Buying into digital

[Peter Wm. Richardson]

OK, so in my ongoing research into digital photography I have another question I'd like to pose. Before I do however, here are the parameters within which to frame your answers. First, I am not interested in a lot of Nikon vs Canon dialogue, frankly I do not care. Secondly, we are strictly talking new equipment here, I have no interest in considering outdated used gear, especially since it is so much harder to judge the condition of electronic cameras. Thirdly, I am asking this question as an academic exercise in research, I have no intention of immediately rushing out and purchasing digital cameras, I just want to better understand the thought process behind why people purchase what they do. Finally, and most importantly, I shoot a lot of moving subjects, a lot of people and I insist on optimum image quality,within the framework of the conditions and the subject matter. At this time, 90% of everything I shoot is natural light and, on occasion, available darkness :-)

This is the question. How many bodies should someone purchase and should they all be the top of the line models and if not why not, taking into consideration that worrying about which body you are picking up and which lens is on it is not a viable option. I currently shoot with anywhere from three to five bodies, most with motor drives and most with fast prime lenses.

May I take this opportunity to thank anyone who responds and to add that all insights are welcome.
Cheers,
Peter Peter Wm. Richardson
Photojournalist
peterw@journalist.com

[ChrisP]

Hi Peter:-
Generically speaking, photographers are changing to digital because some markets dictate that change. Some photographers want the newest and greatest. Some feel they have to change. Everyone has a different reason.

My personal feeling is I have more control of the image after it is shot. There have been lots of photographers that never learned to operate a darkroom. Now there are photographers that don't do their own post processing. I chose the learn Photoshop route. That has been the single most uphill run of the digital learning curve.

How many bodies and what type. You use 3 to 5 bodies. I will make the assumption that those many bodies are for ease of use, and no lens changes. In that case all the controls are the same from camera to camera. If that works for you then do that with digital. One thing nice is that with the larger cards you can get a lot more than 36 exp on a card so you are reloading a lot less.

Some photographers use a primary and secondary camera. A 12mp D2X is slightly better than a 10mp D200 qualitywise but has more features than it's baby brother. (faster frame rate and larger buffer) (Sorry I'm a nikon guy but the same holds true for Canon models.)
The one feature I really like with digital is different ISO shots on the same card.
How old are your lenses? Are they current autofocus models? Then you won't have to change lenses. I went from manual focus film cameras to digital and had to buy all new lenses. I'm still working on that and I want a D2X too. High end digital bodies are a lot more than film bodies and the manufacturers seem to obsolete them sooner.
The pros can outweigh the cons at times, but overall the change was good for me in my niche.
What do your customers say about film at this time? Do you think you may be forced into the change or will you stay with film?

Cheers
Chris

[Peter Wm. Richardson]

Hi Chris:
Thanks for the reply, it is along the lines of what I was hoping to receive. About manufacturers, I have no problem with hearing what you use and why you like it, what I have no time for is the useless diatribes that seem to plaque questions like this about why Brand X is sooo much better than Brand Y and only a fool wouldn't change! Naturally, I know that Canon has both types of sensor sizes and I do have to think about whether or not this full frame vs APS size issue has any merit, but that is a totally separate issue. This question regards cameras, not sensors. I too use Nikon at the moment. I will have to purchase a few lenses, but not a whole new kit, if I stay with Nikon, and yes I try to avoid changing lenses wherever possible and I do not use many zooms, since most are too slow and those that are not are bloody pricey. Obsolescence is a big factor for me! I don't fancy shelling out anywhere up to $35,000.00 every couple of years for new camera bodies and neither do I want them in the shop rather than in the bag. I am also interested in the fact that industry insiders are saying that current digital files equal or exceed the resolving power of current lenses and therefore the bigger is better syndrome is no longer valid. Hence, why exceed X number of mega pixels, if you are paying for resolution you can't use?
I definitely agree that Photoshop is a huge part of the learning curve. I am an excellent darkroom technician, frankly I love it, but Photoshop gives me a migraine. I'm learning, but thank the stars I have really good people who can do what I need the first time, not the umpteenth time. I will always shoot film and scan if needs be, I prefer the depth and saturation of colour in film. For now, my clients have no problems with film and I have no desire to go to digital capture, so life is good. Unfortunately, I'm not living in Camelot, so at some point I will have to do some digital shooting, and I want to be informed and prepared when that time comes. Which will be this afternoon, with my luck!
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Wm. Richardson
Photojournalist
peterw@journalist.com

[DW Dorken]

Hi Peter:

It really depends on what type of photography you do, what your style is.

Canon makes some great cameras that work really well for some people. Same with Nikon. Some folks love Fuji.

I use one Nikon D2X as primary camera with a D70 as back-up. In the last two years, I've never needed to revert to the D70, and for any big job, I bring a rented D200 as back-up. My gear travels in a Pelican cases. It rarely seems inclement weather.

I owned Nikons and picked up my D70 for lower end editorial jobs and was blown away by what I could do with digital. As a corporate and editorial portraits photographer, digital fit my style far better than my beloved Blad. And the D2X file quality easily met my (and my client's) needs.

I shoot at 100 ISO strobed about 90% of the time and push the ISO to 800 a couple times a year. Personally, I like the look of D2x at 800 ISO, and at 1600, it seems to my eyes to be way better than film ever was. And my clients have raved about the quality.

If I was shooting stills, or PJ, I'd be thinking Canon, because it does handle high ISO better. And it has a much better selection of fast fixed lenses.

David Alan Harvey uses 6 MP D70s for his National Geographic work. He likes the size and Nikon's great TTL flash system. The magazine obviously doesn't have a problem with its quality. http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/n...geographic.com

Look at any football game or White House news conference, and you see lots of white lenses. Few black ones.

A couple years ago, the NPPA magazine photographer of the year used a pair of Olympus hi-end "point-and-shoots" to capture his award-winning images.

But it's like buying shoes. I like size 8 1/2 Converse high cuts - others don't feel the same way.

Hit Vistek or Film Plus, rent a camera (or three) for the weekend and play with them. See what best suits your needs.

David
DW Dorken Photographer,
Toronto, Canada
http://www.dwdorken.com

[Peter Wm. Richardson]

Hi David:
I should clarify, I don't shoot hard news any longer, or a least very, very infrequently, so like you I rarely, if ever push film. My standard is ISO 100 shot at ISO 125, so strictly from that stand point, Canon holds no edge for me. Also, I have most of the fast primes I need, though not all are auto focus, so again that is not a factor to promote Canon. This doesn't mean I won't find other compelling reasons to switch, but those two aren't ones.
I liked the NG reference, since I have shot for the Society. The D70 images seem reasonably nice in print, but I wonder about other uses, or large prints.I certainly agree with Nikon's TTL Flash prowess, it makes my life easier all the time when augmenting the available darkness. :-) The white lens thing I'm aware of, but I also know that a lot of those shooters went for the full frame argument and the. now, 16 MP file size. I'm still not convinced that, that, is right. One thing here though is that I do shoot a lot of wide angle work and APS does make that really tiresome. I do find it interesting that my favourite German manufacturer went with 7MP for the ultimate Leica M8.

I think you are right with the shoe analogy, it is largely a matter of taste in the end. I have borrowed Nikon gear and may rent Canon in the future, although that isn't affordable any more. It's amazing what $10,000 bodies and current insurance costs have done to rentals. Incidentally, one of my most productive images, was taken with my point and shoot glove box camera. I never underestimate the abilities of those things any more!
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Wm. Richardson
Photojournalist
peterw@journalist.com

[DW Dorken]

Hi Peter:

If you're mainly interested in people pictures, Chicago shooter Will Crockett (http://shootsmarter.com) did a survey of the best DSLR portrait cameras. He shot portraits of a model using the same Tamron lens and pulled digi prints from a bunch of cameras and displayed them. Pros choose their favs, without knowing what camera shot them. 1DSII and D2X got their respective butts kicked (and Canon's Cadillac really sucked). Canon 5D was best, followed closely by Fuji S3 and D200.

I've used the Fuji. Brilliant skin tones, great sensor in a $1.99 camera body. S5 is in a D200 body, but has had mixed reviews.

Glad I already have a camera I love. I think the worst thing about digital is deciding what to buy. I almost bought a Kodak 14N. Waited, waited for D2X. Now, don't think you can go too far wrong. There are some really fine options available.

Nikon is allegedly coming out with a D3H that could rock your world. If it is anywhere near the 1DIII, I'd be taking a good look at it...but vaporware always looks amazing.

I seriously thought of switching, but had a few Nikon lenses I liked, so I stayed with the brand. And I started off life as a Canon FD user. Both systems work. But with a bag full of Nikons, I don't think you'd be unhappy with a D200 and an SB-800 or two.

But the big thing is, jump into the water. You won't be making a bad decision.
(Unless you buy a used 14N).

DWD

[dan]

I'm using a Canon 1dsmk11 and a 5D and I'm very, very happy shooting full frame. I owned 2 or 3 20d's, 2 10d's, and whatever came before the 10d, maybe 2 bodies before the 10d... All I can say is FULL FRAME BABY! and with fast primes!! The 5D is so cheap and so great I can't believe it. I use it mostly when I travel because its so light and the files are great. The 1dsmk11 you can hammer nails with and all those pixels are sometimes necessary. High iso with the 5D is just remarkable. Match the 5D with a f1.4 lens and you can shoot anywhere and get fatastic results. I love that about the canons. If you go to my web site: www.dancallis.com then go to 'random acts' and the last 3 pics were shot in africa in january '07 with the 5D and 35mm 1.4 at 1200 or 1600 iso. There are no street lights there either! The inside stuff just a low watt bare bulb here or there. VERY low light.

dan

[Peter Wm. Richardson]

Hi David:
I'm not about to jump into anything, not for a while, but I have to say your repertoire of links are worth their weight in gold!! I do not do only people, but they are a big part of my work so this last insight is exceptional. Nevertheless, if I stay with Nikon it would be either the D2S or the new one, which I have also heard is coming and probably before the end of the summer, if my sources are correct. More than any of the others, I'd like to get my hands on an M8 for a couple of weeks. Leica rangefinder glass is soooo fine and the M-Series cameras have never disappointed me, in over 30 years. Still, there is always the question of wide angles. One thing for certain, I will buy two or three SB 800's if I stay with Nikon. They are a sweet unit!
It's funny about the Fuji, I've heard so much about it and always the same things, great sensor, cheap body. Another one people are talking about is the Panasonic. You are definitely right about the hardest decision being what to choose. No matter, If I have to decide I'll know between now and the fall.
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Wm.` Richardson
Photojournalist
peterw@journalist.com

[Peter Wm. Richardson]

Hi Dan:
Thanks for the insight. You are my first Canon response and although I know most of what you are saying, I thank you. The graphic examples from Africa are great by the way! I do like the idea of full frame, for the wide angle choices, but there would have to be a lot more advantages before I could justify the change over financially. Replacing what I have with top line Canon is over $50,000 and I don't have access to that kind of coin. Also, I'm an old dog, my style is based on fast prime lenses and super saturated colours and I don't want to start over again, not at my age. So, if I switch I have to buy the whole package, not just a body or two and a couple of zooms. Unless it is Leica, I don't really want to be carrying two different systems. Still, the jury is still out and I have lots of time to compare and ponder.
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Wm. Richardson
Photojournalist
peterw@journalist.com

[DW Dorken]

Dan:

Will Crockett's survey concluded that 1DSII wasn't the best for skintone. I've got some 1DS portraits in my book. If that's what they call inferior skin, I'd take it. I think the current quality range in cameras is from very, very good to excellent.

And I too love a full frame DSLR. If I was making the leap today, the 5D would be very tempting. But I also like keeping the overhead low.

(Great website BTW.)

DWD