[Closed] Digital SLR info: buy now or wait for new stuffs?

Conqueror - Member

yeah how may people actually need or would even max out the potential of a full frame beast... it might just get left at home

this guy shoots with micro four thirds (owns both panasonic and olympus) and gets better results than a lot of people would using a DSLR

http://www.bobtullis.com/

Some amazing work there, nice link Conqueror

Clearly there IS a market for a DM2N. I need something small, beautifully made, metal to partner my nikkor 24mm. And at a price less than the Fuji. This would be the camera to make the nikkorcenti jump to digital. I just wish Nikon could see it.

Don't buy a D700 now, Nikon will release the D4 and the D700's replacement (D800) in the next few months. It was to be Q3, but the earthquake there set them back in schedule. As soon as the new one is announced, 2nd hand prices for D3s and D700 will fall.

I'm waiting for the D4 myself...

Keep an eye on [url= http://nikonrumors.com/2011/09/23/nikon-sweden-executive-no-new-full-frame-cameras-in-october.aspx/ ]Nikon Rumours[/url]

If anyone wants a FF camera, I will be selling my mint Canon 5D soon......

No not really Geoff. I've always said that when dijical matches fillum, then I'll switch

Oh and regarding kit, the vast majority will never use even the mid range bodies and lenses to their full potential.

Don't bother with high end stuff unless you are rich or a pro.

FF is great as is medium format, but unless you are making large prints it isn't all that. The main advantage is being able to compose easier due to the bigger viewfinder. You get used to a crop sensor though 😉

that happened in 2005 with the 5D and 1dsMKII in 2004. get with the program.

Nope film is still king when it comes to pictures with high contrast. Even the most fancy digital backs clip the highlights, where as film softly transitions to white.

Once they crack this film will truly be obsolete.

Can't say I agree Kudos100 high end pro lenses are just amazing - can't go back to kit lenses once you've used them...

Film is quite thin, I expect sensors are much thicker.

the actual light capturing part of the sensor is measured in microns, film is thick in comparison. (this is why the depth of field is slightly different between digital and film as light is focused on one place instead of through layers of film)

Nope film is still king when it comes to pictures with high contrast. Even the most fancy digital backs clip the highlights, where as film softly transitions to white.

Once they crack this film will truly be obsolete.

maybe for amateurs, pixel peepers and measurbators.

why have all the film c-41 and E6 labs closed in london? i know people who spent 20k a year on film and processing 8 years ago, their film bill now is zero.

get with the program

Just a couple of points to someone saying 'git wiv da pogrom' (or something like that I dunno);

One: Did you bother reading the bit about me being a [b]Nikon[/b] user? Did you? Hmm?

Did you?

Two: Can use older [u]manual focus[/u] lenses with a Canon AF body? Can I? Hmm? Well?

And don't bother trying to come back with something witty and clever cos I'll just make a 'W' shape with my fingers, and go 'Whatever, girlfriend', in a camp New York type stylee manner favoured by über-trendy divas what frequent achingly fashionable nightspots. 🙂

So there.

Coming in with yer 'git with a can of Niblets' like Aguirre: Wrath of God, then leaving like a pair of cheap binoculars.

Tsk.

That'd be like riding a geared bike and only using one ratio, only you would know it's a singlespeed.

I was wondering how to reply and thank you don for putting it so well.
it's the whole tactile experience that is so unsatisfactory with digital cameras though to be fair manual focussing of lenses has been rubbish ever since film cameras went autofocus.
I should point out that I'm very pro digital and I think the combination of a fully manual camera combined with immediate images would be by far the best way one could ever learn about taking better pictures. For me I would only go back to film if I had a darkroomm again - unless you do all the processing and printing I see little point.
The Lieca is nice in it's way but what I want to see is something the beginner might buy.

Just a couple of points to someone saying 'git wiv da pogrom' (or something like that I dunno);

laughable coming from an adult who insists on using childlike affectations when describing 'digital' and 'film'

One: Did you bother reading the bit about me being a Nikon user? Did you? Hmm?

Did you?

just use an adapter for your ancient lenses, your flash will not work anyway. or sell the lot and buy a decent digital camera.

The main advantage is being able to compose easier due to the bigger viewfinder

I was gonna say, Elf already posted the reason he wants full frame.. but he already replied 🙂

Plus I don't think he's exactly an amateur as such...

the actual light capturing part of the sensor is measured in microns

Yes but it needs support doesn't it?

Another thing is, you can't use older AIS lenses on some of the cheaper Nikon bodies, like the D70, as there's no mechanical aperture activation on those cams, they need AF lenses with electronic aperture control. See?

As I understand it, they won't meter but you can still use them in Manual (M) mode.

On a D700 they will meter but you only get Manual and Aperture Priority.

See http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

(just FYI. Sounds like your set on a big FX body anyway)

just use an adapter for your ancient lenses, your flash will not work anyway

Jeeze do you not bother reading [i]anything[/i]?

Seriously?

You've come on to try to appear all clever and knowledgeable about photography, but you've failed to appreciate that I might, just might, know what I want and need a bit more than you, seeing as how it's my photography I'm talking about, not yours.

The D700 allows the use of older AI MF lenses [b]without any adapter[/b], and with full aperture control by the camera, and my flashguns will still work with dijical bodies (albeit not in full TTL mode). Obviously certain bits of kit would need to be upgraded but that's how it is. I fully expect to have to buy a fully compatible flash at some stage anyway. something like the SB800 or 900.

Oh yeah, and:

[img] [/img]

...Girlfriend. 😉

buy a d700 then.

Easy, you two.

So far as I can see the only limitations to the DX format if you already have a stock of lenses is you won't be able do do super wide angle shots without a a new lens. Some of the DX cameras will work properly with older AF lenses (motor needs to be in the body rather than the lens) and some will only work manually. FX lenses won't bust a DX body, but DX lenses can be bad news on an FX/film camera

So get a cheapish DX body to try out (maybe something mid to upper price but used), keep your F5 for landscapes. If this works then you probably only need a wide DX lens and some tippex to write your new focal lengths on your old lenses.

Two: Can use older manual focus lenses with a Canon AF body? Can I? Hmm? Well?

Certainly can, as well as all your nikon ones, leica, and pretty much anything else you would want to list. In fact I have a lovely Zeiss Planar I used to use regularly on a Canon 5d.

Given the larger lens mount size of the Canons over the nikons ... theres actually wider scope for using niche lenses. Canon bit the bullet of increasing the aperture size when it went to its AF mount, Nikon decided to stick with its existing mount which has become a bit of an achilles heel.

Now ... which programme are we getting with now ???

maybe for amateurs, pixel peepers and measurbators.

why have all the film c-41 and E6 labs closed in london? i know people who spent 20k a year on film and processing 8 years ago, their film bill now is zero.

Not for high end ad and fashion photographers. Clients want proofs yesterday so the vast majority shoot digital, but I know some who shoot both. Especially large format. 5x4 still beats just about every digital back.

The labs have closed because the vast majority are shooting digital due to cost and pressure from clients, but that does not mean digital is 'better' it just has different strengths and weaknesses.

Certainly can

Without an adapter? With full open aperture ttl metering? Aperture control?

No, thought not.

Now ... which programme are we getting with now ???

You tell me, Honey... 😉

Can't say I agree Kudos100 high end pro lenses are just amazing - can't go back to kit lenses once you've used them...

Kit lenses are shit. Tamron and sigma make some decent lenses that are not as expensive as Canon or Nikon. My Tamron 28-75 is sharper than Canons 28-70L and is about half the price.

Yes the build quality is not as good, but the images it produces are wonderful.

My Tamron 28-75 is sharper than Canons 28-70L and is about half the price.

Without an adapter? With full open aperture ttl metering? Aperture control?

Must have missed those requirements in your original post. Mind you given that no pre Ai lenses will work with modern bodies, and the prevalence of Ai and Ai-s that will only work in stop down / sunny 16 or external meeting I don't think its a great cause for celebration personally.

I actually find the canon system much simpler for people to understand, Theres EF lenses, and theres non EF lenses, no need for compatibility charts, or will it / won't it work dilemmas.

My Tamron 28-75 is sharper than Canons 28-70L and is about half the price.

I think I would dispute that.

I've read very good reports about the Tamron, but think this is the exception rather than the rule, nicely summed up by you may get a sharp Tamron, but you should get a sharp canon (or nikon equivalent).

The other factor is build quality, Ive a 24-70 than has been abused in a studio for 4 years, dropped numerous times, cleaned thousands of times with edges of clothing, leant on, sat on ... you name it. But its still going strong (bar a slightly wobbly mount).

At the other end of the spectrum, was recently registering focus calibrations on a 1 series body and was shocked at how poor a Sigma 70-200 2.8 was resolving detail, even stopped down. Was quickly sold on as a result.

but think this is the exception rather than the rule, nicely summed up by you may get a sharp Tamron, but you should get a sharp canon.

I've read very good reports about the Tamron, but think this is the exception rather than the rule, nicely summed up by you may get a sharp Tamron, but you should get a sharp canon (or nikon equivalent).

The other factor is build quality, Ive a 24-70 than has been abused in a studio for 4 years, dropped numerous times, cleaned thousands of times with edges of clothing, leant on, sat on ... you name it. But its still going strong (bar a slightly wobbly mount).

At the other end of the spectrum, was recently registering focus calibrations on a 1 series body and was shocked at how poor a Sigma 70-200 2.8 was resolving detail, even stopped down. Was quickly sold on as a result.

Quality control is not as good, but canons quality control is not that brilliant itself. I have seen soft L lenses and I have seen soft tamrons and sigmas.

Wide open the canon is marginally better, but stopped down the tamron is better. Not much in it.

I love the build of L lenses and the 70-200 is the cats whiskers, but unless you are pro I don't see the point in spending x amount extra to have the coveted 'L' series lenses.

Too many people worry about having the expensive gear, when they have little understanding of composition or light.

Too many people worry about having the expensive gear, when they have little understanding of composition or light.

For me, it's about having reliable, dependable kit you can trust to do a good job. And stuff that works the way you want it to.

Elfin - I've got a Sony DSLR which I bought new for £250 does everything you say there.

Do people buy expensive cameras these days as an attempt at skill compensators? IMO you can either take a good picture or you can't, doesn't matter if its a £10 camera or £5k +

For me, it's about having reliable, dependable kit you can trust to do a good job. And stuff that works the way you want it to.

In that case stick with Nikon. Over on the DWF (Digital Wedding Forum) screeds of shooters have migrated to Nikon over the last decade due to dodgy 'L' glass. Yes, the bodies are great, but the glass is unreliable in terms of focussing issues...

It's quite simple. Forget about everything said on this thread, and ask yourself the original question again and do just that. You seem to know exactly what you want so i'm struggling to find out what it is you are after.

mmh to tell him it's allright?

elfin.buy 30m of bw film,roll it yourself.develop while watching tv sitting on the sofa.sorted.just saved you buying throwaway stuff.

if you NEED it,buy it.whenever something's announced it'll take 6months to get to market anyway.then there won't be any for a year or so.if you don't need it..lots of good deals on used mf.
if you want it.well,get it.can't take pictures with gold.
or just get [url= http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/professional_photography/film/gf670/index.html ]this[/url]
wa version available too.
with a flatbed scanner.a v750,v700 you've got huge files.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm#costly

I love the build of L lenses and the 70-200 is the cats whiskers, but unless you are pro I don't see the point in spending x amount extra to have the coveted 'L' series lenses.

Do people buy expensive cameras these days as an attempt at skill compensators?

well Emmanuel, letslook at the facts:

He's going to by Nikon, He wants a full frame body, his mind won't be changed re: what brand he goes for, he seems fairly set on the possibility of keeping one of his film bodies.

Bearing this in mind its simply a question of waiting or not waiting for Nikons D700 update.

If I wanted a camera for use with a collection of old MF lenses I'd buy the Nex7. Have a look at the reviews (focus peaking in particular).

Nikon rumors mentioned talk of a delay with the D800 & D4

[i]Reporter: “The question everybody asks; when will the D4 or D800 be released?
Lasse Pettersson: [Jokingly] “Later!”
Reporter: “Will they be announced at the event in October?”
Lasse Pettersson: “No, I do not believe so.”

Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com/#ixzz1Z8mRUyN6
[/i]

If I had the money waiting Elfinsafety I would be watching the price of the D700 like a hawk

Anyone know if there is still any savings to be made on buying this sort of kit abroad, say Hong Kong?

This I can agree with, even if I still disagree with Tamron being better than an L lens.

I've worked with many pro's and have shot with both lenses. The Tamron is the better lens in terms of sharpness. Wide open the canon is better and the build quality is streets ahead of the Tamron.

I know one pro who I used to work with who uses the Tamron for exactly the reasons I stated. It is sharper.

The difference is Tamron and sigma make a few really good lenses, whereas Nikon and Canon only make a few average ones, most are stellar.

Kit lenses are shit. Tamron and sigma make some decent lenses that are not as expensive as Canon or Nikon. My Tamron 28-75 is sharper than Canons 28-70L and is about half the price.

Yes the build quality is [s]not as good[/s] crap, but the images it produces are wonderful.

Thing is, right, surely Nikon must be bringing out a replacement/cheaper FX sensor cam soon?

Highly unlikely. The D700 will probably be replaced within the next year or so. The replacement will almost certainly re-peg the RRP back to where it was when the D700 was first introduced (c. £2400 IIRC). That's what Nikon's done with their dSLRs for more than a decade.

Sony tried cheap FX and it bombed. The market's not there. The margin's not there. Ain't gonna happen, particularly at a price that would cannibalise high-end DX sales. Buy a D700 while they're still available and cheap(ish), or sit there fuming when the new one comes out and it's too expensive for your needs ;P

I've always said that when dijical matches fillum, then I'll switch. With the FX sensor, this moment has arrived, I feel.

I think you've been missing out on the fun 🙂 IME digital matched film with the arrival of the D2X in... when was it, 2005? Since the D3 and D300 12mp digital has been clearly superior to film (regardless of sensor size) in terms of acuity, dynamic range, noise and versatility.

Ditch the film stuff. Buy a D300 or D7000 and a decent wide zoom; keep the other lenses (though don't expect MF to work very well with modern focus screens). It'll still cost less than a D700 and it'll get you started in 'digical' while you wait (probably a very long time) for the mythical 'affordable' FX body ;P

D3 and D300 12mp digital has been clearly superior to film (regardless of sensor size) in terms of acuity, dynamic range, noise and versatility.

Hmm, for me, nothing will ever match the look I used to get with HP5 developed in my own secret recipe (that even Ilford were intrigued about...), but I concede that there is certainly no advantage to be had in continuing with fillum any longer. Fair enough.

It is only the top end cams that interest me, sorry. I've seen enough stuff done on D90s and lower cams that just don't cut it for me. Probbly fine for 70% of subjects but it's stuff like blown out highlights and the low-light limitations which rule out anything below a D300 level really, and that's DX so that's out also. I used to get better results with a cheap Vivitar body and a nice Pentax lens, than what most sub-£1000 dijicams are capable of now.

Yeah, it's the D700. Interesting to hear conflicting views on it's replacement, and I think you're right Seb, that it's unlikely Nikon will produce a cheaper FX sensor cam just yet, thinking about it. Too big a DX market. I spose give it another five years or so and FX will be in the consumer range, but too early really.

I was hoping for a D800 to be launched, as D700 prices will undoubtedly drop significantly (it'll be s/h anyway tbh), as s/h D300 prices seemed to when the D700 was launched.

Another issue is that I wear glasses, and need a large bright viewfinder. Sorry, but again it's only on the high-end models that you get this. And no, I won't be using dioptre lenses they're a pain in the bum glasses on, off, on, off.

I think you've been missing out on the fun

Not really; sort of lost the passion for photography for a while, got into other stuff. Wasn't really motivated to take pics. Want to get back into it now, for [i]me[/i], not for any other reason, which I think is the best reason.

And as I've said; I'll keep me FM2 (must buy an FM2Ti some day...) and stick the occasional roll of B+W through it, just for fun. Might even resurrect me darkroom one of these days...

D700 is a bit of a hefty beast though in't it? One of the biggest downsides of the F5 is it's size and weight. Compact it is not. TBH the F100 would probbly've bin a better bet.

Of course, it won't end with a DSLR body. There'll be a flashgun needing bought, always need more lenses, then what about a nice travelling cam, like that Leica? Yes, I know cheaper compacts are available, but it's all about the glass; remember the Olympus XA? Still pees all over most dijical compact cams on the market today, for image quality. The lens in that was a jewel.

Sigh....

[img] [/img]

Oooooooooohhh.....

[img] [/img]

(Is misty-eyed)

If you like that Pentax then maybe you should look at the [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/photographers-what-do-we-think-of-the-new-nikon-1-system ]Nikon 1[/url] 🙂

Now why have you gone and shown me that Graham, eh?

FFS....

[img] ?1316585365[/img]

Oy vey.

sensor too small, lenses too big and too slow, too expensive