Film to Digital - When

A Film Man Waiting to go Digital

Some time ago (1967) I caught the photography bug. Around that time the classic film 'Blow-Up' was released and I was captivated by it and the Hasselblad with 150mm Planar!

My first camera was a secondhand 'Petriflex' 35mm + two lenses. That broke down after 15 mths so what could I do with a low apprentice wage in 1969??

A Leica read and looked like a good idea but expensive. However I decided that I would try and buy one (even on an apprentice's wage). A few months later I bought a secondhand M2 with 5 cm Elmar.

The Photography bug became stronger and I was doing my own B/W processing. I found that I needed a 9 cm Elmar so I got one (2nd hand). Then I finished my apprenticeship and wanted another M2 (2nd hand) and got it!

Next I needed 35mm 'wide' angle and managed to buy a new f1.4 35mm Summilux in 1971 for £56! But I still thought of all that involved in 'Blow Up' and still fancied a Hasselblad. That was mot to be but I did get an excellent Rolliflex 2.8F with Planar for more detailed work.

On top of this and an inerest in photojournalism I found that I needed an SLR and managed to buy a new Nikon F and f4 200mm lens.

So fellow readers, here comes the relavence to my plight. I sold the Rolli (mistake) but still have the Nikon and Leicas. Those pieces have not been used much at all over the past 25 yrs!! (I got married etc.)

However, I needed to use my Leicas the other month and ran some colour test film thorugh them. I'm not as quick as I used to be but got the job done. Folks at work said what's it like using an antique, thought you would have a digtal.

Yes I would like a digital but not one like they had (or others) that have thousands of this that and the other capabilaties. I just want a M type but for it to be digital.

I started to scour/browse the net looking at digital different cameras. As mentioned before I kinew what I wanted but was there such a digital camera around? It seemed not.

Then I found DPREVIEW.com, what a fantastic site. After some time looking through the site I found the Leica D2 review. Yes, yes, at last, I said. But wait whats this about a poor Electronic ViewFinder (EVF). Oh no, my hopes are quashed. (My eyes are not what they used to be and I must have ad good (EVF). I also read another excleent review on the D2 by Andy Piper and he said the same.

But I cant afford a digital M replacement but need something like the D2. So come on Leica if you want some more customers improve the EVF and other 'easy' things the pro reviewers suggest - fast!

Like I've said, I've had my M2's for some thirty plus years, looked after them and went out to take some test shots recently. Will I be able to do that with a digital Leica ?? I fear not.

And what about the lens on a digital witll that last? If it would how about this for an idea Leica.

If your digital's would last for 20 years plus why not make them 'retrofittable' with updated sensors and software??

I can still get my Leica M's seviced and carry on with film as I did 30 yrs ago. What about a Leica Digital doing the same?

If you liked everything about the Leica except the EVF, then buy it. You will always find something about every camera that you don't like. Cameras are like spouses, you have to find one whose faults you can live with!

As for lasting 20 years, do you expect your computer to last 20 years? Digital cameras are essentially small, highly specialized computers. Most people have the desire to upgrade long before their camera goes 'belly up'. At least with the dslrs, the bulk of the expense, the lenses, can be used from camera to camera.
--
Theresa Kelly
Constructive criticism always welcome!
http://www.pbase.com/theresa_k
http://theresak.smugmug.com/
Panasonic FZ-2O, Oly FL-4O, PSP Nine, bunches of glass

emrys1 said:

Next I needed 35mm 'wide' angle and managed to buy a new f1.4 35mm
Summilux in 1971 for £56!

Click to expand...

Is the exclamation mark there to infere you bought it cheaply or that it was very expensive?

Was £56 a cheap price for to pay for a 35mm f1.4 Summilux?...If so its seems it was very overpriced as £56 was an average weeks wages back in 1971, equivalent to about £400 these days.

emrys1 said:

Yes I would like a digital but not one like they had (or others)
that have thousands of this that and the other capabilaties. I just
want a M type but for it to be digital.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, seems we think alike!...I have a DSLR and only use it on manual and with manual focus lenses...And coincedentaly they are mostly medium format lenses!

emrys1 said:

I started to scour/browse the net looking at digital different
cameras. As mentioned before I kinew what I wanted but was there
such a digital camera around? It seemed not.

Click to expand...

There was,...I'm using one!

emrys1 said:

But I cant afford a digital M replacement but need something like
the D2. So come on Leica if you want some more customers improve
the EVF and other 'easy' things the pro reviewers suggest - fast!

Like I've said, I've had my M2's for some thirty plus years, looked
after them and went out to take some test shots recently. Will I be
able to do that with a digital Leica ?? I fear not.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately you cannot compare a Leica film camera to a Leica digital camera. The film camera will easliy out resolve it and you might end up quite dissapointed that you decided to go digital at all.

There are cameras out there that can out-resolve 35mm format film and they can cost a heck of a lot less than you might think, but alas none of them are made by leica, so you may have to budget for some new lenses too.

emrys1 said:

And what about the lens on a digital will that last?

Click to expand...

Depends on the quality of the lens. I use Mamiya 645 lenses on my DSLR and I can attest that they all seem built to last!

Modern AF lenses have a lot more delicate moving parts to go wrong of course but as you are only interested in manual focus lenses you will find that many of these will probably outlast most DSLR bodies, even those made by Leica.

emrys1 said:

If it would how about this for an idea Leica.
If your digital's would last for 20 years plus why not make them
'retrofittable' with updated sensors and software??

Click to expand...

???...I assumed they already did?

BTW...You have mail.

Regards

DSG
--
http://sigmasd10.fotopic.net/

you want a camera that's not yet been made.

You can wait on the perfect camera (may never come around) or go get one of the MANY excellant digital cameras that professionals are using EVERYDAY in their business.
I started shooting my weddings digital three years ago and never looked back.

--
http://www.mikegoebel.com
http://www.belmontstudio.com
'Evil prevails when good men do nothing'

emrys1 said:

A Film Man Waiting to go Digital

Yes I would like a digital but not one like they had (or others)
that have thousands of this that and the other capabilaties. I just
want a M type but for it to be digital.

Click to expand...

Well, the obvious choice would be the Epson R-D1 - it would even accept your existing M lenses.

It's a bit pricey, though.

Cheers,

-Topi Kuusienn, Finland

To be honest I didn't even finish reading your post. The "I want a digital just my beloved film (insert your favorite camera here)" post gets nowhere.

It's like asking "When is someone going to release a car that gives me fertilizer for my roses like my beloved (insert your favorite breed here)?".

Film cameras were mechanical cameras. Digital cameras are not. The old rules don't hold.

Film cameras are a mature technology. Digital cameras are still evolving, fairly rapidly. Something much, much, much better will most likely be available in only a very few years.

Let me suggest this. Forget your present approach.

Ask yourself how large you want to print. Determine how many pixels it will take to do the job you are after. Then look at the cameras in that range.

Pick something and start shooting. If your pockets aren't deep then get a fixed-lens camera or an entry level dSLR. Then if you need something better you can move up and use the first camera for backup work.

--
bob
Latest offering - 'Penny's Neighborhood - Thailand'
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
Shots from a bunch of places (esp. SEA and Nepal).
Pictures for friends, not necessarily my best.

http://www.trekearth.com/members/BobTrips/photos/
My better 'attempts'.

DaSigmaGuy said:

emrys1 said:

Next I needed 35mm 'wide' angle and managed to buy a new f1.4 35mm
Summilux in 1971 for £56!

Click to expand...

Is the exclamation mark there to infere you bought it cheaply or
that it was very expensive?

Click to expand...

Dirt cheap.

--
Cheers,

Jim Pilcher
Living in the Queen City of the Plains, USA

'I know what I know and I know what I like. But sometimes it's like I just don't know.' -- Me

Think you already got several good answers. Agree with others here that digicams still aren't really mature. They are pretty good in many areas, but there are still room for improvement, and any camera you get today will be replaced by something better pretty fast. That doesn't mean you have to replace it though.

Coming from Leica and Nikon SLR you'll probably going to be disappointed with most P&S. EVFs simply aren't very good (OK for framing, but difficult to evalutate focus and exposure). Shot to shot speed and autofocus speed aren't that great either.

I'd probably get an entry level dSLR, something like Canon 350 or Nikon D70s with a decent normal zoom.

It is a joint effort between Voigtlander and Epson, but accepts Leica M mount lenses. All your screw mount will work also with an adapter.
dpc
http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/showgallery.php?ppuser=2233

DaSonyGuy said:

Next I needed 35mm 'wide' angle and managed to buy a new f1.4 35mm
Summilux in 1971 for £56!

Click to expand...

Is the exclamation mark there to infere you bought it cheaply or that it was very expensive?

Was £56 a cheap price for to pay for a 35mm f1.4 Summilux?...If so its seems it was very overpriced as £56 was an average weeks wages back in 1971, equivalent to about £400 these days.

Thanks for comments DaSigmaGuy.

Re price paid for sumilux = a good purchace - still holding its price in 'real' terms today.(£1 in 1971 approx = £9.30 in 2005 taking account movement in RPI)

I've yet to find out that sensors can ge upgraded along with their software.

-----------------

Theresa K made reference that a digital camera is similar to purchasing a computer.... Not for me. Something like a D2 with quality is not and should not be a throw away item. (Theres too much of that going on in the world today)

----------------------

BobTrips

Your ""The "I want a digital just my beloved film (insert your favorite camera here)" post gets nowhere."

comments not posted by me!

However, many thanks for your suggestions

---------------
EOM

emrys1 said:

A Film Man Waiting to go Digital

Click to expand...

If you are really asking a question, your view below probably answers it - stick with film.

emrys1 said:

Theresa K made reference that a digital camera is similar to
purchasing a computer.... Not for me. Something like a D2 with
quality is not and should not be a throw away item.

Click to expand...

This is naive. You should discuss it with a D1 owner.

your comments are sort of what all ex-film types go through... the world has changed... no more BW paper from kodak anymore!

Just get a Nikon or Cannon dslr with new lenses and be done with it.

Start to enjoy photgrapy again, but you will need to get a computer and photoshop and learn them also!

Stop Whineing!!!

I see that the majaority of my views in 2005 - countered by a number of DP readers - have become to life with the Leica M8.

Theresa K said:

If you liked everything about the Leica except the EVF, then buy
it. You will always find something about every camera that you
don't like. Cameras are like spouses, you have to find one whose
faults you can live with!

Click to expand...

Well that's certainly true enough!!

Theresa K said:

As for lasting 20 years, do you expect your computer to last 20
years? Digital cameras are essentially small, highly specialized
computers. Most people have the desire to upgrade long before
their camera goes 'belly up'. At least with the dslrs, the bulk of
the expense, the lenses, can be used from camera to camera.

Click to expand...

While superficially true, this analogy breaks down completely on closer examination. The reason computers become obsolete is that a new of software typically requires a more powerful system than the older version. I know people who are still running PCs from the early 90s, with Windows 3.0 and Word for Windows 1.0. As long as they don't add new printers or other devices needing device drivers, the system continues to perform to their needs. (There is still the risk of disk drive failures.) The could probably evern get a new monitor for that system if/when needed.

To apply the comparison properly, we would have to have the ability to replace the sensor and image buffer. Then you could say that the camera's CPU isn't up to the task of processing the RAW image of a much larger sensor, let's say 40 MP. Or, if a new file format came along with significant advantages, let's call it JPEG 2008, and the camera couldn't output in that format. Or Photoshop's newest release supports 32-bit color depth, and produces astoundingly better results with that format. Or you needed to use your digital camera to produce 12' x 18' murals with absolute detail. Absent any of these reasons, no one needs to upgrade.

Absent any of those reasons, there is no reason why your 2006 digital camera purchase can't give good results for many years.

And by the way, even if you could upgrade the sensor, you might not be happy with processing speeds if the new sensor had significantly increased color depth or pixel count.

Lots of "things" today have embedded computers and we don't talk about replacing them every two-three years. Cars, kitchen appliances, thermostats, office copiers, TVs. Almost anything where mechanical switches and dials and their associated gears and other mechanics can be replaced by an embedded processor.

I challenge anyone to refute my arguments here.

--
LongTimeNikonUser

Actually there is a computer analogy. Despite production having ceased in the early 90's, Comodore Amigas are still used for music synthesis today over 20 years since it first hit the market.