Film Camera Vs Digital Cameras

[student]

Full manual cameras might be good for landscapes and situations where people are willing to pose for u. For all other situations its a liability. Think long and hard b4 u get one.

Really?

Ask Cartier-Bresson or Eugene Smith whether they agree with you. Oops sorry. They are dead.

OK, you can ask Salgado or Marc Riboud.

If you cannot ask them, then look at their images. See how many of these images are landscapes or posed pictures.

Their cameras were no liabilities at all! Even today, the choice for fast "silent" "unobstrusive" "unposed" photography by many photographers remain the Leica M.

Think long and hard b4 u dismiss manual cameras.

 

[student]

Full manual cameras might be good for landscapes and situations where people are willing to pose for u. For all other situations its a liability. Think long and hard b4 u get one.

Really?

Ask Cartier-Bresson or Eugene Smith whether they agree with you. Oops sorry. They are dead.

OK, you can ask Salgado or Marc Riboud.

If you cannot ask them, then look at their images. See how many of these images are landscapes or posed pictures.

Their cameras were no liabilities at all! Even today, the choice for fast "silent" "unobstrusive" "unposed" photography by many photographers remain the Leica M, as manual as it gets!

Think long and hard b4 u dismiss manual cameras.

 

[student]

sorry for the double posts! Not meant as an "emphasis"!

 

[The_Cheat]

I really think that the argument between film and digital is senseless. Both works in their own way to make photos. They are just different medium at the end of the day, just like pen and pencil... but if you could write something wonderful out with it, who cares whether you wrote it in ink or graphite!

I'll still think that LustForLife should accept the offer of blurblock, to learn by experiencing. How I wish I'd gotten that offer when I first started off with photography!

If not, think he should really join one of the group, and have a face to face discussion with regards to the equipment. Even I'm getting a little bit confused, if not infuriarate, by so many opposing points of view here...

 

[The_Cheat]

Really?

Ask Cartier-Bresson or Eugene Smith whether they agree with you. Oops sorry. They are dead.

OK, you can ask Salgado or Marc Riboud.

If you cannot ask them, then look at their images. See how many of these images are landscapes or posed pictures.

Their cameras were no liabilities at all! Even today, the choice for fast "silent" "unobstrusive" "unposed" photography by many photographers remain the Leica M.

Think long and hard b4 u dismiss manual cameras.

HCB did have quite a bit of impressive landscapes under his portfolio... He also have a few posed shots as well!! ;p

Anyway, these guys are geniuses... I think there's even a guy (can't remember his name though) who does streetshooting with a 8x10 too! With the current opinion that using SLR to do streetshooting is difficult, can you imagine that!?

Then again, I think to even start bringing out the big names seems kinda off-topic in this instance! :bsmilie:

Sorry!! :embrass:

 

[Parchiao]

Think long and hard b4 u dismiss manual cameras.

I don't think that he was putting manual cameras down lah.

Take an example, my example. My baby has started to move about, and she does not stay put in one posture for more than a second. Trying to take a photo can be pretty exasperating. I can think of theoretical ways to go around the problem e.g. smaller aperture, watch your DOF, preset your aperture and focus etc etc but sometimes in situations such as the one I mention above, having an autofocus camera is really a plus.

BTW, something offtopic, not everybody gives a hoot about Leica Ms or some famous photographer lah. Not all of us are cut out to be as good as them, so we need more assistance i.e. autofocus, TTL metering etc etc. Also, Leica Ms are not necessarily good cameras, they are good manily because of the lenses. The body, except for the fact that they are almost fully mechanical (some almost), is pretty crap. If not for the fact that Hermes has a role in Leica, Leica M's would not be seilling at such exhorbitant prices. I can't wait for the Zeiss Ikon to kick some Leica M asses.

 

[obewan]

Hi LustForLife,

Just some experience from myself. I'm a newbie in photography too.
I have the same questions as you when I decided to invest on
a camera.

Digicam is definitely the direction for you to go. Film camera
is cheaper, but it is very fast being replaced by digicam, as the price
of a digicam is getting more affordable. Another great advantage of digicam
is you can preview the picture on a computer before you send to print.
So you save money by only printing pictures that you want.

I don't have any particular model to recommend you, but the Canon Powershot A85
cost approx. $600 or lesser and is a good camera for a newbie to start with.
You can play with manual settings like ISO, exposure, shutterspeed, etc.
If you can wait and save a bit longer, you should be able to afford one.
http://www.dpreview.com is a good site to read about camera features and review from
some users. So do your homework and get what best suits your needs. Do take
into consideration the types of battery and memory card your digicam use. Coz,
they will affect your operation cost. So by the time you are proficient in
photography, you should have save enough for a DSLR with more features and more
flexiblity to explore. You can always sell off your investment to recover some
cash back.

But if you really can't stretch your budget any further, older model like the Canon
Powershot A70 is a good start. http://sg.classifieds.yahoo.com is quite a good place to
hunt for one. Important things to take note of when you are getting a 2nd hand digicam
is the lens, LCD displayed, memory & battery compartment covers, and the zoom motor.
Minor scratches on the camera body is ok if you won't mind, since the owner will usually sell
at a lower price. So you get a better feature camera with lower price.
That's all the advices I could give you.
Happy shooting pal

 

[zaren]

With the current opinion that using SLR to do streetshooting is difficult, can you imagine that!?

who says using SLR to do streetshooting is difficult?

 

[Ben1223]

I'll still think that LustForLife should accept the offer of blurblock, to learn by experiencing. How I wish I'd gotten that offer when I first started off with photography!

I agree here. Take the offer of one month trial. The knowledge you gain during that period would help you decide if analogue or digital is for you. At the least you won't wonder what you missed by immediately jumping to digital.

 

[taku1a]

Ask Cartier-Bresson or Eugene Smith whether they agree with you. Oops sorry. They are dead.

Yes, it is a pity that there is only one Henri Cartier-Bresson but many manual camera users that achieve much much less.

Anyway, Cartier-Bresson will probably tell you that he stops doing serious photography since the 1970's to concentrate on painting; and does not know enough about the latest cameras in order to comment. Or more likely, he will refuse the interview because he was very media shy.

Never heard of the other guys other than Smith. Yawn...I guess these guys might become famous after they die.

Even today, the choice for fast "silent" "unobstrusive" "unposed" photography by many photographers remain the Leica M.

Any rangefinder will be quieter because there is no sound created by the slapping of mirrors. For the same reasons, digital cameras other than DSLR are as silent as a Leica.

Thus, for most paparazzis photographers nowadays, the choice for fast "silent" "unobstrusive" "unposed" photography is a digital compact camera with black gaffer tapes. Shocking, isn't it?

Leica M5 has TTL metering, and M7 has Aperture-Priority autoexposure. I will very much like to own one of these semi-automatic cameras. :bsmilie:

 

[F5user]

In the end... this still sadly turns out to be a debate of digital vs film .. sigh...


aiya... best of all, u figure out how u want your budge to work for you; and THEN decide what u want to do with it.

Do take some of the ppl's opinions with a pinch of salt though... film cameras though dropping in price, will NEVER drop as drastically as digital.

Yeah.. A85 or A60 or whatever other canon models that are out now are around 600$ or thereabouts. In 1 yrs time, u won't even be able to sell it for slightly less than half? in 2 yrs time, ppl will laugh at u if u want to sell it. Film Manual, like some of the better ones, will always command at least a reasonable price in the market, eg: fm2, etc etc.... that's one thing to think about.


As Taku1a said:
" Trust me. Even if your son gets a AE1 to start photography now, he will still want to upgrade. The way camera and lens manufacturer do business nowadays are much much different from 30 years ago. And Canon probably more so than Nikon.

The last thing Canon want is a customer who buys a camera and a 50mm prime and use them for 30 years. So it's a new version of the same lens and camera every other year. Not even manual camera users are impervious to such temptations."

Well my response to this is, hey... a majority of us are STILL using the same cameras from whence the vietnam war was still brewing. Nikon seems to be relying on this tradition to gain back its customers, most of which belong to the older age group here in northern california. Canon itself is fast following this path too with their digital technology, but hey... it's digital.. what's out today will be dead eventually down the road.

And i also beg to differ on the generalization of manual cam users and their temptations... Hey... impt thing about photography. BUY/USE what you NEED. I raised up my 2 kids till uni relying on my Leica M, and Nikon F to do my job for me for the past donno how long. Yeah.. technology did change, and temptations did arise.. but never saw the need for them. Pt is.. if u're comfortable with what you have, and it does the job... USE IT.

Whereas if you're keeping up with the generation in singapore that simply upgrades due to the technology train, or "temptations" caused by people hanging around the camera stores with their 5k plus 1ds, (dslrs) then nothing to say lor....

And Yes, Canon and Nikon Do indeed want customers who get their equipment and shoot it for 30 yrs... why? Hey... it breeds consumer loyalty which will NEVER affect sales. On the contrary, it would infact zap the prices up of that product if lots of ppl use it for 30 > yrs. Good examples are the Contax RTS bodies, and zeiss lenses, or even the leica Ms... still being used after soooooooo long, BUT, price? upppppppp :nono:


Lots of ppl here are giving u advice based on their personal shooting experience. so, it is good to read their but most importantly to be discerning of what they're trying to say, as one man's cup of tea can be another's poison.

My advice is based on what my father, and my university lecturer, passed on to me when i was a child (graflexes 4x5) and later, when i was doing my degree in journ. It's not the best as there are other excellent photographers here that are more up to date on today's technology. Instead, it's rather old school, and postdated for some... just to "warn" you first hor. So... go with what u feel is good for u, what u feel most comfortable with.

Once again... Good luck! :thumbsup:

 

[taku1a]

who says using SLR to do streetshooting is difficult?

Well, it is more obstrusive than a rangefinder or a point-and-shoot. Unless you are using a pancake lens, most lens will bulge out if you try to hide the SLR in a jacket. So street candids can be tougher.

One type of street-shooting is the Cartier-Bresson's approach of "stealing" image. The camera remain unnoticed til the "Decisive Moment" before it is whipped out to take the "image on the run".

Even better if you can get away without people noticing you taking photographs.

Some believed that Cartier-Bresson was media shy because he worried that people will recognise him and start acting unnaturally. Like Chow Yun Fatt's God of Gambler, he disliked being photographed till after the '70s. That's the time when he effectively quitted photojounalism and probably worried less about being recognised.

 

[taku1a]

Well my response to this is, hey... a majority of us are STILL using the same cameras from whence the vietnam war was still brewing.

:nono: I will say a minority. 80% of photographers uses cameras that are much younger. That's why FM2, etc., fetch a certain price, Their supplies are dwindling so much so that their price point can be maintained by a relatively small group of dedicated photographers.

Nikon seems to be relying on this tradition to gain back their customers, most of which belong to the older age group here in northern california.

Yes, the "I wanted a Nikon/Leica/etc. when I was young, but did not have the time/money" generation, or the "I used to have a Nikon/Leica, etc., when I was young, but sold it off because I did not have time for photography" generation.

Canon itself is fast following this path too with their digital technology, but hey... it's digital.. what's out today will be dead eventually down the road.

I think Canon is pursuing a different path. They are targetting the 20 to 40 something who are gadget crazy and wants the latest. I don't think they has as much appeal to the manual camera group.

hey, it's the same thing with film and manual cameras. Everything has a lifespan and will eventually deterioriate. It is just that manual cameras come from an age when product cycles are longer, and so are designed with a longer lifespan.

And i also beg to differ on the generalization of manual cam users and their temptations...

And I beg to differ about the generalisation of the digital camera users and their temptation. There will always be some amongst us who jumped in for the sake of getting the latest just because they or their dads can afford it. The number seems bigger for the digital group because it is more accessible and thus attract a larger number of gadgeteers than photographers. To say that manual camera users are less susceptible to such temptations is rather groundless. When the FM2 or Leica M3 first come out, there are probably many who buy them as a status symbol.

Remember: Photography has always been an expensive hobby and a status symbol for some.

And Yes, Canon and Nikon Do indeed want customers who get their equipment and shoot it for 30 yrs...

Not the same equipments, they don't. Shareholders don't care for consumer loyalty that does not translate into regular annual revenues.

And consumers are notoriously fickle. A guy can spend years extolling the virtue of a certain brand film camera. He buys second-hands so the camera manufacturer don't make a single cent out of his loyalty. And then suddenly, he converted entirely digital by buying a first hand digital camera system from another manufacturer because he finally saved enough money to go digital.

We have to remember that resale value may be sustained, but Nikon and Leicas are not making a single cent out of the resale. Unless they are in this business for charity, I cannot see how much such consumer loyalty is going to contribute to the company's financial health.

It is not a good thing, I agree, but that's Capitalism for you.

 

[F5user]

Touche ...

don't really get your drift on the "i want this and that" generation point you were making though, all i can add is that we used those cameras back then to make our living cause we were in the field. My cameras were free as they were from the companies i worked for... so... well, not much of a point to make here regarding this.

For photographers using cameras much younger, well, do be reminded that that may be the case in singapore... not here or perhaps elsewhere in the world other than south east asia.

The older generation of which i regretfully belong to here, hold on to our old cameras because they still deliver desired results. And surprisingly, to my knowledge in Berkeley, where i am, or in LA, where i travel to visit my company hq twice a month, manual slr users still dominate most of the professional photography market in the photojournalistic field, not for sports. In fact the older manual products here still take up a large portion of the market share, with TONS of dealers offering service on the products. and FYI, the nikon factory and agent here in southern cal still services my nikon F and fm2, and will be doing that for the next 10 yrs or so from what they say, thanks to the large market that still uses it here. :bsmilie:

Price wise, it's the market.. and a small user group ain't gonna be really able to keep the price up in my opinion. But I suppose it varies according to the places u're in.


Yup, us faithful manual users still have our temptations... who doesn't... never did say we're not susceptible to them. I use my cameras for work, and well temptations don't really bug me unless i really need it for that crucial assignment. And i've never actually thought well of those who regarded photography as a status symbol.. these ppl simply need to WAKE UP .. sigh...

For others, i think the temptation is there, but it's definitely MUCH less than getting a Canon Digital 300d, and wishing that you'd have waited 1 yr so that you could've bought the 350d. That's life i guess. ;p

expensive hobby.. yes... but then again, if u really love a hobby, price wouldn't be a factor restricting you right? even stamp collectors spend a BOMB buying old philatic components for their collection. Use the hobby for what you want to accomplish, appreciate it, get what you need. I earn a living with this hobby of mine, so i don't really consider it expensive.


Regarding the consumer loyalty section here, i won't really rebutt your pt cause it's valid in both our opinions. But do bear in mind, consumer loyalty is contagious... and if your product is good, the consumer pool will almost always increase in #. An excellent eg: nikon f5? expensive camera yes... reliable yes, ppl keep/abuse/work with them... journ companies still issue them, schools are now using them... etc etc, and all these factors based on consumer loyalty. How does nikon earn from this? An almost confirmed pool of the market that will snap up their next product through faith and product trust. The company i'm with has already placed orders for an obscene amount of F6s for their pjs.

but then again, these are my opinions... so if u've taken offense, i apologize.

aiya.... let's just hope that the person starting this thread benefits from what we've been discussing here... and help him out.

 

[blurblock]

Ever heard of the microsoft gospel do more with less.
Modern cameras film or digital come with advanced metering and stuff.
With full manual u have to spend much time at one place just adjusting the focusing, metering etc.

With the more modern cameras, you can focus on a lot of other things that matter just as much or even more. Like composition. Some momments happen in an instant, by the time u focus and meter properly, the particular momment might have been missed.

Also if u want to try things like sports, nature shots like animals moving, insects.
etc.

Full manual cameras might be good for landscapes and situations where people are willing to pose for u. For all other situations its a liability. Think long and hard b4 u get one.

Don't agree with the "spend much time at one place just adjusting the focusing, metering" thing. Firstly, Film has high latitude, unless you are shooting slides where overexposure is less forgiving, I always take picture using manual cameras at 1.5 - 2 stops over exposed, thus as long as the light condition is similar and not too much of a difference, then chances of underexposing is very little. In fact I had not underexposed even one picture until today, and mind you, I do not even use the manual camera's built in light meter.

Whoever told you auto focus is faster? For manual focus, if you understand the concept of depth of field, there is certain time sharpness can be forgiving. Unless the animal is running like a mad dog, then chances of not in sharpness is minimal. For Incects and other macro shots, I think you should had hard people actually switch to manual for such shots. For sports, I agree, you need the faster the better, but then it depends on what sport too. By the way, had you tried panning shots on a Autofocus mode and Manual focus mode? Tell me which one you prefer after you tried it ;D.

Basically, I now prefer manual to autofocusing, I am even trying to get the viewfinder of my Dynax 7 to be changed to a Matt screen so I can do manual focusing more accurately then using a plain screen.

 

[tommon]

Why don't you borrow an SLR from a friend or relative then get started by shooting. post them up for comments. The El-Cheapo way to cut down the cost and save the $400 for processing. Better still go and shoot with someone who has a spare DSLR. Buy your own memory card and multicard reader. so you can view the image at home.

I am basiclly still a film user has has been for more than 20 years. I only started using DSLR in the last couple of years, yet I don't own them. I was fortunate that the companies I worked for buys them for their people to use.

Some photography courses also allow you to rent their SLR or DSLR during the course for a nominal fees. I rent my FM2 with a zoom lens for about $40 / day and to my students for $10 / day.

 

[student]

My point is not that manual cameras are superior. Or autoeverything (note: not just digital, includes film!) is superior. I think that one can learn photography with any type of camera. They all have their pluses and minuses. Iwas trying to correct a very wrong impression of manual camera.

At the end, mentioned ad nauseum, it is the photographer.

One of the sharpest images I made on the streets was pointing the camera at a galloping donkey in Greece. Took a few frames and the pictures were made while running after the donkey.

These images are not Cartier-Bresson stuff. I mention this to illustrate that an average photographer, namely, me! was able to take pictures of moving subjects - well "focussed" (Actually I did not "focus") and well exposed! They were taken with a completely manual rangefinder camera!

I am not sure, with exceptions of top end DSLR with tracking ability, that the average digicams can take such pictures. By the time you get them focussed, the donkey would have galloped away!

 

[student]

Anyway, Cartier-Bresson will probably tell you that he stops doing serious photography since the 1970's to concentrate on painting; and does not know enough about the latest cameras in order to comment. Or more likely, he will refuse the interview because he was very media shy.

Never heard of the other guys other than Smith. Yawn...I guess these guys might become famous after they die.

Cartier Bresson was still doing photography, though as you said, not "serious". By that time, he was using a Leica Minilux with the 40 mm elmarit. I got this from Ralph Gibson who, for a long time, have meals with CB once a month.

If you have not heard of Salgado or Riboud. Salgado books on workers, migrations etc are currently classic. He was(is?) an economist with some international banking. Despite writing about the horrendous working conditions of the workers in the Brazilian minefields, he did not make headway until he took pictures of the workers. These shocked the authorities into action! During the Iraq-Kuwait war, he walked around the burning oilfields with his Leica and took pictures of the devastation.

Ralph Gibson is a "living" photography "legend",and so is Salgado.

Riboud is another person who specialises in street type photography. His book on China is something really worth looking at, if you are interested ins uch genre of photography.

 

[whoelse]

Poll: How old are you guys?
Yawn...Bak Siap.

 

[hongsien]

Poll: How old are you guys?
Yawn...Bak Siap.

He! he! one day you will be as old as us/them.....what a long thread just about this subject...

what does 'Bak Siap' mean?....I can't speak hokkien, sorry, wished I would have learned it while in SG....