Any photographers out there/

[animeotaku99]

I have been thinking bout getting a good camera but I'm not sure if I should get a 35MM camera or a similar one that is Digital. I heard that 35 MM is Higher Quality but that film will soon be obsolete but I found the 35mm easier to operate. THey both had shutter settings and multiple shot settings, like "sports" for motion shots and low light and portrait. any ideas, they where Canon brand but I forgot the name of them

[tenshi_a]

I'm not a pro... I don't really know much about good photography... but I know that all the deisgner-type and artist-type guys I know who are really into photography stick with digital cameras. You have a lot more freedom to take *a ton of* photos without worrying about film... and digital photography has come along a long way; I expect you'll be able to find a digital camera with all the features you've come to know and love from film cameras.

I remember the good old days when I used to develop my own black-and-white photos... that was fun, playing with dangerous chemicals in the dark... ^_^ every effect I could ever achieve with film can probably be done in a photoshop-type editor on a computer, these days, and more...

[Haro!]

All the cool people use film

[tenshi_a]

Oh. One other thing I thought of... with a digital camera, you can take pictures you *don't want to have to take to a shop to develop, for whatever reason*. -_-;

[VidelCoolGirl]

I have been thinking bout getting a good camera but I'm not sure if I should get a 35MM camera or a similar one that is Digital.
Matters what kind of photography you want to do in general. In my last class, we did both digital and film, although focused more so on the hardcore stuff. (I.E. Taking it, developing it ourself, enlarging, ect.) 35MM is really good, but I find the Digitals to be really good for color. As far as detail goes, then go for one that uses film. (Just me, but I like the detail that comes out in B&W film more than a digital. )


I heard that 35 MM is Higher Quality but that film will soon be obsolete but I found the 35mm easier to operate. THey both had shutter settings and multiple shot settings, like "sports" for motion shots and low light and portrait. any ideas, they where Canon brand but I forgot the name of them

Still matters. Its best to use a handheld flash if you want good lighting. I mean, The aperture matters a lot too, but you cant depend on the camera for all the lighting. Digitals are better for action shots. Low light, I say film is better.

A good digital 35MM though is the Canon Rebel XT. Great camera. That's one of the only digital cameras I really feel comfortable with.

Sadly, film is becoming obsolete, and all the big shots usually use digital cameras. Not true in all cases, but if you want to pursue an actual career in Photo, then you need to know how to use both, expert level.

[Haro!]

Oh. One other thing I thought of... with a digital camera, you can take pictures you *don't want to have to take to a shop to develop, for whatever reason*. -_-;

But those are fun when they get handed back to you.

[VidelCoolGirl]

But those are fun when they get handed back to you.

The slightest mistake usually discourages you fairly easily. I took the best roll of film last quarter, and I was so happy to develop it. I put it on the reel wrong in the darkroom, and none of the negatives came out. Needless to say, I paid for it next time.

[animeotaku99]

I just got back from Anime Detour and some of the shots taken during the Masquarad turned out blurry do to movment and distance I want one that has a setting for multiple shots like motion, portrait, landscape ect. and with a fast FPS and where you can hold down the button to take continuous shots. I found a DIgital and 35MM both where so similar. I belive the DIgital was 8 megapixials

[Flavius]

35MM is really good, but I find the Digitals to be really good for color.
Actually, film in general still has an advantage over digital as far as color goes, and is much cheaper to get the same results when compared to digital. Slide film like Kodachrome and Velvia would still produce better, if not similar colors when compared to digital cameras that have $3,000+ sensors (the price is not for the camera itself, but the capturing mechanism on the digital cameras). Digital sensors that capture light still have a way to go as far as capturing the physical limits on film (since film itself is physical and doesn't rely on the on-camera electronics).

And remember, no matter what kind of camera you own, whether digital or film, most of the quality you get relies on the type of lens you use on the camera, assuming you buy a camera that allows you to change lenses.

The maximum mega-pixel/resolution equivalent of film cameras (when using a typical 35mm film scanner) is about 20 MPs - so the details, like VidelCoolGirl mentioned, are better with film.

[VidelCoolGirl]

I mean it in the sense of how adept you are at developing. Color will come out "perfect" to some extent with digital cameras. If you have film, and develop it...yourself, it can take a while unless you know the machine really well, color balance (B,Y,R), will come out good enough for gallery work, magazine ect.

Last time I did my own color development, it was a little rough, since we only had one class, then fell right into it. "To add yellow, you must take out yellow..." And all that hooha.

EDIT: I love B&W though. I used a Holga camera most of the quarter, and I love the way the light leaks through it, giving the picture a unique look. Although light leak can be annoying at times, if you use it right, you can get some REALLY good pictures.

[animeotaku99]

I'm not worried about developing the film myself Ill pay for someone to do that

[master terrence]

Digital Camera

why? although you are buying the film yourself, you don't have have a dark room or any experience with manipulating photos (photoshop is considered cheating). Pros who use film know how to balance the chemicals, but for us amateurs, we'll just stick to clicking the color settings (sepia...black and white) on our digital display.

...I didn't see your previous post :P

my advice is buy the digital, but DON'T USE the digital display to take photo's only to review them. Use the old fashion view finder. Pictures on the digital display are bigger (include things that wren't meant to be seen), and you may not notice it, but the parts that show up in the digital display that weren't in your viewfinder are slightly bent and are usually cropped by editors.

[VidelCoolGirl]

Digital Camera

why? although you are buying the film yourself, you don't have have a dark room or any experience with manipulating photos (photoshop is considered cheating). Pros who use film know how to balance the chemicals, but for us amateurs, we'll just stick to clicking the color settings (sepia...black and white) on our digital display.

my advice is buy the digital, but DON'T USE the digital display to take photo's only to review them. Use the old fashion view finder. Pictures on the digital display are bigger (include things that wren't meant to be seen), and you may not notice it, but the parts that show up in the digital display that weren't in your viewfinder are slightly bent and are usually cropped by editors.
Developing really isn't all that hard. People make a bigger deal about it then they need to. You can get the negatives, and then scan them into Photoshop. So you can still use a regular film camera.

[Flavius]

I mean it in the sense of how adept you are at developing. Color will come out "perfect" to some extent with digital cameras. If you have film, and develop it...yourself, it can take a while unless you know the machine really well, color balance (B,Y,R), will come out good enough for gallery work, magazine ect.

Last time I did my own color development, it was a little rough, since we only had one class, then fell right into it. "To add yellow, you must take out yellow..." And all that hooha.

Oh, I see. The only time I've really hand developed film with color was with Ektachrome slides. Though for some reason, if you miss-count a cycle in the wash/rinse phase, the colors tend to shift quite a bit (one roll of film turned out more bluish than the other). Ever since then, I've trusted the people in labs to develop my color film instead. :)

So I guess if you're going to let someone else develop, make sure the person/people in the lab are able to give you some consistent results with your developments.

EDIT: I love B&W though. I used a Holga camera most of the quarter, and I love the way the light leaks through it, giving the picture a unique look. Although light leak can be annoying at times, if you use it right, you can get some REALLY good pictures.
Yeah, B/W really does shine with film and hand process. I've found that all of the black and white "processing" on digital cameras simply don't have that edge with what you get on B/W film, especially with regard to contrast/light.

[animeotaku99]

Well Im looking for high quality pics that I can adjust the camera for a variety of shooting environments. I found 2 cameras, one digital and one film that have the same settings (I think the film one has a faster shutter rate) so since 35MM is about the equivilent of 20 Megapixils shouldnt I get the film camera?

[VidelCoolGirl]

Yeah, thats why I hate to see B&W not really being used anymore. That's why I'm a fan of old photography, because for some reason, I've found B&W film to capture more than the scenery or subject. Norma Jean (Maralyn Monroe sp?) has amazing pictures of her done, and those of course are all in B&W. Love them so.

[animeotaku99]

THe main reason I want to camera is Cosplay and convention photography

[Haro!]

THe main reason I want to camera is Cosplay and convention photography

You're better off with digital for that I think.

[animeotaku99]

The proablem I found was the slow shutter rate of the camearas we had. and I want a "rapid fire" shutter for the masquerade and action shots

[Flavius]

Well Im looking for high quality pics that I can adjust the camera for a variety of shooting environments. I found 2 cameras, one digital and one film that have the same settings (I think the film one has a faster shutter rate) so since 35MM is about the equivilent of 20 Megapixils shouldnt I get the film camera?
I guess it depends on how big you're going to print stuff out. With a 35mm camera (digitally 20 MPs - about 5000 x 3000 pixels), you can print out stuff that's 13 inches by 19 inches without losing any detail.

With a 6 MP digital camera, for example, you're only able to print pictures that is at the most 10 inches by 8 inches, while keeping the quality and detail intact. However, if you wanted to have a 13'' x 19'' printout using that same digital camera, everything will be stretched out and at that size, the quality would suffer.

Like I mentioned before, the lens you're using on a camera is the determining factor for getting "high quality pics". So if you're not concerned about enlargements, then a digital camera will work just as well, provided that you're not using a cheap lens in your kit.

Edit- If you're concerned about speed, make sure you know stuff like the ISO speed on your camera, the aperture size on your lens, and just general picture shooting tips.

If you set the ISO on a digital camera to a higher setting, you're able to obtain a higher shutter speed with your exposures. With a smaller aperture setting on a lens, you'll also get higher shutter speeds.

You can still obtain good results from slower shutters if you and the subject are able to hold still during a shot. A tripod/monopod usually helps in cases like this. And if things are moving regardless, you can always "pan" a shot by moving the camera along with the subject and take your picture.

[animeotaku99]

I believe the digital one (of course the film one)I was looking at does have a replaceable lens. I dont think I would need to enlarge anything, I would probelm end up having them printed out at a Kiosk

[Flavius]

Is the digital camera you're looking at have the letters SLR or DSLR?

[animeotaku99]

ahhh.... yes?

[Flavius]

Oh okay, just curious. Sometimes there are digital cameras that let you replace only one or two lenses.

If it's a DSLR, then you'll have a lot to choose when looking for a lens.

[animeotaku99]

I believe the entire front lens comes off, I dont know if that makes a difference between SLR and DSLR but if I can I will get one or two extra lens, probably a long range on and another for soemthing else

[Flavius]

Yeah, it looks like you have a DSLR type camera, which means the entire lens would come off and is completely replaceable.

SLR = Single Lens Reflex (film cameras)
DSLR = Digital Single Lens Reflex (digital cameras)

[sorry for the confusion on that]

[animeotaku99]

well I think both the Film and digital camera lens come off in the same way

[drgenestarwind]

film and digital both operate on the same principles, the digital revolution has devloped (no pun indended) a whole new way to be creative.
film is expensive to maintain, digital pics need only be captured and deleted if you dont want that shot.
as for shooting, i find digital easier because you have control over your settings, meaning you can change sensitivity (ISO-like film speed), from shot to shot, with film you have to shoot a whole roll of the same speed. as well as control and recorded data of shutter speed and apeture. say if you want a fast shot, open up your apature, you may not have a lot of depth of field but you get an interesting focus effect.
whether it be point and shoot or SLR in your future, happy shooting.

[Hybrid Shock]

THe main reason I want to camera is Cosplay and convention photography

Digital SLR. Don't bother with Prosumer cameras (like the non DSLR sonys and the Fuji Finepix F9100) and P&S Cameras unless they're gonna be your backup. And if they are P&S, research them well.

During the Cosplay convention, with how rapid they roll out the cosplayers, swapping films every 24 shots means that you'll miss some. However, a good Flash card (and we're not skimping out here. Think Sandisk Ultra II at the absolute minimum) means that you can get a lot of rapid shots without having to swap mem cards (and swapping mem cards is about a 2 second job)

On the forecourt to the convention location, it's the same issue. Speed

If you're not printing, don't stress about the MP count. a Pentax K100D or Nikon D40 will do fine, providing you learn how to use the camera properly (since half the quality of a picture depends on the person behind the camera) and get some good glass. Moving up to the D80 or K10D or EOS400 is a good step if you can afford it. Personally, i think a D200 or EOS30 (or higher) is overkill, though i'd love to have a D200 or EOS5 at conventions :P

Don't skimp on the lenses, but then i know pro/semi-pro Cosplay/convention photographers using Sigma and Tamron lenses (and one using a semi-prosumer Fuji Finepix S6500). A good flash gun is nice to have, but the onboard flashes are just as good as long as you match it to the available light and camera settings.

Also, spend a lot of time at www.dpreview.com and research the camera models that you're looking at. I passed up a Olympus E300 for my Pentax *Ist DS, which is one of the best camera decisions i've ever made (the Oly, with it's 4/3s sensor, is sucky in low light, which is where i do a fair few shots)

Film, i'd leave to other areas. In this day and age, Cosplay and Convention photos are really left to the Digital domain. Not to say i don't have respect for film. i think anyone who still uses film is a freaking legend and has the skills for it (which is why i don't shoot it), but i think the time's over for Film and Convention cosplay (portrait cosplay is where i'd use film)

For the record, at Comiket 71, the old film cameras i saw were otakus and tourists using disposable cameras. didn't see one film SLR (and i was looking carefully... i not only photgraph the cosplayers, but the photographers and their cameras.. it's a tech ***** thing...)

These are the reasons i switched from a Minolta Dynax 404si Film SLR to a Pentax *Ist DS Digital SLR.

[Gejutsuka]

Hybrid is sooo right, about the DSLR. I have been watching them with interest, because I am one of the last holdouts with regard to film, especially B&W.
It's all in the tech and the megapixels. The more the better.

I still use my ancient PK1000, purely because it doesn't have an electromagnetic shutter, and when I used to photograph captive wolf packs in -2 degree weather, battery shutters would not perform well, if at all.

Stopping motion has really gotten there too. One of my penpals sent me a few pictures of their parks in Japan, and froze pigeons in midflight with the same clarity and color as an SLR.

[Hybrid Shock]

It's all in the tech and the megapixels. The more the better.

Not necessarily Gejutsuka. I passed up a chance to buy an 8MP Olympus for a 6MP Pentax, which had less noise because of it's bigger sensor (APS-C beats Four Thirds). My P&S Fuji Finepix F30 beats pretty much most other P&S over 6.5MP because of the quality of the sensor (and the sad bit is, it beats my DSLR in low light.. ;__; ) That being said, the K10D that i'm looking at is 10MP, but i want the In-body Optical image stabilisation more so than the higher MP count

A good noise reducton processor is good to have in a DSLR. That's one of the good things about the EOS series. It's DIGIC processor does very well with APS-C and Full sized Sensors (kinda sucky in low light for the 1/1.8" sensors in their Prosumer and P&S)

Stopping motion has really gotten there too. One of my penpals sent me a few pictures of their parks in Japan, and froze pigeons in midflight with the same clarity and color as an SLR.

If it's from a P&S, then it's a good P&S with good settings.

If it's from a DSLR, it'd be the same as if you were shooting from a film SLR. High shutter speed, high ISO.

That's one good thing about DSLRs, changable ISOs. You're limited to shooting the ISO that your film can do. I like being able to switch from ISO200 to ISO1600 with a few button presses.

[Flavius]

I'd say be careful when using the higher ISO settings if quality of the picture is a concern.

There is a tendency for the digital camera to generate noise/grain when you bump up the settings near the 1600 range.

[Hybrid Shock]

I'd say be careful when using the higher ISO settings if quality of the picture is a concern.

There is a tendency for the digital camera to generate noise/grain when you bump up the settings near the 1600 range.
That's why i suggest doing the research to see if you need to shoot at high ISO, and to find a camera that does high ISO well

It's unfortunate, but outside of spending a few grand on an 200mm F2.8 (or faster) prime, taking pictures of the cars following us on a touge run in the back seat (flash gun on touge run = beatdown by fellow drivers), high ISO is a fallback for me...

EDIT: that's why i wanted the in-body IS on the K10D. it's equivalent to 3 Exposure stops, and lets me use my cheap Sigma 55-200 F3.5-5.6, or my Tamaron 18-200 F3.5-6.3