Film user with Digital envy. Help.

[arthur_reyes1]

So here's the deal. I'm a film user with digital envy. Yes, I'm still using my

trusty Elan IIe which I've had since the body first came out. But I have

digital envy. It seems that where ever I go, everyone has a DSLR. I know one of

these days I'll go digital, but I'm still waiting for the right camera.

 

Here's what I have now: Elan IIe and Rebel II body. Lenses (all canon): 20-35,

28-105 (not used much these days), 28-135, 100-300, 50 1.8, 100 macro. 220ex

and 420ex flash. As you can see, its mostly the canon pro-sumer stuff. Sure I'd

like to have L lenses, but I can't afford it. For the photos I take (travel,

family, occasional wedding for a friends, B&W and still using the darkroom),

the lenses I have now are more than adequate. Nevertheless, the amount I have

invested in lenses is significant (at least to me).

 

Here's what I want in a DSLR: Full frame censor, controls similar to my

ElanIIe, and a pop up flash. Price: Ideally under 1K but I'd consider it if it

was a bit under 2K. Why FF censor? Of course I like the idea of the

magnification factor on my other lenses, but I do use the 20-35 every so often.

Why the pop up flash? Because sometimmes I don't always have my other

speedlights (like when I'm hiking) and the pop up flash is convenient.

 

I'm thinking canon will make what I want sometime in the next 2 years. So am I

being unrealistic or am I way out there, just as far as the planet pluto (oops,

dwarf planet pluto)? Am I the only one out here wanting these things? It sure

does seem like it. The 5D is tempting, but the price and lack of pop up flash

are turn offs. The 30D, and digital rebels are tempting but forking out $$$ for

similar 35mm equivalent lenses is also a turn off.

I'm still willing to wait, but its tough having digital envy. What is a film

user to do?

[peter_shearer5]

Don't want to start the digital/film debate again but my simple answer is wait - I've been digital for 3 years like so many have been duped with the canon/nikon marketing monster and have owned a number of digital DSLRs. However having experienced lost images, even with RAID backups (images having unexplained errors) I took an honest view of my business (weddings) and decided to return to film having scans when necessary. Have never looked back, am now staying with film until the digital monster settles on such things like constantly improving megapixels conning us to upgrade (no business sense for the average wedding tog), image latitude is still behind film by a long shoot, image life (how many of us are opening and admiring our 2megapixel images).

[dogbert]

My guess is a low priced FF 30D is probably at minimum 2 years off and maybe longer. There does not seem to be a lot of pressure on Canon to drop the price of FF just yet, as there is no pressure from anyone. I may be wrong. Canon may suprise with a FF 40D in Feb, which would probably kill Nikon and everyone else for ever, but I doubt it.

 

If you went for a 30D or rebel now, you probably need only one extra lens. Choose one from 18-55, 17-85, Sigma 18-50 (or tamron/tokina equivalent) or Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20 or tokina 12-24. Once you have your digital only lens you could sell the 20-35 and 28-105.

 

Keep the 28-135. I actaully find it quite useful on a 1.6 cropper where it becomes a small 50-200 (approx) zoom with fast USM and IS.

[dogbert]

Ps Digital is fun, and will probably make your life easier. I use both film and digital (mostly for my personal entertainment).

[bill bloggs]

It depends on what kind of cash you have to spare. Let me start by telling you are not really missing anything by shooting film. Film is in no way inferior to digital, and is in fact superior. I completely agree with the poster who said shoot film and scan. He had great point.

 

However, I did own a Canon Digital Rebel XT, and it is superb. It would work with all your lenses. I would definitely pick up a DSLR body to use with your Canon lenses, it makes good sense if you can afford it. Anything from the Canon 10D onwards would be a good bet. Keep your film outfit though, it will never become obsolete, and as I said is superior to digital for printing. Digital prints do not look as good as film prints. They have a flat sterile hi definition video look to them that lets them down, but it can be fun when done right.

[bennyboy]

A Trole - very droll. But you're not living up to your name!

[ken munn]

Buy a film scanner (while you still can!) and you can muck about with/improve your film shots

digitally as much as you like.

 

Minolta has withdrawn from the maket, but their good Dimage products are around on eBay.

 

Nikon Coolscans are better but much more expensive.

[._._z]

"Trole" is Frank Petronio over at clean page dot com

 

I wonder what Frank's clients or potential clients would think about his being banned from this site yet returning periodically to troll/trole....

[bill bloggs]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.......................

[digitmstr]

>>Full frame censor, controls similar to my ElanIIe, and a pop up flash. Price: Ideally under 1K<<

 

A FF camera under 1K? Not ANY time soon...

[mars c]

-- Arthur Reyes,

 

let me ask you, How many shots do you take in a month?

 

I bet if you go digital, the number of shots will be more than doubled.

 

With digital, there is no film to waste.

[jim_larson1]

The comments in this thread all read legit to me.....

 

Regarding the full frame sensor: GET OVER IT.

 

You know, there is no law against shooting film AND digital. You can still use your wide angle lens on your film camera. If you must have wide angle on your digital . . .then buy the 10-22/EF-S lens for the digital camera.

 

A 30D with a 10-22/EF-S lens is about $2K. Much cheaper than a 5D. And the 30D has a popup flash.

 

Don't want to spend that much? Don't buy the 10-22 and carry your elan for the wide stuff. Don't want to shell out that much for the 30D? Then the 20D or one of the dRebels will do fine.

 

As to the upgrade race: Huh. Ya know. . .you don't HAVE to upgrade every 6 months. My 10D is 3 years old. . and shooting just fine.

 

But don't kid yourself. . .you will have to upgrade your computer infrastructure when you go digital.

[denisbergeron]

I have the Elan IIe (and the 10d and 5d).<p>

I miss the Eye Control Focus ! <br>

I miss the Full frame on the 10d !<br>

I miss the PopFlash on the 5d !<br>

I miss the overall control on both !<br>

I miss the IR receiver on both !<br>

I miss the IR focus help on both !<br>

<br>

I hope to see what you ask for !

[gdanmitchell]

"Here's what I want in a DSLR: Full frame censor..."

 

:-)

 

Dan

[geoff_doane]

While you're waiting for an affordable FF digital, maybe you should pick up a used dRebel or XT just to get your feet wet in the digital pond. When you do step up to a FF, you should already have a digital workflow established, and you can be producing top quality pictures right from the start.

 

I would argue that current full frame digital is not inferior to film. It has a different look (no grain), but none of the vagaries that come with film (lack of ISO choices, flatness issues). What rarely gets mentioned is that a FF camera will have a larger and brighter viewfinder than the crop bodies. My 5D has a nicer viewfinder than my Elan II (which I still use along side the 5D for shooting slides). Part of this is due to not having a built-in flash, which leaves more room for the pentaprism, so it may be a long time before we see a FF camera with built in flash.

 

At the very least, you can probably get a used or old stock 5D for under $2K in two years' time, assuming things continue at their present pace.

[mike_mcevers]

I see used 10D's on craigslist for 400$ all the time. Theyre SLIGHTLY outdated technology but theyre excellent cameras capable of stunning fotos. Pick one up today and youll be processing CR2's tonite. (and squealing like a school girl!). Then you can make a more informed decision about what you really want and have fun in the process. And in 6 months or a year you can probably sell the 10D for the same money. Or keep it. The 10D has a great look to its pictures.

[thomas_hardy1]

I went out shooting the other day. I threw three cameras in a bag, a A medium format with lenses, a Canon 20d, and a Nikon film slr with a 19-35mm lens. I had not touched a 35mm film slr in over a year.

 

When I shot with the wide angle zoom on the 35mm camera....it was really W-I-D-E! Too Wide? Almost.

 

Buy, or borrow a crop factor Dslr , then try a really wide zoom on it. You'll need to get down to about 12mm...then see if you like it.

 

Full frame sensor at $3000, no pop up flash? Naah, get a used Dslr and ONE of those "built for digital" wide zooms. Your other lenses will do just fine, as long as you stick with Canon.

[keith_lubow]

Hello,

 

So far there is no full frame digital SLR with a pop-up flash, and nothing remotely close to $1,000. The 5D is the closest to what you want (even though it doesn't have a pop-up flash), and they are 2.5 to 3 times what you want to spend.

 

I would be patient. We are not quite sure exactly what Canon's next flagship will be like and what it will do to the prices of the older models, but it won't be too long until we find out. Maybe get a used 10D, 20D or a Digital Rebel to tide you over and get you used to using digital until things come down. The good thing is that you already have your glass. Bodies will come and go. It's the glass you should really be thinking about, in my opinion, and you seem to be fairly set right now, so waiting shouldn't be that hard.

 

Keith

[lovcom_photo]

Lots of romanticisation and idealization of film. Vomit!

 

35mm Film is inferior to the fruit coming out of a 30D, 20D, and XTi.

 

The control digital provides is MASSIVE, MAAAASSSIVVVVE!

 

Change ISO from shot to shot. The LCD preview. White balance changes WITHOUT changing film. LESS GRAIN at ISO 800 and faster.

 

Did I mention LESS GRAIN AT ISO800?

 

Cleaner images.

 

I've never seen any 35mm image that surpasses the fruit coming out of my 5D full frame. Never! And you will not either.

 

I shoot weddings too, and my overhead and costs are MUCH GREATER if I shot film. MUCH GREATER.

 

The pros that return to 35mm film have failed to implement the digital process...he is failed, then he blames the digital process...and then has the odasity to blame Nikon's and Canon's marketing departments...Lack Of Accountability and skill, to be sure.

 

Arthur, get an XTi and be happy for God's sake. Sure fullframe is the best for ultimate image quality, but don't let the lack of $$ stop you from going with a crop sensor camera. Arthur you feel the envy because you know in your heart of hearts that digital is the best way to go for quality, and to learn more about photography.

[mormegil]

Just wanted to point out the "flatness" issue is due to the fact that dSLR are set to put out lower contrast images compared to final film prints.

 

This is because these images hold more information than if you bumped up the contrast. The idea being a dSLR user will be more likely to do post processing with levels/curves to make the photo pop the way they want it.

 

For a comparison, look at photos from compact digital cameras. They tend to be a bit more saturated and contrasty than dSLR. This is because compact users aren't expected to do any post processing.

 

DSLR images are more akin to negatives when it comes to processing. When you get film prints, those prints are typically corrected for color balance, exposure and contrast. With dSLRs, you get to do that all by yourself - which means a bit more work for the extra control.

 

 

And I agree, you can either wait for 2-3 years and hope that camera comes out, or get a 10D or 20D or dRebel and keep your film camera for wide angle and B&W (that's what my girlfriend does). I mention B&W because most digital B&W doesn't compare as well at the final print when printed on color paper (so either use dedicated B&W inks, or print at a place like MPix that prints on B&W paper).

[lovcom_photo]

Jose, shooting raw will often produce "flat" images lacking contrast, lacking saturation, lacking sharpness, just blah images. It is not true that to retain the most image information the camera has to bump up the contrast...not so....the best way to retain the most image contrast is to expose the histogram to the right with little or no blowing of the hightlights. If one looks at my best images, then look at their corresponding raw images, there is often a massive difference...the raws look washed out, flat, dead...but this is okay, and expected....raw is just the capture of light, a starting point in the mastering of a picture...raw is not the end result....think of it as a foundation from which the finished images is built.

 

That is good news. That is okay. That is how it is supposed to be.

 

Point & Shoot digital processes the jpgs in-camera at the time the shot was made. DSLR's can do that too if one shoots jpg, but if one wants full control, and the best images possible one will shoot raw.

 

Raw places the decisions in the hands of the shooter, not the lab, not in the camera either. Sure this is more work, but this is not a bad thing...this is a good thing.

[robert_potts1]

The way things are going, it seems likely that we will see a full frame Rebel or Alpha in two years. Under 2K is likely but under 1K is not. It is obvious that we should all wait and just as obvious that we won't. Just witness all of the folks who are accruing impressive collections of expensive digital cameras. You could become one of them.

[arthur_reyes1]

Wow! Lots of great responses. Thanks

You all bring up good points.

I will definitely have to upgrade my computer set up and I've always kept that in mind. I'm almost certain that my photography will improve with digital, because I'll be able to view results right away. I tend to experiment a bit, but by the time I get the film developed and look at the prints, its easy to forget what I did. Recently I've been spending quite a bit on film processing/printing and that has been a concern. Getting the 30D or Rebel and 10-22 does sound like a good option. Thanks for all the input folks!

[james_duncan5]

Hi Arthur; Just to throw my 2 cents into this...

 

A few months ago, I was in the same boat as you, an Elan IIe, a variety of prosumer lenses, and about the same use for them.

 

I made the decision a while back to get a bit more serious about my photography. So... I bit the bullet, bought myself a 5D, working on a base collection of L series lenses, and I've never looked back. Yes, it has made me a better photographer, in some ways. I've definitely become more experimentative in my approach.

 

Have I thrown away the Elan II? No, I still carry it around as a back up body and yes, I still occasionally work with film. Digital and analog aren't mutually exclusive... each is a tool with it's own uses. Adapting to a digital workflow has been a bit of work, with a lot still to learn, but it's been a completely worthwhile experience.

 

As for film? Once I'm comfortable in the digital realm, I plan on transitioning my film work to MF.

 

Whatever you do, I wish you luck with it!

[robert lee]

"Recently I've been spending quite a bit on film processing/printing and that has been a concern."

 

Check out the used market for a decent Nikon or Minolta dedicated film scanner. I'm not current on pricing, but see if the economics make sense.

 

Look at it this way, you _already_ have a full frame camera right now in the form of the 35mm film gear. The (scanned) frames is basically worth about 8MP to maybe 14MP. This is true for any new images you create, but perhaps more importantly, for your entire collection of 35mm exposures.

 

Much of the work that goes into making a good picture happens after the image capture. This is the case with the traditional darkroom, and more so now on a computer. Since budget is a concern, spend money on the digital darkroom, i.e., decent computer, color calibration, software. The returns will be much higher than pouring $3k into a decent FF digital kit right now.