Cameras

[kofi3159]

I am currently considering purchasing a Camera..
I am in between Canon 500d and the Sony alpha 380
Any advice on which is best or perhaps buy a third alternative..
It will mainly be used for holidays and taking pics of clothes and amateur fashion shows

[lowrey]

to be honest I don't have experience on the Sony, but I usually advice people to go with an actual camera manufacturer rather than a giant conglomerate that does anything form toothbrushes to laptops.

I'm sure the Sony is not bad, but you can't really go wrong with the Canon.

[Acid, Bitter and Sad]

Completely second Lowrey on this...you simply can't go wrong with a Canon, or a Nikon for that matter.

Used a Sony alpha dslr to shoot a commercial campaign for said Sony dslr (thus i had no option on what camera to use). To be fair, the Sony alpha line is decent, and they've got several top quality Zeiss lens to complement its system, however I'd still put my complete trust (and money) on a Canon/Nikon over a Sony/others...esp when it comes to dslrs. I'm using a Ricoh for a compact ...but my pro gears are all Canon.

[laughed]

i know there's a couple camera guys on here - so i kinda want to hear the digital vs film debate.
the reason is, my little fingers can't stay away from adorama, looking at that sweet price of the ricoh griii - and a used gr for 300. not bad.
i have a sony digital but....it's not a ricoh.
i usually shoot with my contax g2 (i prefer it over a leica) but i haven't found the solution to carrying it around when i want a camera - but don't want the bulk and weight.
so,
should i just stick with film - or is a great digital camera necessary - and in what situations is it better than film? and by digital i mean something tiny - not a big slr. the one advantage is size but beyond that....?

[Fade to Black]

the biggest thing that killed me the first time i took a Contax out was I couldn't look back at the image I just shot, just for a sense of reassurance. That killed me; I spent the rest of the roll in a state of vertiginous queasiness and self doubt that only magnified with each progressing shot.

[laughed]

ha. i guess that's the exact reason why i love contax and don't use digital. too each his own i guess.
think i'm about to pull a trigger on this ricoh gr. hope i use the damn thing.

[Fade to Black]

heh, for me - I hope I learn the damn thing

[endersgame]

if you are still printing silver or c-prints, yeah keep shooting film. but if the pictures are just on your computer and will never leave there, just shoot digital..

[Acid, Bitter and Sad]

film vs digital

Personally, when it comes to colour/contrast of images, i'd still prefer film over digital if i had to make a choice. There's just a certain quality in film that digital isn't able to capture completely. That said though, with the rate of technology development, coupled with improvements on the software front, the differences have become pretty negligible.

For work, there's no way I can ever return to film. Even if I wanted to, clients nowadays won't allow it...everyone's expecting to see images instantly/in real-time.

Agree with endersgame, unless you're planning on printing your own prints in the traditional darkroom, I don't see a strong reason for shooting film. Storage for the films and contact sheets alone will give me a headache.
And digital c-prints are as good as the real thing (actually it is the real thing, just exposed differently) to me anyways.

Fade to Black, one of the aspects of photography that I dearly miss when shooting film is discovering the accidents and mistakes when I get the film back from the lab. If anything, I really dislike how digital photography has created my utter reliance on the lcd screen for assurance after every single press of the shutter button....a habit I'm now constantly trying to unlearn.

[Jonn]

trust me matt the happiest moment of taking pics is getting the developed film/scan back from a lab. you keep looking at the lcd screen youre gonna miss all the real fun of shooting, and well, the decisive moment..

[Avantster]

Personally, when it comes to colour/contrast of images, i'd still prefer film over digital if i had to make a choice. There's just a certain quality in film that digital isn't able to capture completely. That said though, with the rate of technology development, coupled with improvements on the software front, the differences have become pretty negligible.

I shoot film when I want to print, but something to consider re technological development - Bill Henson used digital for the first time for his latest exhibition (click), working with a well known digital photography expert to custom develop a software algorithm that would process the photos the way he wanted (most are optimised for high contrast/dynamic colour and not subtle tonalities). An enjoyable experiment for him as a photographer and although IRL I felt the digital prints still lacked a little, the results were surprisingly good.

[Acid, Bitter and Sad]

Thanks for the link.

Personally, I feel the images look rather obviously digitally enhanced, at least based on their jpeg quality from the website. I'm sure (I hope) they look different in real life.

Avantster, you've seen the exhibition in person?

[Avantster]

Yes, for some reason the website versions are a far cry from the real prints, in particular the landscapes.

[endersgame]

i agree with abs on color/contrast. but the film choices suck these days. if you're shooting film and want it better than digital, nothing beats 8x10 sheet film..

and nothing beats kodachrome. not sure if you guys seen processed kodachrome 8x10's from the 1940's– almost no color degradation, zero grain, and absolutely frightening to look at because it looks like time had froze on a paper sized piece of plastic..

[kucejoe]

Note: I'd like to preface this post by saying I know next to nothing about cameras/lenses.

I recently found some Contax / Carl Zeiss T* lenses (I can get the specific names if necessary) originally fitted to a Contax RTS SLR that my father hasn't touched in decades. From the little I know, they seem to be quite good lenses.

- Is it possible to somehow make them fit a modern DSLR body?
- If yes, how / is it worth it to do so (i.e. would there be an appreciable difference compared to what would come with a low to mid range DSLR package/bundle)?