"My personal opinion is that digital is the way to go if your style requires that you take lots of photos such as at family reunions, sports events, etc.example some of the ones you saw, can be put to CD or emailed to a lab and printed to 8 x 10 size. Also with digital you can try out new techniques, angles, composition, etc. and all the expenses incurred are not actually film related. You do have to lay out some money initially and if you are a pro it seems that there is always something to upgrade to. Digital cameras are not as trusty as my old mechanical ones and seem to last around 3 years for me. Film still has a nicer look in print, to it as digital has a video look to it. Most people cannot see the difference unless side by side comparisons are done. If I was still using film it is doubtful that I would have shot as many images at the track meet (say 300+/-). Conservatively speaking when I use B & W film, it costs me $1.50 at least, every time I press the shutter, good decisive moment shot or not. A digital photo job is not any cheaper for my clients, it's just that the costs are transferred to other areas, but they do get more bang for their buck."
"However if you contemplate a scenic view intensely and know what kind of
result you want then film (transparencies) are still viable. Other factors
to consider are...what system is your old camera? If it is Nikon then the
lenses are still usable on a newer Nikon digital. I use Canon and have to
have the newer lenses. There are other niggling factors about digital
imaging that will surface if you get involved in it, but on the whole it is
very acceptable to me anyways. I shoot Commercially, 80% digital and the
other 20% is say 4 x 5 film and 2 1/4 and 35 mm B & W film for fine
portraiture presentations and artful stuff."
"So my advice is to keep the 35 mm film camera for B & W stuff and backup and
invest say $2500 to $3000 for a digital slr and zoom lenses if you have that
budget or just buy a Canon Powershot Pro1 for $1000.00 (or a lesser cheaper
model) and a couple of 512 mb flash cards and use it for snap photos and
volume. You do have to take care of them remember, as they are computers.
That is the thing that really bugs me in this disposable era, as I am a
slave to the military/industrial complex and it's self propagating
existence. Eve Arnold once said, "The tool in Photography is not the camera,
but the Photographer" or something like that so if you love taking pictures
then use whatever camera you have and use it a lot (my comments)."
Regards,
Robert
result you want then film (transparencies) are still viable. Other factors
to consider are...what system is your old camera? If it is Nikon then the
lenses are still usable on a newer Nikon digital. I use Canon and have to
have the newer lenses. There are other niggling factors about digital
imaging that will surface if you get involved in it, but on the whole it is
very acceptable to me anyways. I shoot Commercially, 80% digital and the
other 20% is say 4 x 5 film and 2 1/4 and 35 mm B & W film for fine
portraiture presentations and artful stuff."
"So my advice is to keep the 35 mm film camera for B & W stuff and backup and
invest say $2500 to $3000 for a digital slr and zoom lenses if you have that
budget or just buy a Canon Powershot Pro1 for $1000.00 (or a lesser cheaper
model) and a couple of 512 mb flash cards and use it for snap photos and
volume. You do have to take care of them remember, as they are computers.
That is the thing that really bugs me in this disposable era, as I am a
slave to the military/industrial complex and it's self propagating
existence. Eve Arnold once said, "The tool in Photography is not the camera,
but the Photographer" or something like that so if you love taking pictures
then use whatever camera you have and use it a lot (my comments)."
Regards,
Robert
No comments:
Post a Comment