Better and economic way going digital?

[bochen]

I am quite confused while I am thinking about the way going digital

and have been doing researches on digital SLR and film SLR cameras.

 

I intended to buy a digital SLR, D70, which seems to be the most

popular consumer level digital SLR. Digital cameras are great. I have

a digital point-and-shoot camera, and I really like it. I shoot

whatever I want to shoot, don?t have to worry about wasting films (and

paying money), and it?s very convenient to see playback on LCD and

laptop. But just consider its price. Electronic gears are always

overpriced and their prices are always dropping. I don?t want to see

the price dropping too much just after I buy it. Moreover, when I

realized that the quality of pictures taken by D70 with its kit lens

is worse than film SLRs at the similar price tag, I was disappointed.

The even worse things are its dim and small viewfinder, and small APS

CCD. I think it?s overpriced too much. And I think CCD size of

affordable digital SLRs will be the same as film SLRs years later. So

the DX lenses designed for digital SLRs will be obsolete then.

 

So the other choice is a film SLR. I prefer to N80. Yes, it does have

drawbacks. It doesn?t have mirror lock-up, and its vertical grip

doesn?t have shutter release. But it?s only about $300, what can I ask

for more? I am going to buy 2 prime lenses, 50/1.8D and 24/2.8D, which

is perfect for landscape. Probably next step 85/2.8D or 105/2.8D for

portraits. I won?t buy any zoom lenses, as I don?t like their weights

and distortions. The lenses I buy now can be used when full-size and

affordable digital SLR is available. Well, it?s a perfect plan so far.

However, as an amateur I want to put my pictures on webs and improve

my photography skills from other?s critiques. I need a scanner too.

But a quality scanner, which doesn?t sacrifice picture quality, is

even expensive than a digital camera. What about cheap ones? I buy

quality lenses to get quality pictures but sacrifice picture quality

due to a cheap scanner? It?s really bad.

 

Either $1,000 for N80, two prime lenses and a cheap scanner, or D70

with its kit lens at the same price. It makes me confused. I want to

listen to your advices. Thank you all!

 

 

Regards,

-Bo Chen

[ilkka_nissila]

How is it that the image quality is worse than film cameras? I have the opposite impression after shooting maybe 40000 35 mm film shots and 5000 with the D70. Apart from black and white, I get much nicer 8x12 inch prints from the D70 and only need maybe 10% of the effort to get there.

[._._z]

<i><blockquote> I don?t want to see the price dropping too much just after I buy it.

</blockquote> </i><p>

 

Why should you care? If you bought the camera for a price you considered fair, and

bought it to use it, then there's no reason for agita if the price goes down. <p>

 

All electronic gear drops in price and new models replace it. That's life. If you shoot a

lot you'll pay for your digital camera in short order (and people with digital cameras find

they shoot a lot more than they do with film). <p>

 

Considering the price of film and a scanner ignores the value of your time. Scanning is

an acquired skill and takes time to get good scans even if you know what you're doing

... and that's before you consider any post-processing/printing work. <p>

 

If you don't shoot much and are happy to have a film processor process, print and scan

your photos, a film camera may well be the best choice for you. If you're still not sure,

keep your digital p&s and use it and don't buy a thing.

[ShunCheung]

Bo, you are planning too far ahead. Nobody knows exactly how technology will improve 4, 5 years from now and it is a waste of time to keeping thinking about the different possibilities.

[scott_warn]

I have to agree with Ilkka. The D70 image quality does surpass what I was able to obtain with the recent "consumer" films. Actually if you compare the D70 at ISO 400 against ISO 400 negative films, the D70 has about a 4 to 1 advantage in terms of quality (my guesstimate). I have also found that the quality of the D70 is better than what I can obtain by scanning slide films with my 2700 dpi Coolscan III. Although I have no doubt that a 4000 dpi scaner would help my slide quality, the D70 is good enough, and so much more convenient, that I just don't bother with shooting slides anymore.

 

Because the quality of the D70 is so good, I really don't think we will see a FF DSLR at the "consumer" level for a very long time, perhaps 10 years or more. I do expect that the D3 will be FF, perhaps in 2006 or 2007, but it will be a pro body with a pro price tag. As for the price drop for these types of goods, it will happen. What you should keep in mind is the you could be taking pictures instead of sitting on the fence waiting for the price to drop. You should also remember tht the 500, or 600 USD, DSLR won't happen for another year or two, and it will be a very "dumbed down" version of the D70. It probably won't have the color, white balance, or exposure controls of the D70, it will be a very basic "point & click" DSLR. The D70 will carry on as a concurrent model and probably only be about 100, or 150, USD less than it is now.

 

Ultimately, it's your decision and you should make the choice that you will be most comfortable with. You are the one who has to live with your choice, so make the choice that you think is best for you.

[kipling]

The D70 is a very good camera and the kit lens is also very nice. You <i> can </i> get as

good to better results with this camera, than with any other 35 mm film camera. <br>

The main difference to a film camera is: you have to be willing and able to do your own

post processing. If you can't and don't

want to, then IMHO you're better off using film. <br>

There are really only three reasons I can think of <b> not </b> to get a D70: <br>

1. You can't live with the dim viewfinder (I can).<br>

2. You get excellent prints from your lab and don't have any interest in scanning and

processing your own photos. <br>

3. Your only interested in doing Black and white printing. <p>

If those three aren't at the top of your list then the D70 should be. <br>

If you're satisfied with what good 35mm film prints look like, then that should put an end

to any worries about this camera ever being obsolete, because it's just as good as a film

camera. If not, think about buying a Middle Format camera.<br>

BTW, your other option of getting a film camera and a cheap scanner is the worse possible

option. If you're doing your own printing then the scanner is as important as the lens on

your camera.

[jeffrey moore]

From the photo.net forums page:

 

Please choose the most appropriate forum for your post. Please do NOT post in multiple forums.

[sergio_leal]

Bo, if you are not sure, keep your 35mm camera(s) and buy a decent used Nikon or MInolta scanner (they can be VERY affordable now). You will spend very litte cash and save a few hundred dollars to buy some fine glasses to use now and in the future with your DSLR if you ever decide to have one. No need to rush! What you will save today doing what I said will probably enable you to buy a DSLR in the near future, even better and cheaper that the excellent D70, and shoot both, analog and digital. What about that!!!

[joe_margetts2]

I've just (with some trepidation) bought a D70 with the 17-80 kit lens. I have been putting off this purchase for a few years. I have been using over time an FM3a, F4 along with various lenses and a Canoscan FS4000. The F4 is a beautiful cross-over between manual and auto-focus with great metering.

 

The reason for eventually going for the D70 though was speed. Scanning negs or slides with my Canoscan FS4000 film scanner gave great results but was so slow. I can scan and crop about 10 frames a night. Any processing of the image you need to put a weekend aside for!!

 

With D70, I have just been making shots, putting the card in my PC and immediately working on the image.

 

The workflow for D70 is far better.

 

The only problem I have with it is that I keep getting white out areas shooting towards the sun but I know this just needs practice, I have only had the D70 a week and I've been shooting film for years!! I accept there are some different skills required!!

 

My advice to Bo Chen and anyone considering the switch is - just do it! This is the advice I took from a colleague who had been shooting film and medium format for years, who bought a Canon D20 and loved it. (I wonder if he still needs that 'Blad?)

 

The viewfinder is rubbish when compared with an F4 but still works fine though.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Joe

[victor4]

Bo,

 

Another 'vote' for the D70. (and I use only film)

 

I have 'good' reasons for using film. But unless you know very specifically why you want to shoot 35mm film you will be much better off with the D70. It has a good reputation and the kit lens is also reputed to be pretty decent. Quality will be very much better with the D70 than with film and a cheap scanner.

 

On the remote chance you someday decide you need film then you can pick up used but very good gear quite cheap.

 

Get yourself a printer along with it and don't look back.

 

Just before the D70 came out my wife needed a new camera. We bought her a nikon film camera. Had we waited a few weeks it would have been the D70.

 

vic... :)

[bochen]

Thanks to all.

I'd like to say I prefer to D70 so far as so many of you voted for D70, even those who shoot with film SLRs for years.

 

Regards,

-Bo Chen

[eco_foto]

In response to Kipling who said a D70 produced better images than any 35mm. camera,this is wrong period useing a good scanner 100 speed film should give you better quality than the D70 everytime with no question, the higher end 12mp.cameras and above should give comprable quality, but not a 6 or 8mp.camera.More true with larger prints film wins!

[kipling]

<i>"In response to Kipling who said a D70 produced better images than any 35mm. camera,this is wrong period useing a good scanner 100 speed film should give you better quality than the D70 everytime"</i><p>

Actually I said "...as good as or better...", but I'd be interested in seeing something that proves that 100 asa film is always better, I've never seen it though - and I've been shooting both, side by side for a long time. Different? Yes. As good in some situation? Yes. Better? No.