I am quite confused

[mallik]

<p>I admit, I am quite confused! I was using Leica M6 TTL 50mm and 135mm for quite sometime (and waited 'very long' before I made that big investment changing over from Nikon film SLR gear). Not too long later, digital took over to my disappointment and for reasons of practical convenience and depleting 'good' film processing studios, I moved to Panaonic Lumix with Leica lens prosumer camera (for budget reasons) about 3.5 years ago. I never liked this camera for its pictures, although I did like the convenient layout functions, without having to go through too many layers of menus and the wide range of 28-410 mm lens. One particular 'feature' that irritated me all the time was wide depth of field irrespective of aperture. I enjoyed the M6 with 50mm on f2 just too well for shallow depth of field. I could restrict the viewer to see what I wanted to show in a scene.<br>

Now I am thinking of moving to digital SLR now that they have become affordable relatively. The other day I saw a Canon digital SLR camera (don't recollect the model, but I am sure not high-end) with 18-55mm. I took some sample pictures in monochrome, and fell in love instantaneously (including the convenience to shoot without flash indoor the mall with 800ASA - no grain). It was affordable for my budget. But then I have Nikon gear all-manual lenses 24mm, 50mm, 70-210mm, and mirror 500mm lens and host of filters (by-gone era?), which I might be able to use with some restrictions on Nikon digital (I somehow feel in digital world Canon is better than Nikon - when you see pictures not camera, and really wanted to try Canons). <br>

Just too confused? Should I buy the Canon, or the Nikon, or do none, or shoot Leica on film and live with the trouble of converting to digital? Any suggestions, thoughts?<br>

By the way, I am just a hobbyist, and like journalistic pictures. I take pictures in social events, travel, and so on. <br>

Mallik Kovuri</p><div></div>

[frank uhlig]

<p>Just stay confused, you save money that way and gear (digital) will get better as you wait ... and shoot with what you have got.</p>

<p>And yes, Canon digital is always better than any other digital gear, of course, simply because you are verrrry confused right now.</p>

<p>And yes, Nikon digital is always better than any other digital gear, of course, simply because you are verrrry confused right now.</p>

<p>And yes, Pentax digital is always better than any other digital gear, of course, simply because you are verrrry confused right now.</p>

<p>Etc, etc, et cetera ...</p>

[frederick_muller]

<p>Wow, you have done a great job of confusing me :-)</p>

<p>Just kidding, let's de-confuse things. I think you should shoot Leica on film, and if you want to go digital, buy an M8 or a used RD-1 series. Your lenses will be interchangeable, akuna matata. If your style is "journalistic", I doubt you will need an SLR for what I consider the key SLR applications - teles over 135mm, and macros. I think rangefinders will give you nice flexibility for the kind of pics youl like.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>Canon and Nikon digital gear, by and large, is pretty much the same at a given price point. One company might have the lead in a particular product cycle, but that balences out eventually. Anyone who tells you different is just misinformed or feeling defensive about their gear.</p>

<p>Shooting film and then transfering to digital isn't that difficult. Get a decent scanner and learn to use it. Or, if you are lazy, shoot C-41 and get the scans when it is processed. They won't be the best you can get, but they will be plenty good enough for web use and small scale printing.</p>

<p>I will admit that high ISO and the ability to white balance are two of my favorite things about digital. But that's balanced out by my love of using a rangefinder and my love of the look of black/white film (a look I get without having to spend time in front of the computer screen for each image).</p>

[cpj]

<p>Since you already have some Nikon manual lenses, you should seriously look into a reasonably priced NIKON SLR. Your lenses are really worth more to you than to anybody else or as trade-ins. As someone else said, Nikon/Canon are equal for general photography when comparing the same price range digital camera bodies. A friend of mine--who has owned a camera shop for 30+ years and is a Nikon and Leica dealer--showed up for a visit a few weeks ago with a D-40 that he grabbed off the shelf and an inexpensive Nikon zoom from his used case--I now live 200 miles from him--and started shooting grab shot as soon as he got out of his Mercedes. Well, he's' not a photographer and never had any formal training, but he later sent me 56 digital shots that when printed to 8x10 wouid match my D-3 output with a $1200 zoom.<br>

In other words, the current digital SLR's will out perform anything the average amateur can produce. Adorama has the D-40 "refurbished" for about $299 and for what you describe, I don't think you can beat it. Keep your Leica but perhaps trade the 135 mm for a 90mm or toward a D-40 & zoom lens and you'll be pleased you did. (I've had a 135 Leica lens for 20 years (and I just upgraded it) but find I use it very little and I shoot professionally.)<br>

Good luck, but get into digital SLR where you can make use of the lenses you already have.</p>

[bms]

<p>Disclaimer: I shoot Nikon DSLR, Leica film and digital...<br />Here is my 3 cents: I think you probably want full frame if you are after a shallow depth of field, although the difference between FX and DX is not that great. E.g., according to <a href="http://dofmaster.com/dofjs.html">DOF master</a>, a Nikon D90 will give you a 26 cm DOF at 2 meter distance with a 35mm lens at f/2 (an approximate equivalent of a "normal" lens on DX), while a full frame D700 would give you 19 cm with a 50mm lens with the same aperture.<br />I think more importantly, you want to go back to RF or stay with DSLR? If you chose DSLR, you manual focus lenses will work great on any higher end Nikon (e.g. D200 and up) - they won't easily meter or not meter at all on the lower end consumer models (D60 etc). I would not invest in new glass if you like yours, there is effectively no big difference except minor details between say Canon T1i and a Nikon D90....<br />You can of course shoot monochrome and use filters but you'll probably get better results postporcessing color images - furthermore, you can set the camera to shoot RAW (all the info is recorded) plusa monochrome JPG and get a feel what the image will look like in B&W.<br>

If you want a digital RF, you can get a used M8 with a 1 year waranty for ~ $3000 or so.... still pretty steep.</p>

<p>Hope that helps</p>

<p> Ben</p>

[35mmdelux]

<p>Between the ying and the yang, why not just buy a Nikon FM or Nikon F100 and use your Nikkor glass, or the D-40?</p>

[john_liberty]

<p>It's simple. Do you like color? Then digital should do fine.</p>

<p>Do you like B&W? Then shoot film, and there's not much better way to do it than w/ an M6 and a couple of Leica lenses!</p>

<p>Or keep a digital for color and the Leica for B&W. Best of both worlds.</p>

<p> </p>

[ilkka]

<p>There is no practical difference in image quality between Canon, Nikon, Pentax or Sony DSLRs. All are very good, and depending on model, equal to each other. Olympus and Panasonic are also good, but their sensor is a bit smaller making it a bit harder to get narrow depth of field. The good thing about the newest Olympus and Panasonic digital cameras is that while not DSLRs they can use Leica M lenses. If I was you, I would take a close look at Nikon DSLRs just beause you already have some glass for it.</p>

[thomas_vaehrmann]

<p>Hi Mallik,<br>

if you are not buying high-end Nikon then forget your old maunal focus lenses. Consumer Nikon DSLR just mount them but didn't support any metering. You should have autofocus-lenses and need a body with the af-motor inside. I think there are adapters to mount old Nikon-lenses to Canon DSLR and you get perheps stop-down-metering. I was in a same situation but choosed Nikon as my wife has some af-lenses that work great. I wouldn't mout Leica-M-lenses on anything else than M8 or RD1 if you can find one. I stick to Leica for slides and shoot everything else digital. <br>

kind regards</p>

[thomas_vaehrmann]

<p>Hi Mallik,<br>

if you are not buying high-end Nikon then forget your old maunal focus lenses. Consumer Nikon DSLR just mount them but didn't support any metering. You should have autofocus-lenses and need a body with the af-motor inside. I think there are adapters to mount old Nikon-lenses to Canon DSLR and you get perheps stop-down-metering. I was in a same situation but choosed Nikon as my wife has some af-lenses that work great. I wouldn't mout Leica-M-lenses on anything else than M8 or RD1 if you can find one. I stick to Leica for slides and shoot everything else digital. <br>

kind regards</p>

[jonathan_reynolds]

<p>I'm afraid I don't have the experience to help you choose, but my sincere advice would be: Don't buy ANYTHING until you are completely clear about it all! Meanwhile, buy a developing tank and enjoy your Leica, which is a superb tool.</p>

[bjscharp]

Actually, if you have old Nikon MF lenses, going Canon might give you more use of them then a low-end Nikon body, cheap Nikons don't meter well with old lenses.

 

With a simple adapter ($15 on Ebay), the Nikkors will mount and work on any Canon. Get a split-prism focus screen and you're back where you were 20 years ago, but without film.

[guido_h]

This sounds like a serious case of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gear_Acquisition_Syndrome">Gear Acquisition Syndrome</a> to me...

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>IMHO, CPeter started out first with the best advice. The use of your old Nikkor glass is highly recommended and what a bargain ! (Canon didn't support their Canon lens buyers from the past.)</p>

<p>Unless you have other manufacture's glass, (such as Leica R lenses) what B.J. Scharp is talking about for $15 is just plain silly. Why add a <em>cheap adapter</em> variable to the mix? Is Canon that much better than Nikon? Trust me, it isn't...</p>

<p>The concerns for metering are overblown & fear based; <strong>you have</strong> after all, an LCD displaying your images the moment after you fire them. Too dark? Click over the aperture and then re-fire. Once you <strong>quickly</strong> find the proper exposure, click away... These displays are a form of <strong>cheap</strong> "Polaroid backs" from the past!</p>

[mallik]

<p>Hmmm. . . . I am thinking I am probably unnecessarily leading myself to a mess! The joy that I got from Leica M6, with 'occasional' use of Nikon SLR all manual with the host of lenses, I never seem to get from the digital Panasonic Lumix - other than the instant gratification of being able to view immediately and share quickly. Also, as I started shooting B&W in the digital, I seemed to have developed a greater taste for B&W. I think shooting with manual focus was easier than the habit of autofocus & focus lock, or shift the switch between auto to manual and vice-versa, use menus to change aperture (I shoot aperture priority) . . . is all a mess that I have self created. The manual gear was certainly more fun where I would concentrate on only framing and timing......only that it was killed severely with the time lag of having to process in studios (drop and pick up) and scan in my Nikon scanner, producing 25-30 MB sized pictures and then edit them in PS or other applications. Several times, my film lies unprocessed for months (I have slides that were not processed for a year - I pity myself). Looks like availability of too many options just took me off for a while from film to digital. Now I am thinking why not just use the same film gear and have them developed, scanned and put on a CD for me by the studio (if I need high resolution, I could scan the ones needed at home). Here in India at Hyderabad, I almost could not find labs that develop B&W film (I carried a ton of them from the US and lying in the freezer). I donno developing. And I don't shoot B&W exclusively. B&W film isn't available either. Why not use the film (color) while it still lasts. I mean it couldn't be impossible to live without digital cameras (digital albums, yes I still see useful and does offer convenience). Comments?<br>

Mallik</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>The Lumix is said to be an excellent camera. Stay with it until you have befriended it. If you want the sort of depth of field effects in a DSLR which you got with your M6, you will need one with a "full-frame" sensor.</p>

[mallik]

<p>Lumix is a good camera.Handling is 'relatively' easy. It is the lack of DOF (and bokeh) control, that kills me. I have shot several thousand pictures in last three plus years since I bought.<br>

Mallik</p>

[peter_mann3]

<p>If you want to really take pictures as opposed to collecting gear, I suggest one of two approaches. First, keep your Leica lenses and buy an M8.2 (even if an M9 comes along, the M8.2 is a splendid journalistic camera). Buy a 28mm lens for the Leica. Second, the alternative for a lot less money, buy a Canon G-10 or the new G-11 upgrade. This is in my opinion the best most versatile rugged high quality convenient carry around digital camera ever made. I understand that many good photojournalists use it when they need to be inconspicuous or just to carry at all times. And Canon says (don't scoff) that magazine editors think the images are great. What do I, a humble retired photograper use? An M8.2 with lenses, and a Canon G-10. What else? But seriously, the best approach I think (my conceited personal opinion) is to just photograph everyting all the time, dozens of pictures a day, and you will find a style, the surprises from the images will astound you, and you will be a new man (or woman). Oh, and just shoot black and white.</p>

[rob_duyser]

<p>ever consider a D700? I had a look at one recently, also because I still have a few nice nikon lenses, it's not bad. But if you are not in a rush to get your pictures out to clients then why not use film in the m6, until digital is good enough for you ;) </p>

[carol_christopher]

<p>Mallik, consider this. The Panasonic Lumix G1 is not the greatest camera in the world, as digitals go. But with adapters, you can use ALL your lenses on it. I don't know about the Olympus Pen-E yet, but I will probably buy one as soon as they get them here. For the same reason, that I can use my Nikon, and Leica lenses on it too. Just a thought, a camera purchase is very personal and you should make your decision based on your own photography. Good fortune to you.</p>

[joel_stolarski]

<p>Don't sell the Leica. Leica glass is amazing !!<br>

You will regret it.</p>