DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is 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. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Will we ever see a digital body for our Manual Focus lenses

Matt,

Congratulations on the birth of your son! I'm right behind you in that my son and first child is due in January.

I keep looking at DSLR's so that I can take tons of pictures of him after he is born, but then part of me says shoot all of it on film with the Contax cameras and Zeiss lenses I already own and know, so I don't miss any shots during the early learning curve.

Any suggestions guys, specifically for photography of the baby and his mom?
 
I like the gradual tonal change from brightness to darkness on his( well, not named yet) face. This is captured easily by 85 1.2 even at large aperture.

''Digital also produces very clean images, which suits certain subjects. Again, wildlife shots in particular seem to show finer detail better without the grain of film. Perhaps the regimented structure of the pixels actually helps here.''

Similar comments were made by many authors including those from luminous landscape. I would try it myself. Recently, my friend send me some ISO1600 colour film from Japan, I will try it with the ISO 1600 of my 350D.

I am sure there will not be a decent digital body or back for both N and C-Y lenses. Why do we need a digital body for these equiptments ? I will tell others about my story.

As I have said, I owned 12 C-Y lenses including expensive ones. Do you think I ought to get a decent digital body for these ?

Unlike many others, I am a slow shooter, I definitely do not need the combination of Canon body and Canon lenses.

What if Kyocera suddenly resurrect C-Y or N system and produce digital bodies for these ?

I would not buy this body for the following reason. The new body will definitely more expensive than Canon 5D. If I believe 5D is too expensive, why would I buy a Contax digital body.

Digital bodies is in the process of evolution. In my job, I have to show up fine details of the skin. None of the Canon bodies are good enough to show that up. I have demonstrated that scanned film is superior to Canon body to show up fine details. I would believe even the hypothetical Contax body will fall short of the required task. The other option is to buy medium format digital camera and I have not tried yet.

I am sure Canon is great for baby shot but not in my job.

So I brought 350D to cover the less demanding part of my job and leave the important part to scanning.

It seems to me that scanners has stopped to evolve and Hasselblad only marked up prices for them.
 
The newer Imacon scanners are mostly rebadged versions to bring them under the Hassleblad brand name. They have eliminated the entry level scanner and the middle level 848. The 646 replacement is now a bit faster. I can see no change in the 949 replacement.

However, the scan hardware is probably close to maximized, and the evolution will come in firmware and software improvements. This is what has been happening with the MF digital backs also.

For shooting babies it is hard to beat the instant gratification of digital. When my first Grandchild was born last year, I sent my son a 20D (that I was replacing with a 5D), plus a nice mid-range zoom and a 420EX flash so I can get pictures off the internet. They live far away and this is how I can keep in touch.

Far to many opinions about digital and film are formed by looking at small compressed internet images viewed on a projected light computer screen rather than seeing prints which are reflected light. Film images don't do as well when blown up on a computer screen verses what they actually look like printed to size on paper.
 
For all you young electronic shutter snappers, Digital resolution does not equal the quality that I obtain daily with my hasselblad and neither does your little Kyocera Contax toys with their tiny negatives. Dirk, Take me off this stupid whiney boys forum. Take some picture and stop taking about your lousy equipment. Do some work in the dark room and throw away your stupid digital scanners and your advanced photo shop xx. You too will see the light. Not a one of you has taken a picture equal to Adams!I am 87 and still take better photos than any of you will ever hope to take.
 
Wow, Richard, this is quite a statement here... Would you kindly show at least one of your masterpieces? I am just 38 and perhaps not yet wise enough not to have some doubts.
 
Hi Richard,

You keep saying you take better pictures than any of us. How do we know? It is obviously true that the computer cannot show the shot to it's best colour rendition or resolution, but it is great at showing the composition of a picture, so how about you stop whining for a change and post one so we can see your 'par excellance' ability!

While we are at it why don't you follow the advice that has been posted here for stopping emails getting to you, or at 87 years of age are you too wise and stubborn to take advice from mere mortals?

Ansel Adams is not the only great photographer that has lived or is living. There is also you.

ps get a real camera while you are at it, say a 10 x 8, it might make you even better, if that is possible.

Paul
 
Richard,

It must be wonderful to be such a master of photography.
Please don't leave the forum, as I'm sure we can all learn from your astoundingly rich talent.

Such a shame though that in 87 years you still haven't learnt the basics of social behaviour, like civility, politeness and humility (or even the ability to follow simple instructions).
I suppose reaching the zenith of the art world must have been a full time occupation.
 
Tom,

Thanks, and best wishes to you for January.

As for DSLR's, I think the Canon 5D is as good a combination of quality and value as you can get at the moment. And you can still use your Zeiss lenses.

Personally I intend to use both film and digital for my family photographs. I'm still not entirely convinced of the archival nature of digital storage, but I have Kodachrome slides my father took in the 60's, and they are still like new (though most E6 slides are somewhat faded).
 
Well, maybe i am nuts, but I love my ND. Since I have had it I rarely use film. Lots of reasons, and forgive me if i do not get into all that here in this thread. But, my ND won't last forever, and i do not really like the prospect of going back to using my N1 instead. For the time being I am very ok with my ND (and soon my Leica M8 too, which will, i am sure usurp my m6). But when the ND stops working, i want to stay predominantly digital for the many unmentioned reasons
happy.gif
. That means sell all 7 N lenses from 17-400 at massive losses. That's why I hope (forlornly?) that one day in the next 3 years some zeiss/kyocera/a.n.other deal makes for an N mount solution for me.
 
Back
Top