What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Thinking about going digital

Where to start... I love my M6 & summicron lens. The images I capture are wonderful... However, everywhere I go another photographer is trying to convert me to the Digital world. I must agree, the thought of taking a picture, getting an instant preview and being able to manipulate and print my own pictures is very appealing. But how good is the quality, really? Is it worth giving up the M for a high end Cannon/Nikon/Fuji??? When I purchased my M I thought I'd never need another system (for my needs) but I have to admin the appeal for Digital is growing... Can anyone give me an honest opinion on the Pros and Cons of going Digital? thanks
 
Doug,

You are free to enjoy digital and film both! I have a Canon D30 DLSR, but more often prefer my manual-focus Contax 135 film SLRs. I handled the M6, M7 and MP for the first time last week (Leica Demo Day at Calumet Chicago), and was impressed by the construction and classic controls.

Continuing advantages of film and Leica M include freedom from the battery regimen, instant shutter response, quality slide projection, dynamic range. Plus, an instrument that retains resale value and functionality for years.

Digital is good for high volume (sport), output for the web or digital archive, rapid turnaround, or you want specific features (voice annotation, tethered operation, video out).

Ignoring the differences in workflow, there is rough parity between 135 film and a 6MP DSLR.
 
Have just had a similar experience. Am in a Photographers Guild where two members (25% of membership) have gone exclusively hi-end digital. I was somewhat interested so bought, 4 months ago, a Nikon 2100 Point & Shoot. It in no way replaces any of my Leica Equipment ( I use both M and R). I use it mostly as a totally different form of art, making images with it as a part of a system which involves heavy Photoshop manipulations, and it makes a great snapshooter when my grandchildren visit (which is not too often, unfortunately), as they want instant results and it lets me provide this to them with my laptop computer without my taking time away from them in the darkroom. But for my serious stuff, it is still Leica all the way. No way will I go digital hi-end.
 
I just bought a digicam - a 2MP Fuji to take pix of my kitty (etc). It took care of my buy a new toy urge, only cost $169 (less 128MB card), and it's fun.

It's also made of plastic, the lens is good for 2MP but not much else, and it has a few quirks. It won't last long, maybe a year or two before it breaks probably... I'm going to take happy, fluffy photos with it, and use it to "set up" some film shots, but I can't see it as taking the place of my RF.

Like any machinery, the RF won't do everything, SLRs have their place, point and shoots have theirs.=20

If you dump the M6, my phone number is 317-408-8893. Thanks.
 
Hi All,

I replaced my digital Canon G2 with D30 as soon I could get my hands on one. Digital allows you to overshoot(quantity)at every opportunity. The resulting picture files are easy to do everything with except manage. And by this I mean manage long term. How many of us that have had a PC since the XT came out can access much of anything that we did back then without a hassle. Granted much has changed but I wonder how many of the digital photos I've taken in the past 3 years will be seen by anyone 20 years from now. I archive on CD and print really very few of the digitals I take. I print and album ALL of the film I take, someone would be able to see them in 20 years. As has been said before each media has a different purpose. The quality of what I get fom my M and the fact that it can be "seen" makes a big difference to me. Just another view...
 
Doug,

I looked at different digital cameras within the past months, i.e. Canon 10D, Sigma SD9, Contax ND etc. and talked to many people who purchased within the last 12 months a digital camera. Here are some observations:

1. Most of them bought into digital to be able to have the fun-effect to see the image immediately, not because it might be cheaper better or something else. Second most mentioned reason was the hype in the media about digital and the curiousity about it.

2. All digital images I have seen so far even on expositions from Canon with the 10D - are still not on par with a very good scan of a very good film with a very good lens in front of it.

In most cases the images are looking kind of "flat". Colours are not the same as Velvia or Provia 100F. Especially with portraits, you see a kind of "cut the face out and glue it on the picture".

3. The disadvantage of digital in general (storing issues, batteries etc.) are still not resolved in a acceptable way for non-professionals.

4. Image quality of the analogue lenses, once used with digital cameras is something the industry tries to avoid talking about. Also the multiplier for your focal lenght is a horrible, if you see the prices you have to pay to use your preferred lenses and the quality you get, because it is actually a wideangle with all the inherent cons in image quality.

My own experience is especially with Contax N1 and N-lenses, Fuji Velvia and Fuji Provia 100F, scanned with a Nikon Supercoolscan 4000 and printed out with an Epson Stylus Photo 1290/1280 up to A3 on Epson Premium Glossy. I can say with this experience that all my prints are looking better than the same pictures made with the mentioned cameras. This might be the lenses, but I think it is also the current status of the development in digital cameras. I would stick with analogue and ask the same question in two years from now here again.

In the mean time buy a digital P&S to get used to it. But do a research beforehand, since the differences are still significant up to 800 Euro in image quality which you get for the same price.
 
True... "I wonder how many of the digital photos I've taken in the past 3 years will be seen by anyone 20 years from now." I can still see slides of my parent at Yellowstone 50 years ago. Unless the house burns down they will still be around (since they aren't sitting in sunlight or a d& basement) for a while yet.

Is there ANYTHING created on a computer fifty years ago that anyone could still use or want to use? Oh, maybe scientific data that was xferred to hardcopy and printed or stored on microfiche, but the actual data medium, punchcards or magnetic tape is dead, dead, dead. Archival is acid-free paper. Archival are books kept in the cool dark. Archival is painting on canvas. Electrons are ephemeral.

You know what tech support will tell you about any computer hardware or software three + years old? Sorry, we can't support that anymore.

If you want something to show the Grandkids, make prints, preferably on some acid-free stable medium and keep it out of the light. Race memory will be printed in books or carved into granite blocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top