will charge your batteries overnight. Battery packs for digital SLRs are NOT small or light! This would mean that wherever you stay must have an electrical outlet and that you will always carry the charger and that the equipment will be safe from theft while you sleep. This isn't a as much of a problem in a hotel room but it can be in a hostel where privacy and security is limited. So the camera you select should have removable battery packs rather than an internal battery that forces you to have the camera exposed during charging.

 

Of course, a fully mechanical film camera doesn't need any batterys at all.

 

For film cameras, issues of 'storage' is pre-determined. The exposed films are full and that is that! If you want to take more pictures, you buy more film. In well-developed countries, there should be little problem finding film to buy. When you have several rolls exposed, you can consider mailing the exposed films back home so that you will have them waiting when you get back. (Family or friends could have them already processed for you and have a record of your trip.) National Geographic photographers would send back exposed rolls in separate bundles...all the odd numbered rolls in one bundle and all the even numbered rolls in another. In case one was lost in transit. With digital you will need to estimate the number of shots you are likely to take and buy enough memory so that you don't have to start throwing away GOOD pictures to make room for new shots. (Trying to find a 4Gb CF card in a foreign country might be a bit of a challenge!) You would therefore also have to provide some mechanism for long term storage. A laptop is too heavy but would allow you to email the pictures back if you had access to the web. There are various portable hard drives that can be used to off load your memory cards. Those devices require batteries and chargers too I'm afraid AND if they are stolen or fail, there goes your entire photographic record!

 

In general, I would think that an SLR (and lenses of course) would be too much to carry in a backpack and would be a tempting target for theft. This would apply to digital or film SLRs. Look for a flexible, zoom, point and shoot that offers you a certain degree of artistic control and live within the limitations. In the end, no matter what you choose, you will have to give up something in exchange. Point and shoots are lighter but lack the options of SLRs. SLRs have the benefits of interchangable lenses but will be a major lump in your backpack.

 

Have fun, take pictures. Enjoy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I may discern from the majority here:

 

As someone who used film for some time, typical "film bag" includes:

SLR, 3 lenses, 30 rolls of film. Why film ? Because it's much cheaper from B&H rather then abroad from some place on a corner. Plus there are a few films I like to work with, not sure if I'll find it, and I'm not sure if it was stored at 100F in Italy during the past a few months - I mean buying film somewhere abroad with no clue about their local rules is expensive and can lead to disappointments.

 

Now with Digital situation is basically the same, but you take CF cards (way smaller then film rolls), batteries (you most likely can do good with two, recharging them), and more expensive camera body with same lenses.

 

I would go with digital for sure, may be would bring small medium format camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon DSLR - forget about 18-55, the lens is crap.

Charger weights nearly zero.

 

Again I would reiterate that there are very good reasons why people take DSLR while traveling - especially pros and PJs.

 

The only winning alternative would be small but nice Leica style camera or Point and Shoot camera with buying film by the way you go.

 

But then again you can buy a small digicam with similar effect in some way.

 

Concerning price of DSLR - it really pays off in terms of film etc. in a couple of months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<i>18-55, the lens is crap</i><p>

<p>

Certainly not MY 18-55, and not the one that Bob Atkins here at Photo.net tested. Quotes from his review:

<p>

"much of the time it can hold it's own against Canon's full frame coverage mid-range consumer lenses".

<p>

"buying the Digital Rebel Kit which includes the 18-55 ... seems like a no brainer."

<p>

"It's small, it's light, it's cheap and as long as you know it's limits, its a good performer."

<p>

"A lightweight 18-55 on the camera is better than a bag full of larger, heavier "L" lenses left back in the car or at home!"

<p>

Quoting from Doug Vann's response to Bob Atkins' review:

<p>

"8x10's from the drebel using the kit lens are WAY BETTER than any 8x10's I ever got from my 35mm - and I was using the 28-70L lens on my 35mm....... I think what this all says is that if you came from 35mm photography to the drebel you will probably be very impressed with the prints you get even from the kit lens."

<p>

Seems like just the lens for Helen!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no simple, single answer. It could well depend on who you are going with - by yourself, with a group, where you are staying, security, electricity, etc.

 

You can bog yourself down with equipment with digital or film. If you are a beginner, film is simplicity itself - it's widely available, even if it isn't your favorite film, it's out there. Batteries are almost a non-issue. I have a Maxxum 5 and it almost seems as if the battery is immortal! I'd consider two sets of replacements, the spare batteries would take up the space of about 2 AA batteries, take some spares for the flash I took, and just be able to forget about it. The chances of a camera failure disaster is out there but remote. If you have a partner, then you'll have some similar if not dupes of much of what you visited.

 

Digital has a higher initial cost and certainly requires a certain amount of extra planning and fussing to deal with batteries and storage. Film - out of the can, into the camera, out of the camera into the can and you are done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you backpack you want to travel light.

 

As a beginner

 

Get a high end compact digital zoom(6x or better) -6mp- with a large phisical sensor (you can decide wich one). Manual settings and raw file shooting can come into question as well, if your level of experience require those.

You will save MANY pounds not having to lug lenses around.

 

Compliment this with two 512mb cards and throw in a portable data storage device -they come in 20gig to 120gig. Every evening you can download the files you want to keep into the drive, and use your cards again the next day.

 

Rememeber batteries! Digital devices eat batteries! You will need at least two sets -preferably three- that can be recharged.

 

Think weight.

 

and Enjoy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll put

http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html

against Bob Atkins - in photozone testing the 18-55 lens gained the title of the worst zoom lens ever in ultra-wide zoom glass.

 

Concerning the fact that some people like it - some people don't understand the reason behind LF, they simply don't see any difference.

It's not a bad thing, but it's the way it goes.

 

another side is that the lens is ok at 50mm, where again there are many better lenses to choose from, but tends to become ultra-crap at 18mm. Damn, it's not really sharp even at f11.

 

Yet another factor is that cheap lenses tend to vary greatly in quality (I can't say it about Canon but some companies simply have "alinged" - "misaligned" left to pure chanse), so someone's crap is someone's treasure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is my personal experience with the d70 dslr in japan - i was backpacking too in this v developed country.

 

the batt last for a week or so .. as its a dslr with these fancy lithium batt. after some days, the night it said full batt. next morning its said 1/2. 3 hr later it said empty. i was in Kyoto and i took a daytour with a bus tour company - I was stuffed. the best sights came and i could not get them. i bought a expensive disposable camera and used that but a lot of pix were not really focussed.

 

then again on another day in Beppu. I even had my Japanese friend with me. My mem card was full. I was again stuffed. Again i bought a disposable camera with the same issues. i came back home, and i spend about $60USD for prints/development and the purcahse of those 2 cameras.

 

i put the mem card into a photo CD. problem is they converted everything into lower quality jpeg. they did not just copy the files straight onto a CD for me. because of this exp and the cost i would not rely on camera stores.

 

i wished i had a portable hdd and a 2nd batt. heck if i bought the 2nd batt i could of used it then and use it now and the future via one payment. and not have to spend those lot then consider buying a 2nd batt now. i would also consider portable hdd. laptop is too heavy. for interent/email unless you are going to subscribe or purchase a prepaid internet account consider it out and configuring your laptop on a foreign place. or you can roam with your current ISP and take it to another nation and use it - bit like how cellphones are roamed. but rates can be like 4x at home. what is best is just pop into a cyber cafe and save that 3kg or so laptop weight. get a portable hdd if you are going with digital. a little walkman sized, heck some u can even double listening to music. if you really want you can take it with you during the day and just buy one mem card. but i would be incline to drop the weight and leave in the accom so to carry 1GB card.

 

I think that SLR can be bulky. If you have not had a SLR before, then pocket versions is the way to go. Bit like jumping into a big pool right at the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I checked out the photozone site. Sure enough, there are 20 anonymous disgruntled buyers (out of how many million sold by now?).

 

However, I believe photos from respected review sites (with a reputation at stake) more than I do 20 anonymous disgruntled complainers. (Plus my photos back up what DP Review and Imaging Resource say and show in their reviews.)

 

See pertinent pages at DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page16.asp and

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page17.asp

 

and Imaging Resource:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EDR/EDRPICS.HTM

 

Following are Photozone's survey results, compared to the above reviews.

 

---"distortion long: heavy distortions"---

Can you say "STRAIGHT LINE"? That's Imaging Resource's picture shows (and what I see in mine). They measure 0.1% pincushion distortion. DP Review say (and shows) 0.3% pincushion in their copy. The lines are so straight in the large thumbnail view that they have to tell you "At telephoto we managed to measure some pincushion distortion but it's unlikely to be visible in most everyday shots."

 

---"distortion wide: critical"---

OK, here there's distortion to be seen. How much? DP Review measured 1.0%. Their conclusion (and mine) - "Distortion was better than we would expect of a wide angle 3x zoom prosumer digital camera lens." (I hate distortion, so I use Thomas Niemann's numbers (from PT Lens) to correct the wide angle distortion using Panotools' Correct plugin for Photoshop.) Imaging Resource measures and shows 0.9%.

 

---"Vignetting Long: significant (w/o)" (w/o = wide open.)---

DP Review said "greater than 20% may be visible in everyday shots." In a later review of the Nikon D70, they became more critical and said "greater than 15% may be visible in everyday shots". Results?

Canon's 18-55 lens: 13% wide open, 7% at f/8

Nikon's 18-70 lens: 28% wide open, 9% at f/8

Any way you slice it, the Nikon zoom's telephoto vignetting is certainly observable wide open, the Canon's is not.

 

---"Vignetting Wide: heavy"---

Canon: 24% wide open, 12% at f/8.

Nikon: 38% wide open, 17% at f/8.

Finally, we can see the 18-55's vignetting, but just barely. See the pictures at DP Review in the Canon 300D and Nikon D70 reviews to see the difference. Their comments? "The EF-S 18 - 55 mm lens did exhibit some visible lens shading at full wide angle and maximum aperture (18 mm / F3.5)". "At full wide angle and maximum aperture (18 mm / F3.5) the AF-S DX 18-70 mm lens exhibited a surprising amount of lens shading". Hard to complain too much about Canon's performance, isn't it, especially at 1/3 the cost of the Nikon.

 

---"Flare: heavy flare"---

Bob Atkins's review ( http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/ ) shows his test image compared to the 50/1.8 and the 28-105, concluding "the 18-55 seems to show least effect...the flare performance of the 18-55 is above average". I guess so, being BETTER than the fixed 50. Imaging Resource said "Detail is excellent in the shadow area of the charcoal briquettes" in their Dave Box test, which shows how little flare there is. Related (but the closest they come to the topic) - DP Review says and shows, under Color Reproduction (using the GretagMacBeth ColorChecker chart), "the 18 - 55 mm lens is quite contrasty giving a good color response very similar to the 28 - 70 mm L lens ... The 50 mm produces the same color response".

 

---"Performance (WIDE & LONG, wide open & stopped down): poor"---

Imaging Resource: "performed very well on the "laboratory" resolution test chart" and backs it up with test shots

DP Review: "a little soft at maximum aperture (almost all lenses are), but stopped down it produced good resolution at wide angle and average resolution at full telephoto" and backs it up with test shots

 

---"Optical Verdict: very poor"---

Imaging Resource: "18-55mm EF-S lens that is being offered along with the Digital Rebel is of surprisingly high quality"

DP Review: "18 - 55 mm is surprisingly good"

 

---"AF Speed: very slow"---

Imaging Resource: "AF speed will vary greatly depending on lens used. These numbers are for EF-S 18-55mm. Quite fast."

 

---"Build Quality: bad"---

OK, so everyone is in agreement here. On the other hand, I hike to Rocky Mountains peaks often, and they don't call them "Rocky" for nothing. And after a year and thousands of photos, my 18-55 is still just fine. So what should I worry about? Worse case - it disintegrates in my hands and I go buy another for $100. Not that I think that's actually going to happen...

 

Well, I'd say the photozone reviewers are batting 1 out of 12.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in Canada at present and i have been into the rooky mountains and Vancouver! From exp i have found that digital photography works best all round! I took photos on the plane & arround canada on foot. Check them out if you want. I have to point out though that like you i am just starting of aswell in the feild of photography! If you need any info on canada or the rockys please feel free to contact me! Hope all goes well.<div>00940A-19055184.thumb.JPG.05e25fde272f925644e969fe2b9235d7.JPG</div>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the point is whether helen should do slr or pocket camera.

one can choose slr film or digital slr.

 

one is about portable hdd and a batt spare. the other is film and spare batt.

 

well its helen's money and she ultimately chooses. if she does want slr then get one. film or digital does not matter at all, just preference.

 

my exp of digital well it was my first digicam and heck i bought my d70 on my vacation, home is so expensive u see..... i did not even know how to use the flash compensation or bracket. heck, the manual was all in japanese. i think i followed the getting started poster with all the fancy pictures. the cam saved me 30% than if i bought at home tho. so it was worth it despite difficulties.

 

i bet helen is going to post another thread at a later stage.

 

if the size is ok, you really want slr, then go to the shop buy it use it for a few weeks at home before u set off. the diff betwen film/digital just come down to individual preference. soem have said if you can review then a dslr maybe better for u being a learner. so yeah basing on this then get a dslr. or get a film slr if you want film. its that easy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...