A&P To digital, or not to digital....

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by jared_IRL, Apr 5, 2006.

  1. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    I'm having quite the hard time deciding whether or not it's worth it for me to make the jump to digital right now. I'd appreciate any advice. I realize what side you guys lean on, but gimme some honest opinions.

    Back story: I'm mostly an amateur photographer, but I have sold my work in the past, rather successfully, and I actively enlarge my work to display in my own house, and for my family. I have enlargements currently hanging on my walls in 24x36 print size.

    I own all Minolta equipment, consisting of two Maxxum 7 bodies, a 28-90 and 70-300mm, along with all b+h filters, and a full package of other equipment. I only shoot color slide film, 99% fuji velvia 50 or 100. Black and white varies, depending on the look i'm going for. I also have a coolscan 4000.

    My concerns are this:

    1: The Minolta DSLR line isn't top of the line. It's only 6.1mp, and they're not making digital anymore, so it's not gonna get any better.

    2: If I start over with a new brand, I'm going to have to spend >$3k, just to get back where I am right now.

    3: If I stick with film, I can use a good portion of the money I was going to use to go digital to expand my equipment, mainly to get a good 17-35mm with the correct filters.

    4: Being a film guy, I have reservations on moving to digital on two specific fronts - print size and sensor cropping. I'm scared of both of these. The idea of losing some effective focal length scares me to death, mainly because i'm a landscape photographer, and getting wide is vital in a lot of shots. As far as the printing, can you get 24x36 off of a digital picture? What megapixel camera would you need in order to get this? I do have access to a Epson 10,000 printer at my job, so I can physically print that large if I can get something that'll look good...

    If you're still reading this, thanks! Any advice you can give would be awesome!
     
  2. BadRotation

    BadRotation New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    11,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OT Train Crew #1225
    I can print over 24X36 with no noticeable loss in quality (unless you are 1" away from the picture, but nobody in their right mind would be)

    On the other hand, my large prints from film (20X30) all have very noticeable grain in the prints, even with extremely fine grain professional films.

    I will admit, I like the look of film, but a good digital SLR is so much more crisp.

    Get a full frame dSLR, and you wont have to worry about the crop factor. And even if you cant afford a full frame camera, the crop factor isnt as bad as people make it out to be.


    Here are a couple crappy examples from a digital SLR. THey are greatly reduced in size, and compressed, so they are lacking quality wise. The originals are VERY sharp.

    [​IMG]




    [​IMG]



    [​IMG]




    And one from film...

    [​IMG]
     
  3. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    well for you, you need to look to the future rather than the present. if minolta isn't making more digital cameras, what are you going to do in the fu? always shoot film? is this just a hobby or do you want to do more?

    film always will cost more in the end, plus is a pain on trips or if you ever want to shoot large quanties or fast shooting
     
  4. SL1200MK4

    SL1200MK4 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Likes Received:
    0
    Once I went digital, I never looked back.

    If want FF, you can go with Canon. Mind you that FF has it's own problems:
    Cost
    Dust
    Corner sharpness
    Corner light falloff

    FF also gives you less DoF and slightly different perspective much like 135 vs. 120. Whether that works in your favor or not is something else.

    Sony wants to enter the DSLR game, they may or may not use the Minolta mount. Nobody knows at this point. Nobody knows when something will come out from Sony either.

    I know in Asia they have been selling the 5D and 7D for dirt cheap for months now. How about getting one of those bargins, for a few hundred bucks. Save the rest of you money and wait. See if something comes out from Sony for the Minolta system. If not, switch to Canon or Nikon.
     
  5. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    thanks for all the replies guys!

    I have more questions...

    The first being, does you point of view change if I had my hands on a Nikon coolscan 8000?

    Also, I have to bring up another fear. 6.1 megapixels. That's the best the Minolta's have to offer. Is that enough? Will it be enough in a year? If I stick with film, and the scanning technology keeps getting better, as it has in the past 2-3 years, my current equipment will never fall behind on a technical level, because i'll just be able to scan the neg's in. (I work at an art school, featuring digital photography, so we'll always have the latest and greatest...)

    I'm so torn on what to do....
     
  6. Here is my advice. I didn't take my time to read the other guys advice so I apoligize ahead of time if I repeat something.

    My advice would be to get a digital camera, and a 35mm camera. Why both may you ask??


    Well as you already know digital is the new craze. You'll have fun with it and it's great fun learning. With digital you won't have to worry if you have your settings incorrect. And with digital to make sure you captured that perfect shot you can review what you've just taken. Film you have to wait and wait.

    Cost.
    Yes digital is hella expensive. And 35mm cameras are DIRT cheap now!! Just the other day someone mentioned getting a Canon EOS-1 for under $200 :eek3: If you got the EOS-1 for $200 and a digital rebel XT for $600 that is only $800. The Rebel XT is 8 megapixels which is plenty enough for large prints. The digital rebel has an EF lens mount so the 2 cameras should beable to share lenses!! :eek3: :coold:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 6, 2006
  7. Oh shit I just read this thread. Sorry to talk to you like your a noob in my last post :mamoru:

    As for enlargements the largest I've done is 8x10 and I've done it many times. At the time I was using my 8 megapixel sony and the picture quality was very sharp. I was expecting the picture to be all pixelated when I went to pick it up and when I saw it I was soo shocked! :eek3: I didn't see any pixelation at all. I'm sure if you stick with an 8 megapixel camera you can double that size and see very minimal pixelation. And I get my prints made at Walmart :mamoru: Believe it or not they're actually pretty dam good. And if you get a 30x20 made and you don't like it... guess what.. you don't have to buy it. I just might try that... :)
     
  8. IntheWorks

    IntheWorks windin film.. takin pics Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,928
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    earth
    I'm in the same dilema, except I use canon gear, so I'm not worried about having to buy all new glass..... As far as your issue with going wide, they've addressed that issue with lenses like the canon 10-20... my cousin just picked this lens up and it's a really nice piece... My reason for staying with film right now is I honestly believe that the quality is so much better, that's just my opinion and I know I'll get jumped on for that one. Now my reason for wanting to go DSLR is cost.... yes, it might be more up front, but right now I'm spending around 300-400 a month in developing and scanning.
     
  9. Tedrzz

    Tedrzz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,578
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    If you get a nikon dslr with a 12-24mm lens then it will be an 18-36 in film terms. Problem solved!

    If you shoot with a high resolution you will have no problem printing that size.

    If you end up hating digital you can sell it for almost the same price you payed for it. Good quality lenses don't have that bad of a resale value.

    I say.....go for it!
     
  10. SL1200MK4

    SL1200MK4 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally I'd still go digital even if I had a good film scanner. There are many advantages besides the workflow. You get to review your shot on the spot. For me, this is especially helpful when doing flash photography.

    As far as the resolution is concerned. Only YOU know how many MP you need. It depends on the size that you print.

    My D70 has the same 6MP sensor. I have printed 12x8 @250dpi and got great results. But if you print 24x36, then you will benefit from more MP.

    At 250 dpi, a 24x36 will need a 24MP file. Now, the technology today can print that, but can the human eye see the difference? Depending on the viewing distance.

    I think most will agree that you an get great 24x 36 prints off with a 12MP file with upsample. Still, it doesn't mean that you can't benefit from more. If you can afford more MP or can wait til the price comes down that is...

    I still would strong advice you to pick up a 5D/7D for dirt cheap, find a good deal. Don't invest in any more Minolta gear than that. Just get a DSLR body. Give digital a try. If you really want to go digital, you might seriously consider switch in the future.
     

Share This Page