Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - Keith

Shutterbug Strasse

A photographer's haven for the lastest in digital or traditional film cameras.

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional

Posted by Keith (A) on April 21, 2001 at 14:14:45

In Reply to: Digital -VS- Traditional posted by Van on April 21, 2001 at 08:15:40:

I suspect your question is on a much lighter-level than my answer, but regardless, it's still food for thought:

It really depends at where you draw your line as to the "best medium" -- is your purpose just to snapshot pictures of family and friends, and post it online? Or on a photo album? Or are you into creative photography, or photojournalism, or what?

Until you know exactly what you want to do, both the $1300 digital camera and the $400 SLR may both be the wrong items for you. Which $1300 and $400 camera were you talking about? I'm assuming the $400 35mm does not include optics... so what optics will you get? Seeing it is an SLR, you can spend more than $10k on getting a range of specialized optics that will let you take more stuff than the $1300 digital camera will EVER let you do (examples: true macro, 600mm telephotos, various filters, etc).

Personally, I remain yet to be convinced that digital photography has caught up with traditional film. I am a Canon EOS lover, and in looking at results from the Canon D-30 (digital SLR, $3k), Nikon, and Kodak digital SLRs, I have yet to find the true color and texture rendition that I love so much about true "photographic art". No matter what, these digital cameras still create a "pasty" color to my eyes. And I don't mind using slow film scanners to convert my work to online pictures. So for me, personally, I still think my "best medium" is film, be it 35mm, or larger format.

Conversely, many people nowadays prefer the convenience of digital cameras to their point and shoot film cameras. Many of my friends are delighted at how fast they get their digital pictures back, they email pictures around to friends within minutes of taking the picture, it's much easier to archive, etc. I'm even thinking about using a digital camera to compose before I snap away using my 120/220.

Best wishes in your camera hunt -- and welcome to the camera asylum.

Keith

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Digital -VS- Traditional - Van 08:15:40 04/21/01 (14)

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - SamM 16:03:55 11/20/01 (0)

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - john c. 15:14:58 05/12/01 (0)

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - Vinylly 23:12:41 04/30/01 (0)

Um, for what? - jj 21:44:45 04/21/01 (3)

Ahh yes but there is always Photo Shop - Van 22:26:44 04/21/01 (2)

Tips on PS - R B 08:34:11 04/26/01 (0)

Well, yes... I've used it on my scanned film images - jj 00:38:05 04/23/01 (0)

Traditional inaccuracy. - Romy 16:05:16 04/21/01 (0)

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - Keith 14:14:45 04/21/01 (5)

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - Van 20:02:09 04/21/01 (4)

The choice is yours... (more) - Steven R. Rochlin 21:55:54 04/21/01 (3)

Well put. - Van 22:16:07 04/21/01 (2)

Thanks Van... (more) - Steven R. Rochlin 06:10:03 04/22/01 (1)

Re: Thanks Van... (more) - Van 11:50:50 04/22/01 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - Keith 14:14:45 04/21/01 (5)

Re: Digital -VS- Traditional - Van 20:02:09 04/21/01 (4)

The choice is yours... (more) - Steven R. Rochlin 21:55:54 04/21/01 (3)

Well put. - Van 22:16:07 04/21/01 (2)

Thanks Van... (more) - Steven R. Rochlin 06:10:03 04/22/01 (1)

Re: Thanks Van... (more) - Van 11:50:50 04/22/01 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.