The Digital Switch

[twkong2003]

I have read a lot of rave review about the 20D and I am considering should I make the plunge into the digital world. I am currently shooting film, and still a die hard on analogue. I have seen a lot of progress made by DSLR, espcially from the reviews I read on the 20D, but I am also skeptical about the fast pace of changes in this format. For ex&le, the 10D was replaced by the 20D in only a short span of time and thast keeps me wondering when they are going to replace the 20D, maybe end of this year? This is the fear I had that kind of put me back from making the switch. I was just wondering if any of you guys out that who make the switch ever felt like you are constantly trying to keep pace with the replacement. To me, that's a lot of money to keep up with newer models once every year. Unlike analogue cameras, they are only replaced once every 4-5 years or longer. Care to convince me to make the switch? Appreciate any input. Thanks.

Tim

 

[honda]

Hi,Tim, It took a lot to convince me to change-
I first looked at and tried out -the 10D,I took a
Compact flash card along to a dealer who stocks canon and he let me take some shots inside and outside of shop-I was not to impressed with 10D-
Did same with 20D-WOW!-I am very impressed.-I decided to buy it-I was worried like you about another model turning up soon-But thought Well 20D does all I want it to do Why wait-You can wait for ever if you worry about next model--This applies to-Cars-any electrical gear etc,
I have been Photographer for nearly 50years-It took a lot to convince me to change to digital.
I would not like to go back to film now.
Regards---dorg--(Gordon)

 

[uj78]

WOW I had no idea I had to replace my analog cameras ever 4-5 years LOL I haven't got a single analog camera that new!! and the average age of my 40+ camera is about 35 years I feel NO desire to replace upgrade switch any of them. I MIGHT add a Digital SLR but the optics are so expensive I would rather just use my 14 Canon FD bodies and 40+ FD mount lenses and scan those I want to print at home or post on the web. Other wise my 25 year old slide projector looks mighty good.

 

[fotografz]

Constant upgrades are marketing phenomenon, not a photographic one. If you investigate the capabilities of any given camera against your needs and standards, and determine that it meets those criteria, then get it and ignore the marketing hype
designed to make you second guess your own decisions.

If it doesn't meet your criteria, then wait, because maybe the next round of digital innovations will meet your needs. Or the next one after that. In the meantime, film isn't going away any time soon.

I've participated in constant digital upgrades, and can tell you all the hype and even user accolades are making mountains out of molehills. The advancements have all been marginal except for Canon's jump to full frame sensors in their high end pro cameras, which in turn cost more than an arm and leg.

If you want to leap into the bubbling cauldron of digital capture in order to learn about it, just get a nice D30 for $400 or $500. and learn on that. Then sell it if you don't like it. Can't lose much that way. Someone else already took the big loss on it.

I shot this with a D30, and it's a major crop from the original full sized image. What's more important with digital is learning post work in PhotoShop.

 

[twkong2003]

Thanks guys for all your reponses. I know it is a hard decision to make. BTW, I only take photography as a hobby and not a pro. That is why I am looking at the 20D instead of the 1DsMkII. I understand that the top of the line pro cameras usually last a fairly long time b4 they are replaced or upgraded to the next model. I saw some s&le pictures taken with the 1DsMkII and they are just spectecular. I got the picture that you can never and should never try to "catch" up with newer models but finding out that some months down the line after you made your purchase, a new/replacement model is launch, is quite a bitter pill to swallow. Its like you have been short change. I guess this mind set applies to a lot of people, whether it s DSLR or a mobile phone. BTW, Mark(Uj78), I was not implying that one should replace their analogue camera once every 4-5 years, I am simplying saying that the life cycle of analogue cameras usually last for about 4-5 years or longer before being replaced by a new model. I had my camera for about 12 years now and I'm still not looking for a replacement yet.
Tim

 

[Jim]

I, too have been in photography for over 50 years. I even worked in a camera store for 15 years. I have done some pro work, but I just shoot as a hobby an compete in camera club. I was out of the camera club scene for about 20 years, and just started up again last year. I had purchased a Contax G2, but when I found that most of the photographers in the clubs in my area were now shooting digital, I decided to switch. I use a Canon Pro1 but might get the 20D later this year. I would keep the Pro1 as a backup camera.

The reason that new models keep appearing on the market is the same reason new computers/TV sets/and any other electronics products change - the manufacturers want you to keep spending money. Of course, there are always new features as well as the latest technology, but a photo taken with a 1930's vintage Leica by a good photographer would still be a good photo...

Don't get caught up in the marketing plans of the manufacturers - just get the equipment you need to do the type of photography you want to do. If your plans change, then get the additional equipment.

Marc is right - learn Photshop!

Jim

 

[cyclist2]

> Very interesting responses. I've been shooting seriously since the Nikon F came out in the 1960's. Went digital first with a Sony that writes to floppies. Got several versions of the CoolPix. Got a D30 and loved it. Got a 10D > and also still have that as backup and love it. Got a 20D and sold it. Used that money to help pay for a 1Ds, which is a super camera. What works for some doesn't work for others. The 20D was not for me. I won't go into > details.

 

[bobbytan]

My first digital camera was the Sony F707 and I got hooked on digital instantly. About a year later, I upgraded to the Canon 10D, and what a big jump it was in terms of image quality.

I pre-ordered the 20D when it was announced (very confident that it would be a significant improvement over the 10D) and I love everything about 20D - especially the speed.

I will probably upgrade again if Canon replaces the 20D with something even better. It's a price I am willing to pay for progress.

 

[charliem]

Bobby I'm with you. Left Nikon & bought the dig Rebel, bought the 20D and gave the rebel to my wife. I have never had a camera this good

 

[uj78]

So are you going to be buying the new Canon 16mp digital as it certinly is better then your 20D. Or do you mena you will up grade when the better camera costs the same as a 20D? I'm so happy i just plod away with my 20-30 year old Canon FD bodies so much simpler.

 

[twkong2003]

No Mark, I am not buying the 16mp pro camera, cost too much for someone who is only taking photography as a hobby. I am still using my 12 year old film canon eos500. I was just figuring out if I should make the switch to digital, which seem to be the way to go for most people I read in this and other forum. Like I said, I was unsure if the move is right as I notice the short life cycle of most digicam. I don't think I would ever give up film.

 

[fotografz]

Analog cameras were no different. SLRs started with either no internal meter, or a cumbersome add on for TTL metering. Films were slower, and fast ones almost unusable. Lenses had to be stopped down for metering and shooting. Motor drives were huge contraptions. To get the most from what you had to work with took a steep learning curve in the darkroom.

Then came more streamlined designs, true TTL metering with auto stop down aperture lenses. Then TTL flash, and the films got better, especially the faster emulsions. Then AF hit, and some makers launched whole new lens mounts making everything before it obsolete (if you applied today's logic). Even motor drives became internalized right into the camera. Darkroom work remained a steep learning curve.

So what's new other than the time frame? If a Canon FD system works for you, use it. If a Canon D20 works for you, use it ... and don't worry if the next thing might make it obsolete.

If you're worried about it as an investment, camera gear is the last place I'd put my money. The value is in using it.

 

[deshojo]

Totally agree with that Marc

I use a 20D for wildlife, surfing etc, where the 1.6 crop makes the phenomenal Canon 300mm f2.8 IS into a 480mm f2.8 - WOW! Couple that with very good quality 400 ISO (and useable 800) and it's like a dream come true. I can finally get shots that have been difficult for years due to low light levels, slow film and small aperture telephotos.

However, I still use my 30yr old Contax RTS and a 10yr old RTSIII for landscape, for the superb Zeiss wide angle lenses. New technology hasn't reduced their quality. Horses for courses...

Get what suits you, use it to the best of your ability and enjoy it!

 

[Jim]

Sometimes it is fun to go back to using older cameras. Technology iscgreat, but we forget the techniques we used before technology automated photography. Shutter speed - f stop - focus; still the basic elements to capture the image. The rest comesc from the photographers skills.

The equipment is not important as it works!

Jim

 

[bobbytan]

Mark - the 1-series bodies are a different league altogether. It would be like comparing a medium format to a 35mm camera. The 1Ds Mk II cost $8,000 whereas the 20D cost "only" $1,500. So, one would normally upgrade from a dRebel or 10D to a 20D ... or a 1D Mk II or 1Ds to a 1Ds Mk II.

Jim - I agree with you to a certain extent. But if you are used to shooting with analog SLRs on manual mode most of the time, I think you will probably still remain a control freak - and use manual settings rather than the fully auto/program mode. I shoot on manual most of the time with my 20D.

 

[Jim]

Bobby - I agree about being a "control freak". I do use some of the automation, but usually shoot in aperature priority mode. I use manual mode when I feel the camera is making the wrong decision. I also focus manually when necessary.

It took me a while to get used to automatic cameras, and I am still not trusting them all the time.

I like my Pro1, but have been thinking of getting a 20D. I can't get one yet as most of the stores here are out of stock and units coming in are already sold.

Jim

 

[bobbytan]

Jim - try getting a used 20D. I have seen the 20D on the Photo.Net classified pages and FM's buy-and-sell section. If you don't need the speed of the 20D, the 10D is exceptional value because of the price drop.

 

[Jim]

Bobby - I got to hold a 20D at my local camera shop on Friday. They got 2 in, but both are sold.

I is a fast camera - the startup and autofocus are very fast. I left the store impressed, but on my way to work I realized the LCD screen is only useable for viewing shots after they are taken. I use my LCD screen on my Pro1 for closeup work.

So, I probably will stay with the Pro1 for now. I don't want to spend the money just now anyway.

Jim

 

[agp]

All digital SLRs use the same idea. There is no point whatever in taking a picture looking at the LCD screen, even if it were possible. You are looking through the lens anyway, unlike on other digital cameras. The LCD is just used for checking the picture after it is taken. Close ups are no problem, as there is no parallax, and you see exactly what will be recorded.

Buy with confidence.

Andrew >

 

[Jim]

Andrew,

There is no point in using the LCD screen in taking pictures?

I use the LCD on the Pro1 for all my close-up work of small flowers and anything else closecto the ground. I also use it 60-70% of the time when the camera is on a tripod. There is no parallax with the LCD panel, as you are viewing EXACTLY what the lens is seeing. Also, the image is EXACTLY what the sensor is capturing.

This in not true, of course, with SLRs. Optical viewfinders on all SLR cameras, film or digital, are not 100% accurate. (Many of the older SLR's - 60s & 70s vintage - had viewfinders that would show the approx. image area of the Kodak cardboard slide mount. Some even had the round corners.) Today's cameras are probably closer to 100%.

I was thinking of replacing my Pro1 with the 20D, but now realize I will need both cameras, so I will get the 20D sometime this spring or summer.

Jim