still using digital?

[uniB]

Having just started with this LF lark I was wondering...

how many of you who moved from digital to LF are still using their digital SLRs much? Is is the case that once you get properly into LF photography the digital gets left at home or do you combine the two?

Obviously there are situations where LF is impractical but where the LF is used mainly, for landscape or studio work for example, is the digital still getting a look in?

[Peter De Smidt]

Yes, I often use my Dslr to scout an area before setting up a view camera. Since I mainly use BW for the big cameras, sometimes I end up preferring the color images for the Dslr. It really just depends on the scene. Note, though, that I use an LF camera for years before I ever bought a digital camera.

[roteague]

I rarely shoot digital (Nikon D200). I have a Nikon 35mm film camera for those times I don't shoot LF.

[Sheldon N]

I have both a DSLR (Canon 5D) and a 4x5 camera. I started in 35mm film, then 35mm digital, then 4x5.

I still shoot the 5D for all my "everyday" shooting. The camera lives within arms reach at home, I typically shoot/edit hundreds of frames a month, and it is the camera I would keep if I had to give up all the others. It's incredibly flexible - ISO 3200 and a f/1.4 lens will let you shoot in near dark conditions with excellent results, the file size, color and quality are exemplary, and it's an effortless tool to work with. I use it primarily for family, event, and portriature photography.

However, I find that when I want to shoot landscape I always go for the 4x5. The control over the image, my enjoyment of the process, and the end results all exceed that of the 5D.

One certainly can't replace the other, but I find myself choosing the 4x5 over the 5D whenever there's an overlap in functionality.

[Marko]

A camera that stays at home/in the car takes no pictures. DSLR is my everyday camera, LF is there for special occassions and relaxation.

[Brian Ellis]

All the time, in fact quite a bit more digital (Canon 5D) than LF in the last year or so.

[Jiri Vasina]

As a digital tool, I have K-M Dimage A200 (not exactly a dSLR per se), that I started using prior to LF. When I moved to LF, I almost stopped shooting with the A200. I only use it for everyday snaps of my daughter (2y old now) and snaps like that.

If I can't use LF, I'd take Pentax 6x7cm with a selection of films - fast/slow, color and BW. Works for me much better than the digital... :)

[Daniel_Buck]

in the past month and a 1/2 or so since i have been shooting 4x5, I haven't touched my digital.

If I were able to easily take both of them in one backpack, I would probably bring the digital along (1Ds2 + lenses is heavy and takes up room!) but so far I honestly haven't missed it! But then again I have only been shooting landscapes, where the 4x5 shines over the digital.

[Chris Strobel]

I haven't even touched my 5d at all this year.Used the 20d twice, but mostly I have been playing with a Canon A640 p&s on a nodal head doing multi-row panoramas.Great fun!Here is another angle of the same meat grinder posted a few weeks ago.Twelve A640 images combined in AutoPano Pro.

http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/82925098/original.jpg

[kev curry]

Wicked shot!

[cyrus]

I use digital for color - but nowdays I don't even bother with a DSLR. The point and shoots are now capable of 10mp and small enought to pop into a pocket as a backup.

[JPlomley]

Sold the 1DsMII for a Mamiya 7 rangefinder to shoot B&W street photography and an Arca Swiss 4x5 for landscape work. Both are superior tools to the 1DsMII for these applications. Will probably never go back to digital again unless Fuji stops film production altogether, or I win a free DSLR. Uumm, on second thought, I would sell the free DSLR and buy another Rodenstock lens :-0

[Scott Knowles]

After retiring in 2005 I added both digital and LF in succession and use all three, my 35mm film (Minolta and Canon 1N) and digital (Canon 5D) and my LF system, always taking 2 of them whenever I go so I have choices. If the scenes or my thinking isn't there for LF I still have my 35mm film and/or digital system.

[Daniel_Buck]

Scott, when you bring your LF and one of your other cameras, how do you back them?

[Scott Knowles]

Scott, when you bring your LF and one of your other cameras, how do you back them?

I don't understand the question, "back them?" If you mean pack them, each of the three systems (Minolta, Canon and LF) are in separate camera bags (Domke F3, ditto, and Lowe Pro AW, respectively). I carry one to two tripods with their own ballheads. The only downside is carrying two bags and tripods doesn't go very far, less than two miles. When I hike with them I use a Sundog Art Wolfe backpack with the LF and Canon and fewer lenses. And as I get older the day hikes are getting shorter, to 4-6 miles round trip. Such is life, and I'm just glad I can still walk with the stuff.

[gr82bart]

I've used my DSLR as a really expensive and fancy light meter and substitute for Polaroid film.

Regards, Art.

[Frank Petronio]

I shoot differently with the dSLR than the 4x5, but I don't value one over the other. The dSLR really lets you shoot a lot and explore, and sometimes it will help me fing the best potential 4x5 shot.

[riooso]

I just bought a DSLR for myself for family stuff and to nudge my wife to photography. She has been shooting film but the turnaround time and feedback make it harder for her to get better. I have found for herself and me that the digital is great to try new things and see how to translate them to LF. My wife has a different eye than I do and she like photography, sooooo.... she packs her own camera into the Sierra's :D

Richard

[uniB]

Do you find this a quite accurate way of working, I was considering doing this myself, although getting totally familiar with my lightmeter might be a better idea in the long run. Do you produce an accurately metered digital and transpose the settings or just use it as a spot meter?



I've used my DSLR as a really expensive and fancy light meter and substitute for Polaroid film.

Regards, Art.

[Gary Tarbert]

They are such different beasts ,I am going on a shoot tomorrow morning will take only
the digital and will use the camera as a preview tool i guess, and will take some keepers at focal lenghts i can't touch with LF,If i like the location i will go back with my LF for some serious stuff!!
I also use my dslr for happy snaps of my 20 month old son i love portraits with relatively shallow DOF so compacts don't suit .
I also shoot some very high magnification macro work of subjects less than 10mm long so the dslr is more suitable for this type of work.cheers Gary

[eddie]

i have a very old 2.0MP PS canon that gets used for posting stuff on the web. mainly stuff i am selling. i use a film 35mm for all else. when iam not shooting LF i use MF and my 35mm nikon.

eddie

[Frank Petronio]

You can judge exposure with the dSLR using the Histrogram, although I needed to compensate about half a stop darker or change the ISO based on film tests.

I pretty much use my D80 and an occassional Polaroid at this point.

[BrianShaw]

Gee... maybe I need to think about getting a digital camera!

[David A. Goldfarb]

I bought a Coolpix 990 around 7 years ago mainly for archiving documents, and I pretty much still use it for that purpose and for photographing things that I want to sell on the internet. I also used it for digitizing images I couldn't otherwise scan, and I don't use it for that as much. It mostly lives on a copy stand.

When I got it, I tried it out for some vacation snaps and just had reason to go back to them after not looking at them for five or six years and discovered that many of the files were corrupted, fortunately not the ones I needed. I probably have a backup somewhere.

I've occasionally thought of replacing it with a DSLR, but it hasn't been a priority. I'd rather spend the money on things like having lenses cammed for my 2x3 Technika.

[Baxter Bradford]

Just recently started making my first digital images with a Leica M8 and some Zeiss lenses. It is significantly more portable than my 5x4 and I use it for Photo-library type images where it is easier for me to get them to a finished standard compared to the Mamiya 7 which it has replaced.

I also appreciate the limited depth of field for portraiture etc

Whenever the light is good and/or I want to make a 'proper' image, it is the Ebony all the way.

[Kirk Gittings]

Virtually all of my magazine architecture work is now digital DSLR. There are things I can do in digital that are either all but impossible or not time/cost effective with film. Such as selectively merging two different exposures (not talking about HDR merge) or two different color balances or emailing tests as we are shooting them in NM to an art director in LA.

[roteague]

Gee... maybe I need to think about getting a digital camera!

I have one, I don't find having one a big deal. However, I'm getting a new Nikon F6 very soon. I still haven't lost my love for film.

[roteague]

Such as selectively merging two different exposures (not talking about HDR merge) or two different color balances

Both of which you can do with film, although probably not within the time frame you want to turn the images around in.

[uniB]

it's quite interesting to hear quite a few people are using 35mm film SLRs, but I s'pose if you haven't bought into digital (and it is expensive if you want a worthwhile camera) and you're happy with your printing techniques it makes sense.

[roteague]

it's quite interesting to hear quite a few people are using 35mm film SLRs, but I s'pose if you haven't bought into digital (and it is expensive if you want a worthwhile camera) and you're happy with your printing techniques it makes sense.

Perhaps, but I've got about 2K into my D200 system (lens, extra batteries, battery pack, CF cards, etc). The techniques I use to print from it (which I rarely do) is the same I use for transparencies. The medium I start with is different, and film does take a bit more work. For example, it takes me about 20 minutes to do a good scan of a 35mm slide (16 bit, 5400dpi, 16x sampling), which gives me a file of just a little over 200 MB. Then I have to resize the file, because it is too big in most instances (I rarely print over 16x20 out of 35mm).

[Kirk Gittings]

I did it on film for three years, but it is not cost or time effective, in terms of shooting or prepress prep for magazine work.


Both of which you can do with film, although probably not within the time frame you want to turn the images around in.

[roteague]

I did it on film for three years, but it is not cost or time effective, in terms of shooting or prepress prep for magazine work.

I understand, there is always time/effort constraints when doing commercial work.

[Daniel_Buck]

I don't understand the question, "back them?" If you mean pack them, each of the three systems (Minolta, Canon and LF) are in separate camera bags (Domke F3, ditto, and Lowe Pro AW, respectively). I carry one to two tripods with their own ballheads. The only downside is carrying two bags and tripods doesn't go very far, less than two miles. When I hike with them I use a Sundog Art Wolfe backpack with the LF and Canon and fewer lenses. And as I get older the day hikes are getting shorter, to 4-6 miles round trip. Such is life, and I'm just glad I can still walk with the stuff.
Thanks for your reply! Yes, I meant pack, not back. Typo, my mistake :)

[Matus Kalisky]

I do use digital as well. I got my Minolta 7D prior to Tachihara. Nowadays if I shoot LF the 7D goes inevitably along as it serves as a composing tool (28/2 for my fujinon 125 and 50/1.4 for my Caltar 210) and especiall as a lightmeter, though sometimes it is too much weight. And I do have some really nice photos taken with it. It is nice to have more options.

[Ted Harris]

I stopped shooting 35mm film (Contax SLR and G and Leica M) several years ago because there was just too much money tied up in equipment that got little use and, seeing the handwriting on the wall, was happy to dump the gear before the market totally collapsed. Over time I used an Olympus E series, then a Fuji FinePix S2 and now a FinePix S5 DSLR. Like others I find hat there are things I can do with the S2 that I can't do with LF (and vice versa of course). I shoot mostly color and I also find that, for the most part, the output from the S2 far exceeds anything I was ever able to produce from 35mm transparency film in terms of my ability to print at sizes over 11x14. In a few weeks I will be spending a half day shooting hummingbirds, something I could not do with LF and for that matter, something that will be much easier with the high shutter speeds available in the S2.

[David A. Goldfarb]

In a few weeks I will be spending a half day shooting hummingbirds, something I could not do with LF and for that matter, something that will be much easier with the high shutter speeds available in the S2.

Really? 1/4000 sec. is probably too slow. I don't do hummers, but the people who do are usually using two or three low-power flash units to stop the wings, if that's what you're after.

[jetcode]

digital is SO convenient. I shoot in both worlds and love both worlds. There is nothing like a gorgeous neg or transparency in LF, there is nothing like the sheer convenience of digital not to mention quality image generation. I have a Canon 5D with some great primes and I just purchased a Shen-Hao 4x10 because I can't live without gorgeous neg's. I use a digital output process because while I envy those who can print like masters in the darkroom I am not nor will ever be a member of that crowd. What I can do in PS however is powerful and repeatable.

Joe

[gr82bart]

Do you find this a quite accurate way of working, I was considering doing this myself, although getting totally familiar with my lightmeter might be a better idea in the long run. Do you produce an accurately metered digital and transpose the settings or just use it as a spot meter?It's like any other tool. Once you 'know' the quirks of your DSLR, I find it to be accurate. I had to do a few tests in several lighting conditions, to find out the correlation between my DSLR settings and my 'real' camera settings. Sort of a calibration, if you will.

What I like about the DSLR is that I can actually see the composition - well sort of similar composition. Mine also has the zoom in feature which is nice. I should explain that for certain situations I use the DSLR to validate the light meter, especially when I'm using the LM in incident mode. As for transposing the settings, all the time, which is the benefit of the DSLR. you can adjust to the point where you just 'copy' the settings over and voila! Image is exposed the way you wanted.

Regards, Art.

[audioexcels]

Digital is wonderful for blasting off a ton of shots and having fun with it when it comes to taking shots of family/friends/etc. For architecture/landscape/etc. things that interest me, I don't find a point in using the DSLR w/exception of say sunsets where you want to take about 200 images of it and capture about 10 solid ones. There's a means for both, but in the end, I don't see a point with digital w/exception of convenience.

[George Losse]

If I worked in color or with a deadline, I'd work with a DSLR. Since I don't do either, I don't own a DSLR. Then again I haven't shot much with 35mm since High School.

[Doug Dolde]

I have a Coolpix 4500 I bought used from B&H for $159. Good for snaps and such but when I want to make a real photograph I use my 4x5.

[audioexcels]

I still think a good 35mm transparency taken with say a Contax G or Leica M system with a Nikon 5000 scan will compete with even the higher end digital setup...then again, the Nikon 5000 along with the prices still going for the analog gear wipes away the costs of a Canon 5D w/some nice Zeiss/Rollei HFT primes.

[gregstidham]

Using a DSLR is like eating at McDonald's, cheap, easy, and available everywhere. Eventually after eating long enough at McDonald's, one may decided that cheap, easy, available everywhere is best and not even remember the better stuff they used to eat.

[Robert Hughes]

I just finished up a series of 30 photographs of historical Georgetown doorways and gardens taken with my cell phone camera. As each picture is smaller than post card size (I've printed them out as diptychs onto 8 1/2 x 11 inkjet paper) I am not as concerned about their fine detail as the overall image.

Two problems with cellphone cameras: 1) they have much less dynamic range than Ektachrome (highlights, sky and sunny areas tend toward blank white), and 2) they're hard to frame with any more than a general guess - no tripod stand mounts. With some judicious Photoshopping they can turn out OK.

Today I did penance, and shot a half dozen 4x5 Provia chromes. They look pretty good, too.

[uniB]

I'm often slightly upset that my cell phone (that sounds very strange in the UK - mobile phone) seems to come up with more dynamic range and acceptable metering than my top end dSLR it amazes me that such low end cameras can create such reasonable images.

Sounds like an interesting project you've been up to!