michael_mitchell8 Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Now I am trying to decide between getting a film or digital slr... now before some of you people who seem to like to impose there dominance over other's by feeding them lines like "listen you newbie photographer, read the reviews.. don't post and waste forum space" I have already read reviews for each from every site possible. Fredmiranda, dpreview, photographyreview, all of them... this is different then a review, and different then the film digital debate... I want to know which camera you guys think would suit me better. Now I have heard: The faults in the 7E outweigh the good things... The drebel isn't built solid, and the flash sucks... However.. here is my situation, I have a deal going with the owner of a plant nursery, he is also a painter, he has already painted one of my photos, and he is planning on mounting it with my photo in the same frame and selling them as a set, he is also wanting me to display my work at his nursery, also the property he lives on. Now film seems alot more practical for me, I buy the film, I shoot the film, I process it, and I get my prints and I display the prints.. plus I can get the Elan7E for 300.. compared to the 900$ the dreble cost. Plus if I want high quality shots I would have to get at least a 512mb card which cost another 200$ and then an extra battery, card reader(cause I heard the camera to computer upload time sucks). I like the fact that the elan has a black body as well, and is more solid, AND light, yet like I said solid. Has true mirror lock up, and other options, I especially like the eye controlled focus, I heard one gentleman state that he can track a car at 100mph from 1/4mile coming straight at him up to a few yards away, and I think that this would work well with bird photography, also, there is no magnification factor, even though I kind of like the fact that a 70- 200mm f4 l lens on a drebel makes it 110 to 320mm. But with the wide angle stuff I need the wider mm lens to work at the mm I want them to... I am not going to get too indepth about film vs digital but I do KNOW these things. Digital is awesome for wildlife and bird photography,BETTER than film. That's a fact, a technical fact. But it is not as good at large printing of landscapes up to 20x30... However, film is great at wildlife, AND awesome at large printing of landscapes... So, I can get a dreble, or an Elan 7E... if I get the Elan I can go all out on a Kirk bh 1 ball head, and carbon fibre tripod, because I am saving 300 on the camera, and 600 on accessories I would need for it, and along with the 70-200mm f4 l lens, I could get another l series lens... so you guys will have to be giving me alot of damaging information about the Elan 7E in order to make me sway my way back towards the digital path of the 300D ok? I would really appreciate replies thank you... means alot honestly.. tough decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooked on velvia Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 What is your experience with photography? And equipment? Do you own any other Canon equipment? The reason I ask is that if you already have film equipment, then you would already know what to expect from a film camera and this would come down to how good of a print you can get from digital. Meaning if you decided to enlarge a photo of a plant or flower to 20x30 how would the print compare from film to digital. I own the Elan7 and the 10D and from personal experience I can tell you that film only beats digital at the printing stage. And if you don't need huge prints, digital is so much easier to deal with. I would recommend the 10D for you because of the instant feedback. It will take away much of the guess work you will encoounter with film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_mitchell8 Posted January 16, 2004 Author Share Posted January 16, 2004 I heard that the Elan 7 was the equivelant to the 10D digital model... That is precisely why I am thinking film is what I should go for, the prints to me are what matters... who wants to buy an 8x10 and put it on their wall? They want to buy at least a 12x16... My experience with photography is indeed limited I will admit, I started in-depth on my 17th birthday last march 18th, I turn 18 this march 18th.. I am currently using my father's Minolta Maxxum HTsi Plus with 2 quantaray lenses, mainly the 70-300mm... and I can't stand how crappy the glass is.. the camera itself is alright but... it's a standard entry level slr that minolta produces so what do you expect? The best film I have used is fujifilm reala 100 negative film, and just the difference between that and the superHQ 200iso was so impressive, I have a chart that I will show you here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooked on velvia Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 By the way Mike, I think you need to get off the high horse. How can you be requesting help from people, but preface your question by scolding people. If you post a question, expect to get helpful and "listen you newbie photographer" type of responses. From the information you gave us, I can almost tell that you have no real experience with photography, or printing photos, etc. All of the questions you are asking you could answer for yourself. Only a newbie photographer would be posting something like this. And you don't want to be scolded? Come on Mike, swallow your pride and take your beating like a man. You will get helpful answers, but expect a bit of a whipping. Good luck with your decision. Just remember that a huge part of photography is at the processing end as well as the composing. You can take a great shot that can be ruined in printing. And you can take a decent shot and improve it in photoshop or in a photo lab (i.e. dogging, color correction etc.) So why don't you decide what you want and use the information online to decide. You seem to be very concerned about money, so go for the Elan7, it's a wonderful camera. I might recommend a macro lens. It will make a huge difference. If you are willing to spend a little more, get the 10D and a 50mm macro. Then learn photoshop to further improve your photos. Happy Shooting! Claude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_mitchell8 Posted January 16, 2004 Author Share Posted January 16, 2004 I am actually pretty good at photoshop.. check out my photos k.. I think I just took a pretty good whipping from you lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooked on velvia Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Good Lord man ... you are a baby! (both in life and in photography ... lol) Be nice, people will be nice to you. Just remember that there are 18 year olds here, and 60 year old people here too. And as far as experience, you are a two year old. So have a little respect. Get the digital, a tripod, and a bunch of books. This forum will only get you so far. I suggest "Photography" (7th Edition) by Barbara London. Also try shooting slides, you will be amazed at the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_mitchell8 Posted January 16, 2004 Author Share Posted January 16, 2004 Naw, I give myself maybe 10 months, I'm just learning how to say my first words... Seriously, why do you say the digital, give me a reason... other people comon gimme your opinions here.. jeeze.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooked on velvia Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 By the way, I like the "Castle Geyser". Nice color, good composition. Michael, you're doing the annoying "newbie photographer" thing again. Ready the reviews and read other people's posts and learn from that. And we have already wasted enough "forum space" on this question. Seriously, just go through the thread. There is more than ample information to help you decide. Where will you be getting the more to do this? And how much money will you be able to spend? How much money will the nursery owner pay you to do this? (Your dad is not the nursery owner is he?) If he is not, perhaps you can convince him that you are serious about photography and that you will make money from the hobby, and that he should front you the money to buy the equipment you want. If you want to see a huge difference in this type of photography, you need to understand that the main variables are lens, lighting, and sturdy tripod, not the camera. The Elan7 vs 10D or Digital Rebel is irrelevent. If that is your only concern, get a point and shoot with a Carl Zeiss lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_mitchell8 Posted January 16, 2004 Author Share Posted January 16, 2004 I thank you, anyhow I think you think I am little more newb than I actually am... I know the camera isn't what really matters, its the glass, the quality of the tripod, why would you think I don't know this when I stated in my original post that I wanted to opt for the elan to be able to spend extra money on a carbon fibre tripod, and better glass. No the nursery owner is not my father, his property is a few acres down the road, and he and his lady partner are very supportive of my photography, they are pushing me, but they are not going to front me money... he is the one that actually asked me to display my work there. He feeds birds on his property so that is where I started going to photograph all kinds of birds, grosbeaks, chickadees, wood peckers, and jays... I explained that I already read the reviews, but I wanted to know the differences between the two... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooked on velvia Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Bye Micheal. I'm hanging up now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_m1 Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 <i>now before some of you people who seem to like to impose there dominance over other's by feeding them lines like "listen you newbie photographer, read the reviews.. don't post and waste forum space"</i> Are you trying to flirt with us? Come on man, what's up with that?<P>On to your question: The 7 was my first SLR. Can't go wrong. If you are serious abt photography, I suggest you spend more resources on instruction, books and learning. But, get a camera that you really like, because if you aren't 100% confortable with what's in your hands, you will more likely not want to go out and shoot. I strongly suggest the film camera for your first <B>real</B> camera so you have to think about exposure and light and get comfortable with using the manual mode. The dummy modes are o.k., but not until you can verify what the camera is doing is what you want it to do. <P> Canon 10D or Digi rebel: Both are great. You can easily get the size prints you want and will be very clear and sharp. The problem I have with digital is it is very easy to cheat. You get instant feedback which is great, but from my perspective, I think using a film camera to learn the craft is a must. Think about it. Using film, you cant see what you just shot. Is it bad? Good? You really don't know until you get your film developed. It makes you think, understand and really take it all in. <P>One more thing about equipment: I see that you are shopping for carbon fibre tripods, L glass, and whatever else. Buy a good canon lens and a good tripod and maybe invest the rest in lessons or a good photo trip where you are around other photographers. Good luck in your journey <B>NEWBIE</B>. Joking.<P> Seriously, <U>bottom line is: learn the craft with a good film camera and the basics, then start to splurge as you become more capable with a specific genre and the art of photography.</U> <P>Best of luck. AJM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooked on velvia Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Amen, Brother!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eosbob Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Hi Michael, If I were starting from ground zero I would have to hear a great argument for film to consider the 7E because the $300 initial cost savings is going to be eaten up rather quickly by film and processing. The cost of storage cards is not to be dismissed, but they are transferable to new cameras down the road. A 10D would be preferable to a rebel, but the 10D is possibly going ot be revised or replaced soon, so go with the Rebel and wait another generation or two and you will probably be able to move to a digital with a full frame sensor down the road. Having been shooting since 1979 I can only say I wish I had the benefit of immediate feedback and almost limitless shooting that digital provides. With regard to enlarging capability there are a couple of programs that do a pretty impressive job of sizing files upward for bigger prints. Lastly, a Bogen 3021 legset with whatever ballhead you prefer might be a way to save a little cash upfront and you can later upgrade to carbon fiber and sell off the Bogen. As others have said shooting is how you will learn the most and improve and digital lets you shoot to your hearts content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_pedone Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 I was pondering this same decision. I ended up with an Elan 7. The with the money I saved, I can get some good glass. Then when the price of full frame digitals comes down, I'll likely upgrade my body and keep my good glass. BTW, my previous camera was a Fuji Finepix s602 so I had quite a bit of digital experience before making the change to a film SLR. I miss the instant feedback but love the photos I'm getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_m1 Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 <B>Ok, I think the point I am making is being overlooked.</b> <P>Instant feedback is fine, but if you don't know what the hell you are doing with a camera, all you are doing is putting a blindfold on and throwing a bunch of darts and hoping one hits the target. Get all the instant feedback you want, but take the time to understand exposure and light when it is more challenging with a film camera. I refer to the artists who used cameras with manual focus and no autofocus option, the artists who used cameras with no light meters vs. everything that is now available. Try photography in it's purist form and you may get a better feel and understanding. <B>I am not anti digital.</B> All it takes is one look at my folder and you will see the main camera I use, Canon 10D, But I have been were the poster is and I valued my experience with film before digital. It really made a difference in what and how I learned. It taught me the value of exposure and making sure everything was perfect so you don't blow an opportunity using film. <B><U>Please ignore everything I am saying if you are not interested in learning, and just collecting expensive equipment.</B></U><P> AJM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Michael: look down a few threads to the one titled "Frequent Corrupt Files from Digital Rebel" for a peek at just some of the fun you can anticipate by switching from film to digital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley_rogouski Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Question: Do you have a decent film scanner? If you do, then maybe the thing to do is buy the Elan 7 now with the lenses you'll need, then, when the price of the Rebel drops in 6 months, buy it then. If you don't have a decent film scanner, the cheapest good one you can get is a Minolta for about $300. In the end, I think it's a matter of what you're comfortable with. I had a Nikon n80, a decent scanner, and a couple of very good lenses and a Canon A40 point and shoot. I simply found myself using the point and shoot more because I liked the instant feedback you get with digital. So I bought the Rebel/300D. The n80 was a better camera but what did that matter. I use the Rebel more. I sold the n80 and the lenses, and bought the 17-40 and now in a year or so I'll just add a higher end body when the prices go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_m1 Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 <P> In this <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0074iF">post from yesterday</a>, you had 7 people give you pretty strong arguments and you didn't seem to respond to those posts. What's up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley_rogouski Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Interesting. I've never had a corrupt file on my Digital Rebel, My A40, my A80, or my Sony DSC-S85. I have had plenty of badly processed film and I have scratched or smudged a lot of negatives while developing or scanning them. "Michael: look down a few threads to the one titled "Frequent Corrupt Files from Digital Rebel" for a peek at just some of the fun you can anticipate by switching from film to digital." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe_lempkowski1 Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 I was recently facing a similar dilemna. I decided to go with the Digital Rebel. I've already shot over a thousand photos with it and I am not diappointed. I like the low light capabilities when I use my 50mm/f1.8 lens. I've been using it a lot for shooting blues bands in night clubs. It has replaced my Konica Hexar Silver, which I used before for this type of shooting. I've also used it outdoors at some festivals with a 75-300mm IS. I've been really happy with it. I used to use this lens in conjunction with a Rebel G. Since, I bought the Digital Rebel all of my film cameras have been sitting on the shelf. In fact, I just ebayed all of my Olmypus equipment last week and I might auction off some of the other stuff, too. The Digital Rebel isn't exactly flimsy. It's a well built camera. I've been happy with it. I wish that it had the 9fps feature and hte flash exposure compensation feature, but it was $500 less and it came with the extra lens. I think this will hold me until the next ultra-cool whizbang camera comes out that I can't live without. I don't know where you live, but you can find 512MB Compact Flash cards at a reasonable price online. An extra battery will run you about $30-$35. Card readers are dirt cheap. I've read a lot of these forums and most people seem pretty happy with the Elan 7E. Either way, I don't think that you will go wrong. It's pretty much a matter of personal taste at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredus Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 I would say go with the Elan 7E. Get the best glass you can afford and go shoot some film. Most of the pictures on my <a href="http://www.400iso.com">website</a> were taken with a Elan 7e. Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photobyalan.com Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 After seeing post after post from you in almost every different forum on photo.net, I think you should definitely get a bag full of disposable wedding cameras from Wal-Mart and use the money you saved to enroll in an English grammar class at your local community college. Sorry to be so harsh, but, come on! If English was your second language I might give you a little slack. Work on your communication skills before you worry about your photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_taylor Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 "Instant feedback is fine, but if you don't know what the hell you are doing with a camera, all you are doing is putting a blindfold on and throwing a bunch of darts and hoping one hits the target. Get all the instant feedback you want, but take the time to understand exposure and light when it is more challenging with a film camera." I really disagree with this sentiment, and quite frankly wonder why people would even think this way (sorry). Practice makes perfect. You learn any art or craft by practicing. The time lag between your action and your observation of the results sets the tempo for how quickly you can master anything. The time lag to seeing your results on film hinders, not helps, the learning process. You experiment and drop a roll off at the developer. When you get the roll back, what were your settings for each shot? On which shot did you try X technique? On which shot did you use Y technique? Few photographers bother to write notes to the level of detail necessary to remember. And if you don't remember exactly what you did, how can you make the mental connections necessary to learn? The costs also are prohibitive to experimenting. If you do experiment, you have no real time guidance what-so-ever. You must try every variable combination while shooting "in the dark" and hoping one works out (and that you remember which one). With digital you can see the results as you're experimenting, and change your technique mid-shoot. This is going to stick better in your memory than the guessing game that happens after you get your film back. You see the settings right then and there. Did your theory work? Or do you need to adjust it? Case in point: I recently tried shooting surfers in my local area. Because I was using my 10D I was able to instantly judge my technique. I avoided a position closer to the surfers because I thought the angle of the sun would flare out shots from that viewpoint. After reviewing *on site* I realized I needed to get closer, so I decided to move to the position I thought wouldn't work. Snapped a few frames and quickly realized that rather than flare out, the images were crisp with some beautiful effects because of the sun's angle to my position and the waves. I probably wouldn't have even tried this with my film body. I shot over 200 frames. As I reviewed the images at home I realized that I actually improved within a single session. The keepers are all at the end, and more importantly I know why they're keepers and how I got them. The first 50 or so look like snapshots from a tourist. The last 50 or so have images that look like they're from a pro. I'm actually considering selling a couple in a local shop. This is the learning curve within *one session.* To learn as much with film would have probably required 4-5 sessions and $50 or more in film and processing. I remember it took me about a half dozen rolls of film over as many sessions before I started getting any good flower shots. Had I had a 10D back then, two sessions would have advanced me as far, and at $0 cost. Practice makes perfect. I have nothing against film and enjoy occasionally shooting with all manual bodies (just got a Yashica Mat TLR --- no light meter even!). But digital is far superior for learning the fundamentals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_mitchell8 Posted January 17, 2004 Author Share Posted January 17, 2004 OK, well in regards to learning with film first, I have been using a Minolta Maxxum HTsi for the last year, to learn the craft.. I understand photography pretty well, I think that the only way I can improve now, is memory, remembering how I shot in this lighting situation, and that lighting situation, and developing my eye. I understand what there saying about "digital being better for learning because it's cheaper and faster and no price on wasted film if it sucks" But I also understand what your saying regarding film being better for learning, also shooting digital I think there has been a HUGE wave of newbie photographers out since digital cameras came out, and I think they have been taking too long to get good at photography just because of the fact like you said, with digital you are almost finding yourself losing your photography abilities and gaining your photoshop skills... I am getting the Elan 7E, I have made my decision I am worrying about lens now, so check that post... I am sorry about not replying to the post I made yesterday about the Pro Film photographers transition to Digital, but I wasn't around to check the post.. so I will indeed be checking up on it today, thank you. I appreciate the GOOD people of this site, and the good people that contributed to my post thank you and I will write your account down and find a way to save you as interesting or something, thnx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Those are totally different beasts. I was lucky to be able to afford both a 10D and an Elan7, which are similar though not identical (I find the controls of the Elan7 to be more flimsy, especially the rear wheel, on the other hand the Elan7 is more advanced when it comes to using the various focusing points (direct controls on the back plus more advanced metering modes, and eye-controlled focus if you get the 7E, which I didn't get). I had a DRebel in my hands, it didn't quite feel like a $900 camera. If quality matters to you, you'll see that you want good lenses. If you want to shoot lanscapes and birds, you'll spend quite some money on lenses. By the time you do the extra cost of a film body will look like small change. If you're really after 20x30 enlargements, skip 35mm right away, and go straight to 4x5. I'm not joking here. And you'll find that a decent digicam is the best friend of a 4x5 photographer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now