The switch from a full MF kit to Prosumer DSLR, is it worth it?

[Barret]

Hey everyone,

Need some help to decide if i should make the switch. recently i have become extreamly tempted to get a 300D and a 50mm 1.4 after seeing how my friend hacked it to get iso 3200 and mirror lockup, i was almost sold to it. even for nature shoots, when i fumble with my mamiya 654 and the mammoth 500mm 5.6, my friends 100-400 typically always out performs it.

my only complaint about the 300D would be the tiny 6mega pixle sensor, which will make blowups a pain.

Money is also a problem these days, i tend to push alot of slides, and thats super costly, moreover, on a typical day i would buy film, shoot it and forget to develop it!

maybe the workflow is to slow for me.

these days i only shoot street and performances.

so its either my full mamiya 645 pro tl set, with a myriad of lenses, tubes and accessories or a 300D

please advise, but bear in mind i already have a contax g system with all the lenses i need. so 35mm film will still be used thoughout.

which would you guys pick?
stick with MF for the resoultion and the thin chance of getting a digital back in the future.

or

switch to a 300D with a full outfit of lenses, heck i might even be able to squeeze in a 400 2.8 with this setup. if i sell off the mamiya

 

[chgoh]

I wouldn't go that way, for the simple reason that the DSLR dust has not settled yet IMHO. Sooner or later there going to be some Nikon/Canon DSLR upgrade that comes along in 6 months that would supposedly obsolete everything else.

For me I sticking to film for the time being. I do think that digital would be the future, but not till Nikon/Canon gets it on a stable mode would I go near.

On the flip side, I would not further invest/enhance on my existing film systems either!

Just my thots as an amatuer/hobbist, so YMMV.

chgoh @ 6:12 pm, 21 October 2004

 

[kex]

used 300D with the kit lens can be had for ard $1800 or less nowadays,if i were u,i just buy another and keep the 645.

 

[Barret]

yeah, the 300D is cheap enough to justify buying without hesitation.

lets change the proposed change to a 20D instead.

erm. its just that when ever i shoot alot and push alot of film, i feel a burning sensation in my wallet!

 

[dundee]

If you are shooting mainly on slides - assuming that your display quality required is to be as good as slide, stick to non-digital. Cost for cost, digital images when projected has not beaten slides projection quality - yet.

If you can accept the quality of digitally projected images, then go for digital as it is cheaper.

As for printed images, I find digital prints more or less at par for the same cost. However, there are other serious advantages with digital images for me. eg. storage, searching, casual viewing, distribution, etc, etc.

 

[kex]

i shoot color on digital now,my film body is most of the time loaded with B&W film.

digital provides alot of convenience for work but takes away the fun and anticipation of results..

i feel more shiok getting results i want from darkroom prints than facing the pc..

get a D2H if i were u,the feel of the came is speechless :thumbsup:

 

[kcky]

Keep your MF gear.
Personally, I still feel that MF still beats digital. I still have my Mamiya gear (645 Pro TL & 7) and was not tempted to go into digital yet. Like you, I am also concerned about dust collecting on the DSLR sensor and the subsequent maintenance.
So far, I think only the Olympus DSLR has the built-in ultrasonic cleaner for its sensor but I have yet to read how effective is it..

 

[Barret]

truthfully, i am still unsure.

its just that MF doesnt give me the same amout of flexability as a fully fleged DSLR system. and yeah it gets costly.

Then again if i shoot for fun and for art then i should stick to MF.

 

[jbma]

I think this is a question which you have to answer yourself. Like someone mentioned earlier you can wait till the dust settle down but the truth is that the dust never settle down. There is always a new model coming out sooner or later. So what you do? Wait? It's a never ending wait buddy. Make up your mind and get what your heart tell you to. If you ask 10 people you will get 10 different answers. Now is a good time to get into DSLR as compared during the D30 D60 period.

 

[alvin]

Do you want to work with/look at raw, jpegs, tiff, or do you prefer to work with/look at slides, B&W negs and colour negs? Weigh the cost, and time required for each's workflow.

I'm still using film 'cause of two things. Slides, and B&W.

2 cents of a noob...

Alvin

 

[zod]

Medium Format Digital :devil: :devil: :devil:

 

[blurblock]

I think this is a question which you have to answer yourself. Like someone mentioned earlier you can wait till the dust settle down but the truth is that the dust never settle down. There is always a new model coming out sooner or later. So what you do? Wait? It's a never ending wait buddy. Make up your mind and get what your heart tell you to. If you ask 10 people you will get 10 different answers. Now is a good time to get into DSLR as compared during the D30 D60 period.

Hi Jbma, had you used MF SLR camera before?

 

[blurblock]

truthfully, i am still unsure.

its just that MF doesnt give me the same amout of flexability as a fully fleged DSLR system. and yeah it gets costly.

Then again if i shoot for fun and for art then i should stick to MF.

Well, what flexibility are you looking for?

 

[Barret]

i like long fast lenses, but with MF i can only get long slow lenses and theses still cost thousands!

but now a dasy i just shoot with a 50(equlivent) so i like a nice fast normal lens say a 1.4. which canon already has.

oh yeah and manual focus is a really a pain sometimes.

i shoot performances, and the shutter snap gets on peoples nerves....

 

[yellowfinsg]

If you ask me, I will just buy one 300D and keep the 645 at the same time. Just like me, When I want to shoot something and have all the detailing, I would use my M7II and any other shoot I would just use my digital camera and shoot.

Just my 2cents worth.

 

[denniskee]

Point to note : be it 300D or 20D, it comes with a FLM 1.6x, so 50 f1.4 = 80 f1.4.

Solution, get 35 f2 or better still 35 f1.4 to get 50mm equ.

But like most have said, keep your MF lah :thumbsup: .

 

[hongsien]

If you are shooting mainly on slides - assuming that your display quality required is to be as good as slide, stick to non-digital. Cost for cost, digital images when projected has not beaten slides projection quality - yet.

If you can accept the quality of digitally projected images, then go for digital as it is cheaper.

As for printed images, I find digital prints more or less at par for the same cost. However, there are other serious advantages with digital images for me. eg. storage, searching, casual viewing, distribution, etc, etc.

You say that projected images from digital cams are not as good as from slides...do you mean 35mm slides or MF slides? And also at what digital cam resolution is that comment based on? Will a Canon 11 meg pixel camera make alot of a difference with lets say a MF slide, both projected?

I am also considering a higher than 10 meg digital, since Canon has a 24mmTS lens.....currently using MF at 6x9 or 6x4.5....can a 11 or Kodaks 14 meg cam at least come near an MF slide quality? Need to be able to print up to A2.....

Hong Sien

 

[F5user]

Hello...

just wanted to say that it really depends on what you're shooting, together with what you require.

Digital is fun, convenient, fast, cheap, etc etc.... BUT as you already do shoot slides, esp on 120, blowing up beyond s8r is a SERIOUS issue for the raw shots on digi, even after intense tweaking on ps.

Personally, i love digital, its ease of use, instant results, negation of the washing process etc etc

I do tons of shoots from which my clients often require prints bigger than s8r. (16 x 12 at least), and so far, even the 22mp mformat backs i occassionaly rent for my shots cannot give me the same quality as the Velvias and Fortias which i have been using for the past god knows how long...

Do also consider the fact that your digi equipment's going to be "dead" in around 6mths to a year, seeing the fast upward trend in technology, whereas the 645s and 6x7s i've been using have faithfully given me service for the past 10 yrs and counting. =)

So, imo, keep the mformat and get the 300d to fool around with it.. shoot with it, and try everything u want with it: blow ups, etc etc.. after al, you never know if u never try... just don't give up your mformat. =)

cheers

 

[mattlock]

well everyone seems to be saying "KEEP YOUR 645"
I'm going to say otherwise...I own a D70 and used to own a Rollei 6003...had been using a few other cameras too including the Mamiya RZ67II
I've basically chunked aside the medium format gear and gone totally digital
I just printed a 13x20inch image on Ilford Gallerie paper from a digital file, flawlessly, yesterday
6 megapixels can be interpolated to much higher resolution, it really just depends on your workflow. With noise ninja, interpolation software and careful adjustments through layers in photoshop you can leave your digital file relatively unscathed
the only problem is dynamic range, which can be dealt with too through some clever photoshopping and messing around with RAW exposure.
Personally although I find 645 capable of going to 16x20 even then the grain is abit irritating at that size.

also you may want to consider that although film and slides are beeaauuutiful, they're going the way of daggerotypes. you'll get a lot of people comparing which one is better but digital is just gonna leapfrog over everything. it's best you get used to digital now, and just invest in one system instead of doing the stupid thing like me and keep thinking film is better and keeping a few systems and having to decide which one tot ake out each time to shoot, and having the problem of dealing with film AND digital.
if your shots don't require you to print past 13x19 just go for digital, once you get used to the workflow you won't even remember why you loved film
plus photoshop will give you complete control of the colours in your images, and if you want to make it look like film then you can do that through software.

 

[mattlock]

also consider this: because people seem to value digital files as less meaningful than film because data is seen as limitless, and you can take as many shots as you want, then you will force yourself to create more interesting images to make your digital file seem worthwhile. This is exactly what happened to me

also consider how much money you will save on film.
Get a 20D, get a 2 sharp primes and 1 sharp zoom lens, go out and take tons of photos, and you will find that the money you invested in your digital system is worth every cent

also don't bother waiting for a digital back, Mamiya's digital back will only work for the 645 AFd and the RZII and RZIID