Olympians Going Digital SLR?

I'm curious how many Zuikophiles are going, are have gone, the DSLR

route? If you've already made the transition, how are you finding it?

Do you still use film, or have you made a complete break? What

camera/lens system did you choose, and are you happy with your choice?

 

I'm on the fence. Still shooting with my OM-1's and they've been

great cameras for me, but I'm also shooting a lot with a prosumer

Canon G2 and I'm being slowly converted to digital by the convenience

factor. I'm no longer as diehard film-based as I was even a year ago.

 

Slowly tilting towards digital,

 

Gene

I am similar to you. A year ago I wouldn't have thought of going digital but now things aren't so clear. At all.

 

I made the "mistake" of buying into Canon a year and a half ago. 6 months ago I was ready to ditch it and stick with Olympus as two systems with high quality lenses was too expensive, with Olympus being the cheaper one.

 

But then it I played with the prosumer digitals, which didn't impress me, and the 10D showed that quality DSLRs are getting affordable.

 

So now my mind is pretty much made up, sell most of the Olympus kit, probably holding on to the OM-4 body and 50/1.4 for a while longer, see how I go. I am now buying all (well, some) of the quality primes for my Canon and I wouldn't be surprised come bonus time next april, I will be making the splurge.

 

I do plan to do a lot more mono work, which is where the EOS film bodies will come in. I don't see myself do much film colour work after I get a DSLR. Maybe if I end up at some very pretty landscape locations and feel the urge for Velvia or some Portra portraits, but other than that...

I don't shoot Olympus, but does the new E-1?, I think, work with manual Zuiko lenses? The ad I saw, showed some new lenses made for their new flagship. This may be a model to look at when it comes out if it takes manual Zuikos. From what I remember, the camera looked pretty impressive.

Nope, not interested. Last year I got an Olympus C-3040Z - used it a lot for a while; now, hardly at all. The output is just okay, the workflow is uninspiring and the equipment requirements (computer, printer, supplies, etc.) are too expensive. I'd sell or trade the thing but it's handy for making jpegs to sell other stuff online so I guess I'm stuck with it.

 

If anything I'm more dedicated now to film and the traditional process. And despite having traded off all my Canon FD gear last year for Nikon manual focus stuff to help in documenting a prospective book project, I find myself reaching for the OM gear more often now for my personal work.

I have always shot slides, and often for slideshows. I don't see how digital can replace this short of a big expensive plasma display which I am not yet ready to buy, and even then there are questions about the longevity of the format (DVD players currently expect a CD-ROM containing a FAT-32 file system with JPEG files... not a format I want to entrust my memories to). Even after all that expense, the quality is probably inferior to that of slides. The only advantage I can see to digital here is that I live in an area prone to bushfires and digital are more easily copied.

 

Now, the few prints I do are mostly from medium format and here the greater depth of field and not having to pay for drum scans has attraction. But this is not relevant to the thread.

I grabbed an EOS 10D as soon as was humanly possible (not bad going, considering I'm Down Under and still got mine before a lot of folks in the US). Mind you, I'd owned the OM-EF adapter for months before I got the 10D - call it foresight; I've got "shit-loads" of Zuiko OM lenses and there was <i>no way</i> I was going to buy all that gear again in a different brand!

<p>

So, back to your question: <i>"Do you still use film, or have you made a complete break?"</i> I use film, but only rarely. I love the OM bodies too much to sell them, so I'm going to have to get back into film at some stage! I recently had my OM-1n fitted with the mercury battery adapter - allows use of a silver oxide battery - and found the light meter works well even with a bright 2-4 screen installed! On my Canada trip, I took it along, and am half-way through a slide film now.

<p>

I shoot <i>much</i> more often with digital. I just got crazy at having prints (from negatives) always coming back not-quite-right. Digital allows me to get the correct colours (may need reshooting, but at least you <i>know</i> it needs it). Well, I'm fond of my Zuikos, so it's good to keep using them!

<i>"[D]oes the new E-1... work with manual Zuiko lenses?"</i> No. But I think an adapter <i>could</i> be possible; if so, I would find the E-1 much more interesting (but it's still too pricey right now).

I've still got my OM-2 and all my stuff, and still do the majority of my work on film - but when I'm working and getting paid for it, I usually switch to a (employer owned) Fuji S2.

 

I must admit, I very much like digital SLR and will probably get one for myself in the not too distant future. Canon's new digital rebel has finally brought it into a reasonable price, and I'm seriously looking at it, or the 10D. I'll keep my OM gear though - as nice as digital is for color photography, I still find that I prefer film and the chemical printing process over digital for b/w. I still have difficulty getting a really satisfactory b/w print from my computer. The fact that there is a converter that will let me use my OM lenses on an EOS digital body is just another nudge in that direction.

 

So I feel, sooner or later, I'll end up going digital and reserve film for b/w or the rare occasion when I need that neg or slide.

Bas: <i>I am now buying all (well, some) of the quality primes for my Canon and I wouldn't be surprised come bonus time next april, I will be making the splurge.</i>

 

<p>

Lex: <i>Nope, not interested.</i>

 

<p>

Frank: <i>I have always shot slides, and often for slideshows. I don't see how digital can replace this</i>

 

<p>

Neil (10D owner): <i>I use film, but only rarely. I love the OM bodies too much to sell them, so I'm going to have to get back into film at some stage!</i>

 

<p>

Eric (Fuji S2 user): <i>I must admit, I very much like digital SLR and will probably get one for myself in the not too distant future.</i>

 

<p>Thanks for all the excellent, thoughtful replies. I agree that slides are difficult to replace if you shoot slides for projection. I shoot slides more because they scan well. I think I'd keep some of my OM-1 kit for the memories if nothing else, and for shooting B&W. But as I look over the past year and a half that I've owned a Canon G2, I find that I use it more than all my other cameras combined. And I'm certain I would use a DSLR even more yet. I wouldn't have predicted this a year ago. Is this 'growth' or sliding down a slippery slope? :)

 

<p>

Gene

<i>"Is this 'growth' or sliding down a slippery slope? :) "</i> Not sure - only time will tell. Just thought I'd mention that I also have a Canon G2, a great little camera. Sure, I use the 10D more often, but the G2 still has its place: parties/social photography, or just when I want to travel really light. I used it tonight, in fact! But maybe this is going off topic......

Depends on your feelings about digital versus film. There are going to be some applications for which film will probably never be replaced entirely. Some photojournalism, for instance, will always want film - I think there's still a lack of trust in the "digital signatures" used to ensure an unmanipulated image (although even with film, there's no guarantees that an image is untouched, you at least have a physical reference). And up to now, I have yet to be totally satisfied with digital b/w printing - the old chemical darkroom still makes the best b/w prints, IMO. Digital is catching up, maybe... but it still has a way to go.

 

But I still shoot a lot of color, and for most of it, digital is a wonderful tool. Shooting film in the field, I have to either carry around an incredible amount of film or I find myself not bracketing shots as much or actually not taking shots I'm unsure about in order to conserve film. With digital, you have two advantages. First, memory cards hold more images than film, pound for pound. Secondly, you can immediately review your shots if you feel the need to, and eliminate blatantly bad shots - you don't have to waste film keeping messed up exposures.

 

I'm sure some will say this makes us "sloppy" and there is some truth to that perhaps. On the other hand, the best way to improve as a photographer is to take photographs. Burn film, we've been told again and again. With digital, I find myself more freedom to take more photographs.

 

I guess if I had advice to people just starting out, it would be to learn on film, then move to digital. Just like there's a big school of thought there that says people should learn on manual cameras - it disciplines people to think, rather than blindly trust the camera - this works for me with film vs. digital as well. But once you HAVE learned how to do good work with film, there's no reason not to use digital if it does what you want it to do.

I also have a G2 Leica! It is a great camera, no doubt about it. But I guess the debate about such P&S digitals is less urgent (more settled?), as they fit nicely into their niche: convenience, both in taking the photo and reviewing the photo.

Eric: <i>I guess if I had advice to people just starting out, it would be to learn on film, then move to digital. Just like there's a big school of thought there that says people should learn on manual cameras - it disciplines people to think, rather than blindly trust the camera - this works for me with film vs. digital as well. But once you HAVE learned how to do good work with film, there's no reason not to use digital if it does what you want it to do.</i>

 

<p>I used to think this too. But I've been tutoring some younger folks in photography and they have no interest whatever in using film. They grew up on computers and they have digital cams and are good with digital equipment. So I'm coming around to a new viewpoint, that they should just take their digitals and learn how to make good images. If some of them get into it enough to want to try out film, that's a bonus, but why start there? Too retro for the young crowd (exceptions, of course).

 

<p>I'll hang on to my OM's but I can see their point of view. -Gene

Quoth the original poster:

 

I made the "mistake" of buying into Canon a year and a half ago.

 

I'm sorry you feel that way. Canon lenses are cheaper and better in many

respects than Zuiko lenses. Ever find an AF Zuiko?

 

I love Olympus cameras, but the sad fact is that the Olympus corporation has

abandoned you, the loyal SLR user in favor of the high-turnover,

low-innovation point n' shoot market. They have attempted to redeem

themselves with their new digital-SLR, but only time will tell if they will stick

with it.

 

Canon makes damn fine glass, damn fine cameras, and will back that up with

constant innovation. I don't think you could lost by moving to a modern,

supported, still-manufactured camera system. Olympus have shown

themselves to be fickle and unless they work HARD won't ever again

compete with Canon, or even Nikon.

Neil D. states above: " '[D]oes the new E-1... work with manual Zuiko lenses?' No. But I think an adapter could be possible; ..."

 

John Hermanson, Camtech, (a highly respected OM repair person, and in my opinion cautious regarding rumors) reports on the Olympus mailing list that an "OM lens adapter" for the E-1 is now announced (with price) on the Olympus US web site. He seems to refer to a section which is only accessible to official Olympus dealers. see:

 

http://zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympus-digest.archive/v02.n4327

 

Nonetheless, I think the use of OM lenses on a halfframe is like using medium format lenses on a 35mm camera. Besides the stopped-down metering (I assume that this will be the case?), it is lots of useless weight. I say this even though I have a Mamiya 645 to OM adapter...

Thanks for the info Konrad! I guess they'll surface into the public lists sooner or later. I think that it's good to have the option to use OM lenses on the E-1, even if it isn't a priority for some due to size and weight factors.

Re using OM lenses on E-1

I think you need to use the special lenses made for the camera to get the best out of the system. As I understand it the lenses are custom designed to suit the sensor size, and the camera recognises the characteristics of each lens to correct vignetting, distortion etc.

 

Alternatively, I am in the final stages of developing a 20MP digital back which simply replaces the back on all classic OM's. It runs on solar power and will be on sale for under £1000 in less than 6 months. Feel free to order one now even though it is a complete lie.