Sijun Forums :: View topic

Impaler · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 1:03 pm

Digital cameras are easier to use, and probably cheaper. They're barely now just reaching the 35mm resolution range, and the ones that have are $1000 per.

Once you go digital, however, it becomes much easier to take a picture that's actually worth something.

My advice? Stick with both.

To end the most useless and redundant post ever, cool pictures.

dr . bang · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 1:11 pm

The digital camera i use at my school sucks when it comes to takin picat night or dark places.

Lunatique · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 1:28 pm

A professional grade digital camera will cost you well over $1,000. A very good consumer grade camera will cost you around $800 or more.

Digital is extremely convenient, and the quality is currently(for the professional models)equal to or better than 35mm film cameras.

I use The Olympus C3030Z, and it's a pretty good digital camera. If you want to see samples of pictures I took, just go to my website.

dr . bang · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 1:54 pm

Who said he has to buy a brand new spankin camera?

My dad bought a good 1 at garage sale for 10 bucks, it looks old but the result are better than the new 1.

MrPumpernickel · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 2:37 pm

Yeah, you can often get a really decent one on garage sales and auctions. I got a praktica ltl which I got on an action for less than $20 (together with 4 lenses) and it has never failed me...

Btw, it's from 1972...old cameras rock...and east germany means quality!

I'd also say stick with both...and use the 35mm as much as possible to learn more than point and click...

wootkoos · member Member # Joined: 20 Jun 2000 Posts: 64

Truthfully it all depends on what you plan to do with the pictures. If your mainly just going to do with standard size prints, max sie being 10x15, then your best bet is to switch to a nice digital camera.

Right now digital camera are coming closer and closer to the quality of 35mm. One advantage of digital is your ability to take it into the machine right off the camera card and adjust it to make a better print, as apposed to film where you would end up having to pay, if you don't own a film scanner, to get it scanned so you can adjust it to get a better print.

Then again if your going from 35mm and your looking for large format printing capabilities then that's when digital lacks. A Drum Scan of a 35mm negative far exceeds that of a digital print Drum Scan. (A 35mm roughly holds 5.6 Gb of image data as apposed to a couple of hundered Mb for a scanned print.)

Right now I'm using both. I have a Eos Canon Rebel (roughly $k) with a nice zoom lens for tradtional photography and a Nikon S1 (roughly $7k) for digital printing.

I could spend paragraph after paragraph on the subject but I've already probably bored you.

I hope you can make sense out of my rambling and find some useful information.

Guy · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 9:53 pm

id love to get a camera too. looked at digital SLR's.. way too much for me. cheap digital cameras seem to be mostly just point and shoot. which i dont want. anyone know much about the EOS Rebel 2000. it seems to be pretty good. its film though, but its around $500. which doesnt seem too bad.

Vgta · Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2001 11:57 pm

Has anyone had any experience with the two mediums? I have been shooting in 35mm format since I can remember, but I am considering switching to digital. Suggestions, comments?

Here are a few samples of the work I have done (been posted before)

Vgta · Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2001 5:45 am

Thanks for the tips.

-Impaler: yeah I'll more than likely stick with both. For now I have an old (1978) which works great.

-dr.bang: Yeah taking pictures at night is another feature I am really interested in. I know I can mess around with the apperture settings and get the shot I want on a regular camera.

-Lunatique: Cool site, very cool pictures.
The sepia colored ones and the B&W did you change the colors in Photoshop or is that a feature of the camera.

-Wootkoos: Hey thanks, actually I hadn't even thought that far ahead. Okay time to spend more time researching this.

Thanks everyone.

Lunatique · Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2001 6:47 am

You can do it in both the camera and photoshop. I do it in photoshop because that feature in the camera is for people who don't have photoshop.

Dthind · member Member # Joined: 12 Dec 2000 Posts: 436

Just to add one more opinion:

I still prefer the flexibility of my old Nikon FG. I prefer to scan actual photos, rather than use the digital camera (coolpix 900). But damn, that digital camera is convenient and easy to upload.