Old Film guy needs advice

[jcdeboever]

I'm a film guy and I use a Fuji GX1 because I have adapters to use all my Zeiss, Leica, Nikon manual lenses. Adapters are cheap. You can get an electronic cable release and take long (bulb) exposures too. I love it.

For the record, I still do film stuff. 90% of my work is film, but digital has its place.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

You mean a Panasonic Lumix GX1?

 

[loonatic45414]

Yes, sorry. Panasonic. I don't take digital cameras seriously. They're more of an electronic toy for me since the pictures seem too contrasty & unnatural.

The Leica lens it has is surprisingly good for a zoom. And taking pictures of pets & family is easier with autofocus.

Just remember that the smaller sensor will make your 50mm seem more like an 85mm, also it'll lose about 1 stop of light. Great for portraits with a quality prime manual focus lens.

Just don't get caught up in the "there's something better and I need it" mentality.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

 

[loonatic45414]

I would NOT go back to an APS-C camera if your last camera was a 35mm film SLR...

Depends on your budget. I'm not sure what having used a 35mm SLR film camera has to do with learning to use any digital camera. You could argue lens focal lengths are similar, but that's where it ends.

I'll admit the quality is better from APS-C to full frame, but not so much better that it's worth a thousand dollars or more. Film guy is on a budget (we all are to some extent) and I am addressing that point too.


Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

 

[Solarflare]

Well if you have Canon already theres good choices aplenty, no matter what budget you have:

- 5D is still a great camera, even if High ISO is really not that good nowadays, but at low ISOs its still excellent and already has the famous Canon colors. Even more than a decade after its introduction, the 5D still has a cult following.
- 5D2 offers a nice boost in Megapixel (22 instead of 12). Not much else though. Last generation that offers viewing screens for better manual focus.
- 6D is excellent and would offer video, too. This would most likely be my personal pick if I would start with Canon now.
- 5D3 would offer good AF, too. The AF of the the previously mentioned cameras is not that great for sports.
- At the upper end of the really good cameras, the 1D X would be expensive, but is also a great camera; possibly find a good deal from someone to switches to the Mk 2?

The newest generation, well the 5D4 gets very mixed reviews. In many respects it hasnt progressed, still doesnt support new card types, the only video format is riddiculous and requires insane amounts of card space, etc. Uuuh, I think one should rather skip that generation and let Canon retry on the next.

Havent bothered to inform myself much about the 1D X Mk 2, sorry. Its super expensive anyway.

Used film stuff is über-cheap these days.

OMG no it really isnt.

Sure the cameras are cheap.

The lenses too, if its a dead system, so nobody keeps using them on digital. Doesnt apply for Canon EOS though, these lenses keep the high price since you can still use them on digital. And many people love adapting lenses, which also causes the prices for good lenses to stay quite high even for "dead" systems.

However, film development for sure is really expensive and hard to get nowadays. If you only want to shoot a douzen pictures or so, sure, no big deal. If its more, however, digital gets quickly cheaper.

Seriously theres some swiss guy on the internet who shoots a custom digital 10x8 large format sensor that costs 100k+ CHF to make and he has computed that thats cheaper in the long run than if he would still shoot film.

At very least you should know what you're doing if you really want to keep shooting film.

OK..... so what is an "entry level" camera? What kind of price range?

IMHO entry level cameras are for people who (a) are clueless and have to test the waters first or (b) are not interested in photography and will basically run their camera in green mode, mainly.

Their image quality is OK, but they skip on advanced features and dont have many external controls, which depending upon the situation might lead to extensive menu surfing. And they have APS-C sensors - so everything has a 1.5 crop factor, or in case of Canon (who uses slightly smaller APS-C sensors than everybody else) even 1.6x crop factor.

So your 50mm on a Canon entry level is a 80mm equivalent.

The problem with this is - the good lenses, both with Canon and with Nikon, are all available for full frame. Sure you can run them on APS-C cameras, too, but you'll always have the crop factor. So you cant get them for wide angle. And neither Canon nor Nikon have really good wide angle APS-C lenses - decent ones, sure, but not the really awesome ones - so in that area you'll be kinda crippled.

If you need features like video, you'll have to get a modern camera, such as such an entry level camera, though.

If you want a really small and lightweight camera, entry level is also better.

If you actually want the crop factor for getting more range, namely for wildlife, APS-C is a great option too. Wildlife shooters love their APS-C cameras. Theres even pro level APS-C cameras just for that.

But if you only want to take pictures, IMHO its better to get the "pro" or "semi-pro" level cameras, and full frame.

For a DSLR, a Nikon D3400 would be a nice starter body.

OUCH. The D3400 is a true stinker that even inferior to its direct predecessor D3300. Avoid at all cost.

I strongly suggest Fuji, either a X-Pro 2 or a X-T2.

I dont know about the "strongly" part but yes Fuji IMHO is the best mirrorless system; excellent lenses, quickly progressing in features, excellent long time support (they even still have firmware upgrades for the first X camera, the X-Pro 1), they recently really good repair ratings over at lensrentals (Zeiss prime lenses are even better though lolz), the new generation of cameras (X-Pro 2, X-T2, X100f, possibly also the X-T20 ?) has really good autofocus now.

As a film guy, you'll probably appreciate a 'full frame' digital SLR more than the 'crop' size sensors.

Word. And they are really cheap now with Canon. A 5D is what now, $300 ?

The only reason I dont have one is because I'm extremely happy with Nikon and really want as much High ISO performance i can possibly get.

They're more of an electronic toy for me since the pictures seem too contrasty & unnatural.

Err, I'm not aware of "too contrasty". I see many unnatural colors from some "modern" lenses, though. But theres only flame wars to be had in that direction. People dont like to be told their expensive, shiny, new lenses look worse than cheaper, older lenses.

 

[goodguy]

I'm with Derrel, very good advice, get a Nikon full frame D610 or D750.
You will get the same depth of field you were used too, also you will get the advantage of the bigger sensor for lower light.
Amount of lenses made by Nikon and third party is huge for these bodies in all price range.

 

[Derrel]

I would NOT go back to an APS-C camera if your last camera was a 35mm film SLR...

Depends on your budget. I'm not sure what having used a 35mm SLR film camera has to do with learning to use any digital camera. You could argue lens focal lengths are similar, but that's where it ends.

I'll admit the quality is better from APS-C to full frame, but not so much better that it's worth a thousand dollars or more. Film guy is on a budget (we all are to some extent) and I am addressing that point too.

Sorry, but you seem to have overlooked that that is NOT "where it ends". The viewfinder magnification is LARGER on the FX Nikon cameras. The camera bodies are also larger than the low-end Nikon APS-C cameras,and have better (more, and better!) controls. And better AF systems in most cases. The metering on the mid-level FX Nikons allows metering with Ai and Ai-S manual focusing lenses. The mid-level Nikons can use the AF, and AF-D lenses, with full autofocus.

There is a BIG difference between a D600 at $695 used with 60+ million lenses available with full functionality, and saving a bit of money and ending up with a baby Nikon that has no metering, and no autofocus with 60+ million lenses, and which also lacks other features.
ONE good lens can make up the $1,000 difference in the body price; yet, I suggested a camera that is $400-$500 below the price of an equivalent APS-C D7200 body...

Oh...and the low-end or baby APS-C models that cost $600-$900? No high shutter speeds. No flash commander mode. No High Speed flash synch. Stripped down cameras that cannot use a substantial portion of what the Nikon system has on either the used, or the new markets. One button manual? Remember--he wanted traditional controls? If he wants to USE an aperture ring on a lens, and have a meter--the higher-end bodies work with the Ai and Ai-S and earlier AF and AF-D lens series.

So, no, you've missed a lot. Did you not notice that I recommended-FIRST off, a USED Nikon D600?

And speaking of being on a budget: I am not 100% sure sure what a Leica film camera owner like yourself, and a guy who comments about owning Leica, and Zeiss, and Nikon lenses, understands about the 2017-era digital user and "being on a budget." And--remember I suggested a used Nikon D600, first off. WHY? because Nikon will replace it with a Nikon D610 if your shutter fails, or if there are repeated service issues with the D600. Getting a new $1299 FX camera for FREE if a low-cost used market D600 acquisition conks out seems like one heck of a smart idea. I buy used bodies most of the time, and have for 15 years in the digitial era. Buying one generation behind is smart money, in my book. And so is buying a camera that has many,many,many more lens options. And that means an FX Nikon, not a lower-end, stripped down model that will likely need to be replaced in less than a decade.

Did you not see that I recommend the self-described old film guy buy himself a camera that would last a decade? That means a decent, FX Nikon.

 

[greybeard]

You are going to love digital but you won't get to smell Dektol or stop bath or fixer. If you can imagine having a camera that you can shoot at any ASA (ISO) from 100 to 6400 and beyond for every frame you shoot and being able to download them directly to you computer without developing and printing. No film, chemicals, or paper to buy, just snap away. If you print stuff, you'll need to buy ink and paper but that is about it. That is what digital is like. dSLR's come in basically 2 formats. APS-C (crop body) and Full frame which is the same as your old 35mm 24 x 36mm. With crop body dSLR's a normal lens is around 35mm where as your Full Frame normal lens is a 50mm just like your film cameras. Crop body's are less expensive than Full Frame bodies. You can get an entry level Crop body with a nice kit lens (18-55) .
This is what Canon and Nikon have to offer. One of these may be all you really need for many years to come.

Amazon.com : Canon EOS Rebel T5 Digital SLR Camera Kit with EF-S 18-55mm IS II Lens : Camera & Photo

Amazon.com : Nikon D3400 w/ AF-P DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR (Black) : Camera & Photo



Full Frame is more expensive. These are the entry level offerings from Canon and Nikon and they are capable of very high quality results.

Amazon.com : Canon EOS 6D 20.2 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3.0-Inch LCD and EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens Kit - Wi-Fi Enabled : Digital Slr Camera Bundles : Camera & Photo

Amazon.com : Nikon D610 24.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera with 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR Auto Focus-S Nikkor Lens : Camera & Photo

 

[beagle100]

Well if you have Canon already theres good choices aplenty, no matter what budget you have:

- 5D is still a great camera, even if High ISO is really not that good nowadays, but at low ISOs its still excellent and already has the famous Canon colors. Even more than a decade after its introduction, the 5D still has a cult following.
- 5D2 offers a nice boost in Megapixel (22 instead of 12). Not much else though. Last generation that offers viewing screens for better manual focus.
- 6D is excellent and would offer video, too. This would most likely be my personal pick if I would start with Canon now.
- 5D3 would offer good AF, too. The AF of the the previously mentioned cameras is not that great for sports.
- At the upper end of the really good cameras, the 1D X would be expensive, but is also a great camera; possibly find a good deal from someone to switches to the Mk 2?

The newest generation, well the 5D4 gets very mixed reviews. In many respects it hasnt progressed, still doesnt support new card types, the only video format is riddiculous and requires insane amounts of card space, etc. Uuuh, I think one should rather skip that generation and let Canon retry on the next.

Havent bothered to inform myself much about the 1D X Mk 2, sorry. Its super expensive anyway.

Used film stuff is über-cheap these days.

OMG no it really isnt.

Sure the cameras are cheap.

The lenses too, if its a dead system, so nobody keeps using them on digital. Doesnt apply for Canon EOS though, these lenses keep the high price since you can still use them on digital. And many people love adapting lenses, which also causes the prices for good lenses to stay quite high even for "dead" systems.

However, film development for sure is really expensive and hard to get nowadays. If you only want to shoot a douzen pictures or so, sure, no big deal. If its more, however, digital gets quickly cheaper.

Seriously theres some swiss guy on the internet who shoots a custom digital 10x8 large format sensor that costs 100k+ CHF to make and he has computed that thats cheaper in the long run than if he would still shoot film.

At very least you should know what you're doing if you really want to keep shooting film.

OK..... so what is an "entry level" camera? What kind of price range?

IMHO entry level cameras are for people who (a) are clueless and have to test the waters first or (b) are not interested in photography and will basically run their camera in green mode, mainly.

Their image quality is OK, but they skip on advanced features and dont have many external controls, which depending upon the situation might lead to extensive menu surfing. And they have APS-C sensors - so everything has a 1.5 crop factor, or in case of Canon (who uses slightly smaller APS-C sensors than everybody else) even 1.6x crop factor.

So your 50mm on a Canon entry level is a 80mm equivalent.

The problem with this is - the good lenses, both with Canon and with Nikon, are all available for full frame. Sure you can run them on APS-C cameras, too, but you'll always have the crop factor. So you cant get them for wide angle. And neither Canon nor Nikon have really good wide angle APS-C lenses - decent ones, sure, but not the really awesome ones - so in that area you'll be kinda crippled.

If you need features like video, you'll have to get a modern camera, such as such an entry level camera, though.

If you want a really small and lightweight camera, entry level is also better.

If you actually want the crop factor for getting more range, namely for wildlife, APS-C is a great option too. Wildlife shooters love their APS-C cameras. Theres even pro level APS-C cameras just for that.

But if you only want to take pictures, IMHO its better to get the "pro" or "semi-pro" level cameras, and full frame.

l cost.

I strongly suggest Fuji, either a X-Pro 2 or a X-T2.

I dont know about the "strongly" part but yes Fuji IMHO is the best mirrorless system; excellent lenses, quickly progressing in features, excellent long time support (they even still have firmware upgrades for the first X camera, the X-Pro 1), they recently really good repair ratings over at lensrentals (Zeiss prime lenses are even better though lolz), the new generation of cameras (X-Pro 2, X-T2, X100f, possibly also the X-T20 ?) has really good autofocus now.

As a film guy, you'll probably appreciate a 'full frame' digital SLR more than the 'crop' size sensors.

Word. And they are really cheap now with Canon. A 5D is what n

They're more of an electronic toy for me since the pictures seem too contrasty & unnatural.

Err, I'm not aware of "too contrasty". I see many unnatural colors from some "modern" lenses, though. But theres only flame wars to be had in that direction. People dont like to be told their expensive, shiny, new lenses look worse than cheaper, older lenses.

lot's of choices - Canon 5D3, Canon 6D, etc. remember it's the lens that's really important
And don't forget the new mirrorless models[/QUOTE]

 

[Derrel]

Used Inventory | Pro Photo Supply

Used D800 with box and accessories? $1200. Used D600 with accessories, $750.

 

[beagle100]

"So your 50mm on a Canon entry level is a 80mm equivalent.

The problem with this is - the good lenses, both with Canon and with Nikon, are all available for full frame. Sure you can run them on APS-C cameras, too, but you'll always have the crop factor. So you cant get them for wide angle. And neither Canon nor Nikon have really good wide angle APS-C lenses - decent ones, sure, but not the really awesome ones - so in that area you'll be kinda crippled."

those APS-C Canon 22mm f/2 prime and the Canon 10-18 zoom ... awesome

 

[Krell0]

Well this has turned into a bit of a storm. OP if you are still reading here is my take

For controls most like film:
Fuji xt1 or 2 =electronic viewfinder
Xpro1 or 2= electronic/rangefinder type hybrid viewfinder
Drawbacks are crop sensor
Cheap dslrs:
Nikon d3200 - 3400, or canon aps-c
still great cameras main drawbacks are low light performance and multuplying focal length for crop factor (same for fujis)
Full frame
Used nikon d610 or canon 6d.
Nikon d610 is better, but marginally more expensive. Has more autofocus points and better AF performance. D750 is even better, but also more expensive.




Sent from my SM-G925P using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

Buy a cheap camera... buy a mid-level camera...buy an older, used model high-level-enthusiast's camera model, or "pro" camera...

Any of these strategies can work well, with the options in used cameras, factory-refurbished, USA official warranty new, or grey market new with no factory warranty, but perhaps a third-party add-on warranty.

If you've not used a 35mm-type SLR camera is 20,25 years you will be utterly blown away by the speed and capability of the highest mid-level or the serious enthusiast cameras with the 51-point AF systems from Nikon. If you try something like a used D3x or a used D800, you will be astounded at how capable these cameras are. Flabergasted, most likely. Canon EOS 5D Mark III qualifies here. Really top-flight cameras, in every way. GREAT "machines".

If you buy an entry-level camera like a Canon Rebel or a Nikon D3400 or D5400 or something like that, you'll probably be surprised at how shoddy the viewfinder image is, and what a PITA it is to have to manually set an exposure with their "single-button" control system. These machines have a lot of scene modes, and you can shoot in Programmed mode quite easily. These are entry-level models designed to be 'easy' to use in an automatic way.

The serious hobby models: the Canon EOS 70D or 80D, or the Nikon D7200 or the Nikon D610, or the Canon 6D...these are quite,quite capable cameras, but lack the sheer, raw capabilities of the higher-level cameras. There are APS-C and FX models in this class.

 

[loonatic45414]

I come from the film guy's world. I left film 25 years ago & came back to it just 18 months ago. I had dektol on my fingers just last night & wouldn't trade it for anything.

I am offering my point of view as someone coming from the same world, not to be argued with by a poster who feels threatened... enough said.

OP, with the Lumix GX1 it does lack the shutter speed dial but I shoot a lot of auto exposure anyway with it. It's not hard to figure out though. But you do get:

Lens aperture control with your manual lenses

Long exposure bulb setting

depth of field check

Aperture priority autoexposure

And your flash works on it.

You can use your fabulous Canon lenses with it and you get an amazing autofocus lens for under $250.

I have an adapter for the m42 and Contax mounts and use some of the most gorgeous Zeiss lenses from the 1970's I couldn't afford 25 years ago but prices are cheap today.

It keeps one toe in the old pond and the new for not a lot of money. If you want more, go for more & these guys are giving you great advice.

Just my 2 cents based on my experience... now I'm off to load up some bulk film, have fun ladies.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

So, you want him to buy an old Nikon F3 camera?

 

[Gary A.]

What happened to the Old Film Guy?