Thinking bout going to digital

[dcobb]

Hello
Several years ago I got started with photograph as a hobby and pretty much what I’ve learned was self taught. I have a Canon AE1 with a variety of lenses and filters which I really like and have taken some really nice pictures with it in the past. I kinda let it go for a long time but recently I got the ole girl out and with a fresh battery it still works like a charm the problem is that I didn’t realize that the cost of film and processing had went up so much. I have been entertaining the idea of stepping up to a digital SLR which brings me to another problem. Please excuse my ignorance but what little experience I’ve had with digital has been only with my smart phone, which has an eight mega pixel camera. It does take pretty decent photos but it just doesn’t do well with sunsets and rises and in low light it is noisy. So here are my questions if I may. First, do the digital SLR cameras really capture color as well as a film camera? And second, I’ve been looking at the Canon digital s, primarily because I’ve been happy with my AE1, and also the Nikon’s and wondering which may be the better of the two?

Thanks

 

[limr]

Hello
Several years ago I got started with photograph as a hobby and pretty much what I’ve learned was self taught. I have a Canon AE1 with a variety of lenses and filters which I really like and have taken some really nice pictures with it in the past. I kinda let it go for a long time but recently I got the ole girl out and with a fresh battery it still works like a charm the problem is that I didn’t realize that the cost of film and processing had went up so much. I have been entertaining the idea of stepping up to a digital SLR which brings me to another problem. Please excuse my ignorance but what little experience I’ve had with digital has been only with my smart phone, which has an eight mega pixel camera. It does take pretty decent photos but it just doesn’t do well with sunsets and rises and in low light it is noisy. So here are my questions if I may. First, do the digital SLR cameras really capture color as well as a film camera? And second, I’ve been looking at the Canon digital s, primarily because I’ve been happy with my AE1, and also the Nikon’s and wondering which may be the better of the two?

Thanks

I shoot film as well and haven't yet felt compelled to go digital. I keep costs down by developing and scanning my own film (color still goes to a lab for developing, but it's only $3 a roll and I still scan it at home.) So I can't answer your digital questions in detail like some of these other folks can, but I do know where you're coming from.

First, to comment on your color question (from my limited experience with digital cameras other than cell phone cameras): I'd say that what you'd need getting used to is less about the color rendering and more about the dynamic range. Film has better dynamic range than digital. Even with a 'real' digital camera, mixed light situations will be more difficult to capture than they are with film. And I don't know how much post-processing you do with your film, but it's possible you might have to do more than you expect with digital if you shoot in RAW (which is apparently the way to go) in order to deal with some of those range issues. But if you're willing to deal with this, then you can probably get results that you like.

As for the second question....yipes! Can o' worms! But what I'll say is consider whether or not you can/want to use your current lenses on your DSLR. If you do, stick with Canon. If you want to start new, then figure out what's more important to you, then research which brand is more likely to give that to you. And if you do step away from Canon, remember that there are options other than Nikon. Pentax, for example, doesn't get a lot of attention, but it often fares very well when compared to equivalent Canon and Nikon models, and they tend to be less expensive, so you end up with just as much camera for less money.

Also, some might mention that a DSLR isn't your only option for getting a proper digital camera. There are more mirrorless options from Fuji, Sony, Olympus that perform very well. A few folks here might talk about those options.

 

[molested_cow]

Well, I haven't touched my SLRs since I went digital. It's not that I don't like it anymore, but it's just a lot more convenient and more potential for exploration. Your knowledge and skills with film will be 100% useful when you use a DSLR. The principles are the same. There will be new knowledge that you need to learn about digital, but it will be an easy learning curve.

Color wise, I don't think it's the color that is different. In fact, you can get whatever color in post processing. Digital images will always be different from film. It's not a bad thing if you are into landscape, sports, macro and wildlife photography when you need speed and sharpness. For street and portraits, film shows more emotions.

Canon or Nikon?

I am a Nikon guy so I will just talk about the advantages of going Nikon. The biggest advantage with Nikon IMO is the ability to use older lens. This is great for cheapskates like me who live on used lenses from 20 years ago. Good lens will always be good lens if kept well. I have a AI-S F1.2 50mm lens that sells for about us$300 used, a 80s design that still work on modern Nikon DSLRs. Also, I do feel that Nikon's product offerings now is more specific than Canons. Other than the usual pro cameras like the D4, you have a landscape and studio oriented D810, a hobbyist full frame D610. However I think the real question isn't about the brand but what you will be doing with it. I think it boils down to the particular camera as opposed to the entire brand.

 

[chuasam]

My D300 was more than a match for film in terms of grain and colour. My D700 blew my D300 out of the water. These are older cameras. Film doesn't come close to modern digital slr in terms of performance.

For your old lenses
Try a Sony A7s


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[gsgary]

My D300 was more than a match for film in terms of grain and colour. My D700 blew my D300 out of the water. These are older cameras. Film doesn't come close to modern digital slr in terms of performance.

For your old lenses
Try a Sony A7s


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

But it does with feel and the look is more pleasing

 

[gsgary]

I bought the A7 to use my Leica mount lenses great camera

 

[ann]

You can't use your older lenses with a new Canon digital camera as they changed the mount sometime ago.

The difference may be a shock as they work differently, i.e. + amd - exposures go in the opposite direction, and they may feel different, you need to handle them to see which feels the best for you.

Then digital has a different look and feel. They are really just different animals.

 

[Braineack]

I had to check to make sure this post wasn't from 1995

 

[runnah]

First, do the digital SLR cameras really capture color as well as a film camera?

Better and then some.

And second, I’ve been looking at the Canon digital s, primarily because I’ve been happy with my AE1, and also the Nikon’s and wondering which may be the better of the two?

How much do you have to spend? Nikon has the better $1,000 range cameras but if you can afford it Canon makes some great $2,000+ cameras.

 

[CameraClicker]

Hello
Several years ago I got started with photograph as a hobby and pretty much what I’ve learned was self taught. I have a Canon AE1 with a variety of lenses and filters which I really like and have taken some really nice pictures with it in the past. I kinda let it go for a long time but recently I got the ole girl out and with a fresh battery it still works like a charm the problem is that I didn’t realize that the cost of film and processing had went up so much. I have been entertaining the idea of stepping up to a digital SLR which brings me to another problem. Please excuse my ignorance but what little experience I’ve had with digital has been only with my smart phone, which has an eight mega pixel camera. It does take pretty decent photos but it just doesn’t do well with sunsets and rises and in low light it is noisy. So here are my questions if I may. First, do the digital SLR cameras really capture color as well as a film camera? And second, I’ve been looking at the Canon digital s, primarily because I’ve been happy with my AE1, and also the Nikon’s and wondering which may be the better of the two?

Thanks

There is no "better" between Canon and Nikon. There are some differences between them, this is true. But, there is only the question: "Which is better for you?" And, only you can answer that.

Visit a store. Try them both, see what speaks to you. Your AE1 lenses should work fine with the Canon digital bodies. If you purchase a Nikon, you need new lenses.

I borrowed a film body and shot a roll while shooting digital of the same scene through the same lens. That exercise convinced me digital has arrived and for my photos it is much better than film. I had to borrow a body because my last film camera was Nikon and my digital SLR's are Canon, and my old Canon film bodies all take FD lenses instead of EF lenses.

 

[zaroba]

Asking Canon or Nikon is like asking somebody to pick Ford or Dodge.
For the most part it is purely personal opinion and there is a lot of bias and fans of each that will stand by one or the other no matter what.

Only time one would be better over the other is if one company releases a new camera with a new feature that the other doesn't have yet.

 

[Ido]

Your AE-1 has the older FD mount, so you can't use your lenses straight-up, not even with a Canon DSLR. You can, however, buy an EF-FD adapter to use your existing lenses with Canon DSLRs. Don't think such adapter exists for Nikon DSLRs, but it does for pretty much any mirrorless system, so that opens up many options.

I cannot comment on the color question, as I have never shot film. But I can tell you this: Digital isn't bad at all. Some cameras' processing in-camera is pleasing (my camera is among them), but many (including me) prefer to shoot in 'raw' format, which can then be edited very easily in an editing program, much like developing film. The possibilities are endless, unlike film development, but you can still limit yourself to just dodging and burning.

Don't compare brands, compare camera models and lens/flash systems. If a certain brand has the camera you want and the lenses/flashes you need, it doesn't matter what its name is.

 

[Designer]

As for color capability; runnah's answer should tell you to have confidence in digital. As to that; I'm guessing that you have experienced some color tendencies in film.

If you haven't already, search the forums for "Nikon vs Canon". You'll find enough reading material to last you into next year.

Or you can use this handy shortcut:

Get a Nikon.

 

[timor]

If you haven't already, search the forums for "Nikon vs Canon". You'll find enough reading material to last you into next year.

Or you can use this handy shortcut:

Get a Nikon.

Yup, the ad listings are full of people selling Canons as they switch to Nikon and selling Nikons as they switch to Canon. So, why don't you go with Pentax ? Very few people are selling them second hand. Maybe it means, they love them ? Unless you want to go "full frame" then no Pentax, pentax doesn't have "full frame" body, instead it makes medium size camera with sensor about 1/3 bigger than FF (not that much bigger) but Canon and Nikon have nothing to compare. (But it's not all that straightforward. )
I don't know, if you should even think about dslr, maybe Fuji X20 would be more, than enogh. I shoot my vacation photo on 4 MP, 10 years old Canon p&s. No one can tell it was than not done with dslr.
Off course digital is BETTER, but it doesn't mean it is better. Is it more convenient ? YES. For snapshots, after all it is more of a computer, than a camera and can calculate hundreds of solutions per second, while the film photographer can mainly rely only on his brain. But does it take better pictures ? Hm... this is not technology dependant. "Better pictures" are not mesured in pixel count or sharpness or colour saturation, better pictures are measured in feelings invoked in anyone viewing them. One small advantage of film photography is, that it is made by hand, in process devoid of automation, only by skill of individual photographer. (That's why prints made by AA costs like a new house, but his photographs printed today just couple of hundreds bucks.) Hand made things are often dearer.
So we came to the point of ambitions. If you feel, that your photography is very important to you, doesn't matter, which technology you will go with, you in for much, much more questions, then only:"which camera to choose ?" You in for the whole journey, an exciting one. Welcome onboard.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I think it's more a matter of knowing what you're doing rather than whether or not you shoot film or digital. And it doesn't have to be either or, you can do some of both. I'm a film photographer and use all kinds of older cameras and have a digital camera too.

I've found in submitting photos to juried exhibits that I've gotten accepted original B&W darkroom prints, color photos from film, a digital photo in B&W, alternate process images that I scanned and printed digitally. I think it's absolute crap when people say that you'd get a lack of good color with film, it has a different quality that I like but is only better or worse depending on knowing how to use either one. Using good lenses probably makes a difference in quality more than if you shoot film or digital - I use some of the same lenses on film bodies and with my digital camera.

As far as shooting in low light I find that I might be able to keep shooting longer as it gets dark using my digital camera (when I've reached the limit of getting any more exposures on film) but the quality isn't good at some point unless you set up a long exposure. The camera's recording light so it just gets to a point that you don't have enough light left in the day to work with.

Since the Canon FD mount won't be directly usable with anything digital that would leave it open to plenty of possibilities, and if you keep that it would still give you a nice option for doing some film photography - most places that develop film will scan it or as mentioned you can scan your own. You could consider used, I've done well buying from KEH; then you could always upgrade later on once you find a system that works for you. If you have good skills in film photography you should be able to learn how to get good quality digital images too.