which digital camera makes most sense for me?

Hello...need opinions: I'm an advanced amateur, have 35mm F3 (20

yrs) with Nikkor 55mm micro AF, & 180mm Nikkor ED 2.8 manual focus

also 35-105mm Nikkor zoom MF. Also Pentax 645 with 75mm and 120mm

lens. The Pentax doesn't mean anything to this post, just background

info. Would like a digital. Do the 3 Nikkor lens I have lend any

importance to whether I buy Nikon D70 or something less expensive

like Fuji S7000 which is fixed lens? I enjoy landscape, little

portrait and macro/micro. Thinking abt adding a scanner and printer

later. Too many choices, and I'm not thinking clear anymore. Your

input would be appreciated greatly. Bob Hollifield

Bob: With your experience with Nikon SLRs and the lenses you have now, I think you will truly appreciate a D100 or a D70. Never used a Fuji S7000 so can't say much. I have tried a few P&S digital at stores. Few is satisfactory.

I own a Fuji S602 Pro (model before the S7000) and I'm very happy with it. I would love to own a digital SLR but I'm not convinced that they really offer good value for money just yet. Saying that, if I was in your position with existing SLR lenses I would consider a camera such as the D70 - however check that the lenses are compatible first! </br></br>Also look at the features on offer to see if they meet your needs. I need a PC socket and the D70 (and Canon 300D) do not provide one. Some disadvantages of the built in lens types of camera include a lack of bulb setting, poor manual focus (especially on the S602), electronic zoom locking you into one focal length once you hit the shutter (prevents me being <i>�artistic�</i>) and focus lock which prevents you from effectively photographing a moving object. Minolta have addressed some of these issues with the Dimage A2 but I haven�t seen the image quality yet.</br></br>Best advice (as always) is make a list of what you want the camera to do and the features you need, and then get down to your local camera store to try the various models.

Consider the Minolta Xg while you're getting your digital feet wet. You can carry it everywhere with it.

Assuming you do not need a protrait grip, get the D70 kit (with lens). Have your 180 Nikkor chipped. Sell the 35-105 lens and you are set (the macro should work fine)

Just remember that you manual focus lenses will not meter with the D100 or D70 unless you get those lenses chipped (ASSUMING those lenses can be chipped -- not all can be modified).

 

Also, since you're used to the F3's viewfinder, youll be in for a disappointment looking through the D100 or D70's VF.

 

However, assuming you do want to play in the digital sandbox), my suggestion:

 

Forget the DSLR for now, unless you have a compelling reason to shoot digital. Keep the F3 and 645 and those lenses, shoot film, and just scan your negs or prints. Also, get Photoshop and a printer.

 

If you want to complement your film cameras with a digital p&s, then get one like the Canon A80.

I've used the Fuji 602, and find it nothing more than a toy compared to my 10D and various D100's I've used. Image quality isn't even up for comparison - it's like moving from 800 speed print film to 100 speed.

 

If you have the cash, wait for the D70. Not sure how much it will cost to 'chip' the 180, but man, I love that lens.

I totally agree with Scott, the Fuji S602 is a toy compared to the 10D, it also costs around the third of the price before we even start looking at lenses. Like every thing, you get what you pay for.</br></br>

 

I only mentioned this camera because you said that you were looking at the Fuji S7000 and this was it's predecessor. I then hopefully pointed out some of the short comings. Saying that, if you do need to save up for the D70 then I'd recommend getting a cheap second hand S602 type camera to see if you like digital - not every one does because it is very different from film - and if you do like it, save up for a D70 (or sell your Nikon gear and buy a Canon 10D).</br></br>

 

When it comes down to image quality remember it is your opinion which counts. (A lot of digital camera owners are obsessed with magnifying images up to 300% to compare pixilation and noise etc) so get some prints made with different cameras and compare those to see what you like best. Another important point about digital is that the quality is built into the camera and not the 'film'. With a cheap 35mm film camera you can potentially take images as good as you can with an expensive 35mm film camera, it depends upon the optics and film loaded. However with digital, a cheap camera can not produce such 'technically' good images as an expensive camera because the 'film' is built in. If 'absolute' image quality is what you're after then look at the D-SLR.</br></br>

 

Alternatively don't go digital, shoot slides and get them scanned in professionally...

All of you have great answers and suggestions...I really appreciate the input. I wasn't aware I could "chip" a lens...this I am going to check out at KEH, which has a repair facility here in Atl. That 180 f2.8 is a fine lens as Scott pointed out. I also love that old F3..what a hunk of camera. Given the comments by KL, Steve and Scott I'm thinking check out the "chipping" for later digital, but keep shooting my F3 and Pentax, get a scanner and printer...and wait for the user reviews on the D70, plus maybe a price drop later. Guys I really appreciate your time and input and thoughtful suggestions. Best regards to all...bob

Bob - the only person that I know of (at least in the US) who will install the electronic contacts on your AIS lens is Rolland Elliott in Charlotte. He charges $90 for parts and labor, and $5 for shipping.

 

He installed the ship on my 600mm/5.6 AIS, and while I initially had alignment problems (he fixed it), it does work as advertised.

 

The downside though, is that Rolland seems to be very busy, so you may be without use of that lens for a number of weeks.

 

You can check it out for yourself at:

 

http://home.carolina.rr.com/headshots/NikonFAQ.htm

<i>He installed the ship on my 600mm/5.6 AIS</i>

<p><p>

meant "chip" -- tho that 600mm sometimes feels as heavy as a ship

Bob.

 

If you are planning to digitally process your film, I highly highly reccomend you get a DSLR rather than the scanner. No matter the limitations, once you get one you will almost never use your film stuff for anything other than traditional B&W (well at least the 35mm stuff). Just my 2 cents.

KL..thanks for the info. I went to his website and checked it out. He is a character, isn't he..but seems to know what he's doing. bob

JAMIE..Thanks for ur .02 also. You do have a good point and right now I'm shooting B/W with my Pentax. I don't know of any other hobby where we have so many choices and all of them fun. Since I'm not lucky enough to do this for a living, at least my bad decisions won't bite me in the butt. Thanks again guys..bob

No problem Bob. JUst for a little backround on why I made that reccomendation.

 

I was an exclusive Nikon MF (FE2 & n2020) and Yashica 124G (6x6) user for many years. I blew off digital complely for a while. Then early last year I got a Canon G3 as a b-day present. Well once I got that my Nikon film use dropped at least 80%. In fact the only times I ever used the Nikons was in situations where the G3 simply was inadequate (avaliable light, specialist lenses, action shots, etc...). Basically quality was never an issue, because if quality mattered that much I should use MF. Well once I realized all that I went out and began saving up for a Canon 10D (long decision process for me, and I think I made the right one, but the Nikon D70/D100 are pretty much just as good). Since I purchased the 10D I simply stopped using any film (other than B&W). If you already hve a computer and can afford the entry, digital is so much more convienant than film. Ans to all those film lovers out there that say digital is not more convienant, it's just because they are so used to film. Besides with the Canon and Nikon systems, you can always get a great film body to share your lenses if film is an issue for you.

Digicams are suitable for a wide range of photography. They don't do low light all that well. they don't do dynamic, low predictability moving subjects well. They are trememdously convenient. I kind of think there is a lab/tripod test you can apply. If you have a spectrum of photographers from "What's a tripod?" and develop and print at WalMart to everything is professionaly developed and printed and "always" shot on a $400 or more tripod. (Or weigh your camera bag - if it takes two people to get it on the scale, you'll go dslr.) The closer you are to the high end, the more likely you are to find a digicam isn't going to make you happy. OTOH, if you inhabit the middle ground and only sometimes stretch to really edgey work, then you may find a good digicam covers a lot of your needs.

 

However, having used an slr a lot, you'll likely find that you'll still want a dslr at some point. If budget is a consideration, then dslrs are like a boat - a hole in the water into which you pour lens money. I have a Fuji S602 and find it pretty well meets my needs. My wants? Nope. It just doesn't do everything I'd really want. Indoor school and church choir events suffer from poor low light performance, dynamic sports are very hard to capture w/o a lot of work - using burst may capture a moment but there are inherent delays with feeding shots to memory, resetting controls, swapping aux lenses on and off is tedious and risky, etc. (Filter thread mounted converters must be handled gently to avoid cross-threading, etc.)

 

Why not try finding a good used or even new middle end digicam. Like a Canon G3, Fuji S602 (I think you'd find the Canon a little better suited to landscape type stuff than the Fuji with it's remote, adjustable finder, internal nd filters, etc.) or maybe one of the new Canon A80 types, etc. That may get you a good feel for where you can go with a digital. In any event, prices tend to drop over time with both the high end digicams and dslr bodies. The A80 types (especially) are quite convenient and there are a lot of threads from folks with slrs/dslrs looking for a convenient general use camera that doesn't require lugging a huge kit around. So you might find it useful even if you go dslr eventually anyways.

Craig and Jamie...everyone is really helping me think thru this process. What got me interested in Digital, I confess, I have been fooling around for about a year with a Nikon 880 Coolpix 3.34 MP. It has three JPEG settings and TIFF. It's fun and the instant feedback is very nice. Then it crashed..."system error". I looked in the manual and it said to take out the battery and then put it back in. If that doesn't work call Nikon. It didn't work and I called KEH and they want $105 to repair. I'm thinking put the money in a DSLR. Yes I do use a pretty good tripod, a Bogen Manfrotto model 3221(8 or 9 lbs) with a Bogen 3265 video tripod head on it. Great for switching from doing vertical shots to horizontal shots with just a turn of the head, also has finite adjustments and a levelor. So Craig you are right on about looking for something above middle ground results. After all this discussion I think my intermediate goal is to get a D70 and chip that 180 lens. Short term, shoot my 35mm b/w and Pentax 645 and have fun and put away a few bucks for that intermediate goal. Thanks a bunch guys...this photo.net is great. I think I need to send Bob or someone a little money to help support it. bob