Camera questions

[bunglehead]

My old SLR camera has died recently, and I'm thinking of a replacement. The question is, digital or film camera?

Any suggestions? I'd want something with a zoom lens, good pic quality, yadda yadda yadda......

[allthumbs]

For the best quality 35mm film is the way to go. The pros all agree.

[lummox]

trask said:

For the best quality 35mm film is the way to go. The pros all agree.

no they dont.

[allthumbs]

Let me rephrase...most pros agree.

[lummox]

trask said:

Let me rephrase...most pros agree.

50mm would yield better quality than 35.

[David_Parker]

trask said:

For the best quality 35mm film is the way to go. The pros all agree.

 

Trask, I have 3 friends who are professional photographers and they have all gone digital. Granted, much higher end stuff than most on this board would be willing to pay, but digital is the way now. The issue at hand is that some magazines are not set up to receive digital images at high resolution and print into magazines so they still want film images. They are just behind the times or don't have the budget to buy the proper equipment. For the average climber who is used to shooting slides, the issue becomes how you show those digital images (as in slide projector) to friends. I'm not willing to fork out the dough yet for a digital projector. I'm sure the prices for those will come down soon though. Anyone shopped for one recently?

 

BH, I and a few others have recently purchased the Olympus Stylus 300 which is weatherproof, small and light. Great camera at reasonable price for outdoorsy type. No complaints so far.

Edited September 18, 2003 by David_Parker

[Figger_Eight]

It depends on what you want to do with those pictures. Pro photographers are using digital SLRs in order to update news sites in almost real time, and its a lot easier to take hundreds of pictures at a particular site and toss out bad ones in the field. If you plan on shooting slides or blowing them up, 35 mm or medium format cameras are still the way to go. Pro-sumer digital SLRs do a good job of providing enough resolution to get a big print, but the body alone is gonna be over a grand.

[allthumbs]

I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. You guys have at it.

[bunglehead]

See the dillyo is that I love how slides come out. The colors on slides just seem to be so much richer to me than prints, so if like I'm going to have to spend a thousand bucks on a digital camera body alone, that's a little ouchie. Although it is damn convenient to be able to just download them.

[lummox]

the one pro photographer ive spoken with in the last year or so uses both film and digital. whatever he uses he manipulates color after the shot with photoshop or sumpin. he will scan a film shot.

heres one:

[bunglehead]

So is that a digital or film shot?

[Figger_Eight]

Bunglehead - it could be both and it wouldn't matter if you were just simply going to output to digital (post on the web, "slide" shows on Powerpoint with a digital projector, etc.) because you would reduce the pix to a low resolution anyways to manage the amount of hard drive space they take up. When prints are scanned, they look just like digital obviously.

 

You're correct about slides - their color saturation is entirely better than prints. If you want to blow a picture up to poster size and retain the crispness and color, you would ideally shoot slide film, not prints.

 

If this is what you want to do and keep the price reasonable, get a decent, middle of the road, camera body (like a Rebel) and some kick ass lenses. I recommend Canon, but that's only cuz that's who I'm most familar with.

[cj001f]

Figger_Eight said:

You're correct about slides - their color saturation is entirely better than prints. If you want to blow a picture up to poster size and retain the crispness and color, you would ideally shoot slide film, not prints.

Slides in general have better saturation - but saturation is also a function of film stock - some give washed out looks, some highly saturated. If your doing posters you'd go with a medium format camera.

[Necronomicon]

I shoot 35mm slides or B&W prints. The digital technology available today cannot match the resolution available from slides. If I want a digital image, use a slide scanner.

[ryland_moore]

What is the best film to shoot using an SLR? What brand of slide or print film? Speed? What filters do you guys like to use for alpine? For glaciers? Lens size in mm? An Amateur photo guy wants to know!

[Necronomicon]

I use a Minolta XGM SLR

I use Fuji Provia 100 for color slide, and whatever for B&W.

I use a 28mm-80mm lens with a macro feature.

I use a polarizing filter in good light, but a regular skylight filter in low light, so that I don't have to push the film.

When I shoot BW I use a yellow filter to improve contrast.

 

[Figger_Eight]

 

[Figger_Eight]

ryland_moore said:

What is the best film to shoot using an SLR? What brand of slide or print film? Speed? What filters do you guys like to use for alpine? For glaciers? Lens size in mm? An Amateur photo guy wants to know!

 

Tough question because it depends on what kind of trip you're on. Lately I've been too lazy to carry around a lot of stuff, so I use a digital point and shoot, then touch it up in Photoshop later. I can get pretty decent 5x7's from them. Otherwise whatever Necro said, maybe a zoom lens, a tripod and a graduated neutral density filter if you're going in snow. Make sure to keep a uv filter on your lenses just to protect them from scratching.

[bunglehead]

Necronomicon said:

I use a Minolta XGM SLR

I use Fuji Provia 100 for color slide, and whatever for B&W.

I use a 28mm-80mm lens with a macro feature.

I use a polarizing filter in good light, but a regular skylight filter in low light, so that I don't have to push the film.

When I shoot BW I use a yellow filter to improve contrast.

 

That's exactly the same setup I ran for a loong time until my camera broke. I think I'm gonna buy a Nikon SLR. Thanks for the beta guys!

 

Man that Fuji Film makes good slides doesn't it? I'll post some pics I took a couple winters ago when I get prints of em.

[David_Parker]

BH, the quality difference between film slides and film prints is huge, even using the same camera. That is not what I thought you were talking about. You can get great prints from digital with the advantage of only printing the photos you like and trashing the rest.

 

If your slr camera body died and you still have the various lenses, you might be able to find a used replacement at a good price. I still have my Nikon with a bunch of lenses and I wonder when I'll ever use it again. I didn't get an expensive digital so I guess if I wanted to do some sort of timed exposure of the stars or something, the nikon would be way better, but I really don't do that kind of photography any more.

 

This is the website for one of my friends who has switched to digital. Many of the photos on the site were older slides and the newer ones are digital. See if you can tell the difference although admittedly on the web is not really the place to discern.

 

http://www.bydalek.com/home.htm

[PONCHO&LEFTY]

ryland_moore said:

What is the best film to shoot using an SLR? What brand of slide or print film? Speed? What filters do you guys like to use for alpine? For glaciers? Lens size in mm? An Amateur photo guy wants to know!

Get a polarizer! Even on hazy days with washed out skys you can get good pictures, plus it deepens the blue in the sky. I have liked Hoya's lower priced filters, about $20 dollars. Try slides sometime too as every one has said, you'll be blown away by the difference.

 

On another note I just got a canon 10D digital SLR. I think the quality is as good as 35mm slide and print film. I am sure some photo nut could find some differences, but I am more then happy. It cost about $2000 dollars for everything (lens & memory), but not having to deal with developing is fantastic. I have also found myself taking more pictures then ever with different settings because if the picture turns out crummy I can just erase it right on the spot.

[ryland_moore]

After having my Pentax K-1000 ripped off last year I was talked into buying the Pentax ZX-M. Same fully manual, lighter, but with an auto wind feature. It came with a lense 28-100mm. and the pictures just do not turn out the same as the Pentax K-1000 with the standard lense. I use a polarizer on it and still it is bad. I think, however, that it is the lense and not the body of the camera? Your thoughts? Trask suggested some excellent quality lenses, but I don't have $1k to fork over on a lense. Other suggestions?

[PONCHO&LEFTY]

I have a zxm too and I really like it. The problem is probably the lens. Most of the time when cameras and lens are sold together a lower quality lens is usually included. Your K1000 probably had a fixed focal length lens? If it did they are usually better then zoom lenses. I have a tokina 28-80mm lens for it, and while it is not by any means a great lens I have been happy with it. I think you can get an adapter to fit your old lens to the ZXM. K1000 is a screw mount I assume?

good place for camera questions

Edited September 18, 2003 by PONCHO&LEFTY

[ryland_moore]

No, the K-1000 lenses fit the ZX-M, but since the camer a was stolen with the lenses, it was a mute point. I start over now with lenses.

[ncascademtns]

I have yet to give up my 35mm Canon EOS for the mountains but I have been looking for a digital camera for just point and shoot stuff. I was thinking that a 5 megapix camera would be good.

Any suggestions?

For climbing I only shoot slide film because looking at a scenic picture on a 4x6 print just doesn't cut it.

Type of film.

Fuji is good for your blues and greens where as Kodak is good for reds and oranges. Depends on what you want.