Did all Professionals moved to Digital yet?

Started Jan 3, 2014 | Discussions thread
OP Newkidhere New Member • Posts: 6
Re: Did all Professionals moved to Digital yet?

Chris R-UK wrote:

I think that you need to do two things.

Decide what size camera you want and what degree of "ruggedness" you need.

Re-read all the posts on this thread and decide what exactly you requirements are and what your budget is. Drop all the requirements that aren't really relevant.

Then start a new thread setting out your requirements and budget and ask for recommendations. In this way respondents won't have to read every post on this thread and won't have to guess what your budget is and what exactly you are looking for.

Very Sensible advice. I am thankful for all the responses, I will answer some questions here and close this thread as solved, while I will probably drop "Rugged" in the requirements.
Thanks as ton.

chris102 wrote:

Mark Scott Abeln wrote:

Chris R-UK wrote:

The European Union banned the use of lead in solder, and the camera companies complied, and I've read that this will decrease the shelf life of cameras, leading to a greater incidence of "solder bloom," where solder oxidizes and increases in volume, which may damage electronics.

We might not be able to expect decades of life from cameras anymore.

This is correct - solder bloom and tin whiskers will cause many electronic failures. Of course there is gold bonding, but that would mean price increases.

-> Thanks for the heads up. Probably it is same with all Electronics and Motors as well (Washing Machines no longer use metal drums, all new one's do not last longer, Fans are no more using the high end metal gauge any more hence my decades old fan works like charm and new one just winds up in about 3 - 5 years. So are TVs etc. I will set my expectation same regarding Digital Camera as well.

edispics wrote:

Photoshop for pan and zoom? I don't understand, I must be missing something.

I actually use other free Ken Burns features, I used to like windows xp's movie maker but the same in win-7 just does not work that way. I have quoted photoshop, as I use it at my friend's place who has this software, because you guys must be aware of it a lot more (Import pictures, go to time line, right click to select Pan and zoom and set the pan and zoom accordingly and play)..

Digital costs are prohibitive? I don't understand. I saved a fortune in film, processing and printing costs when I switched to digital. Unless you take very few photos

Just scared of initial investment, brought a very high end stereo deck the next year we had digital MP3 so small and playing lot better, Brought a high end P1i when introduced, within a year it was considered antique. Around 1 year back i was serious to go digital, I was told about mirrorless which I was told would soon replace SLRs.. So I was waiting ..Yes I take few photos and hence my skill level is not anywhere it should after many years. No scope of experimentation, I used voice recorder to record the film counter number and descriptions to learn but got no where.

This does not make any sense. Yes film is expensive, that is why people switch to digital. The initial outlay is more than compensated by savings in film purchases and processing.

I take a few shots and have only one lens. Most shots are from Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH6 for a lots of pictures. They come really great. It was sand blasted in the beach as I captured blowing wind, it looked dead and came back alive and as before. Learning experience as I would have done the same with dSLR (Now I would never do it). I buy from bulk sellers who use bulk film to put in canisters. The processing is costly and hence brought the Kaiser, which is awful

I have 5 mp scanner from Kaiser which is doing bit awful job but ok to send pictures around..

If you have a digital point and shoot, almost any of those will produce much better digital photos for sharing than a scan from a Kaiser. Why are you not using your point and shoot? Since you say you have photoshop, check out your digital point and shoot photos and compare them to your Kaiser scans. Unless your point and shoot is really really old, even it should be superior to your Kaiser scans.

100% agreed, Kaiser is only to post it to friends and email and to see the film has come good or not. It serves no photographic interest at all. Also I used 5 mp because, processing labs are giving me 5mp charging me fortune. If I ask for higher pixel, they are charging me moon.

Go to a large physical photography store and check out as many different cameras as you can to get a sense of what might suit your requirements physically and then check functions and specs and prices.

I am in New zealand, the shops here are tiny and limited options. Only way most buy here is search online and many get stuff from Ebay or on a visit to US.

peevee1 Wrote:

The post was stuck somewhere in the Internet tubes since 1999. Probably got out through an NSA leak.

Thank you Snowden!

Probably it is me who did not pick the art of earning enough to keep up with hobby ! Thanks for the smile.

Million Thanks every one. As Chris as advised, I will start a new thread with requirements and first get the list of suggestions, do some research and move to digital.. My New Year resolution.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow