Choosing a camera to shoot film now, digital later

[threebythree]

Greetings,

I've been going around the houses for a couple of years (!) now debating which technical camera I should buy to shoot film now, with the option to add a digital back at a later date. My points for consideration are:

1. I will be shooting architecture/landscapes AND products / still life in the studio

2. I would like to add a digital back at some point in the future, so need a future-proof system

3. I have considered the Fuji 680

4. Are older LF lenses high enough resolution for modern digital backs, or would I need new glass when I bought a back?

5. My mind is blown at the amount of choice - so I have focussed on KEH.com and their offerings to keep me sane

6. I currently own a Canon system with TS-E lenses

7. A folding camera is not as versatile as a studio camera (rear movements etc) - am I right?

8. I am therefore considering: Horseman 450, Toyo 45, Sinar

9. My budget is around $500 at most

Can anybody help me out of the rabbit hole I'm in?

Many thanks

[Bob Salomon]

Not really. An analog film camera is not precise enough for high end digital. But a digital view camera can easily do roll film as well as digital. However, digital view cameras are 6x9cm not 4x5.
Same with the lenses. The requirements for high end digital lenses are very different then those for analog view camera work. A search of this forum will find several threads detailing the differences in requirements for the lenses and the cameras.

The short answer is that you can use a view camera and analog lenses for digital work but you will not be able to get the quality the digital back is capable of. And you will not find a digital view camera for close to $500.00.

If you are lucky enough to live near a good digital view camera dealer why not go visit them and see for yourself what can and can't be done and what you actually need to do what you hope to do. That will save you a lot of money if you find that you went the wrong way originally.

[Bill_1856]

There's almost nothing that you can do with a LF camera that you can't do with your Canon and TS-E lenses. If your pictures aren't good enough, then changing cameras won't help.

[Bob Salomon]

There's almost nothing that you can do with a LF camera that you can't do with your Canon and TS-E lenses. If your pictures aren't good enough, then changing cameras won't help.

Try doing 3-point perspective with a TS-E lens.

[Richard Johnson]

If your budget is only $500 then which decade will you get the digital back?

You understand that an older digital back will be outperformed by a modern full-frame 35mm-sized SLR which is why you can find the backs that cost $40,000 in 2004 for practically nothing nowadays... they have to be depreciated within 3-4 years by which time a $3000 DSLR will match or outperform them. The medium format digital backs are not consumer electronics that follow a declining price curve because the market is so small... you will never see a "cheap" MFDB.

And yes there is old camera advertising that mentions you can use a digital back on a view camera but those ads were written back in the Leaf Color Wheel era (1994) when getting a 10-mp file was a big deal. Nobody competent is going to stick a modern MFDB on a $500 coarse focusing view camera and analog lenses, it's like using wooden wheels on a Porsche.

[Kirk Gittings]

Try doing 3-point perspective with a TS-E lens.

Define what you mean by "doing a 3PP"? This is a common image with 3PP and it can be done with no movements at all on any camera including an iPhone.

[Bob Salomon]

Define what you mean by 3PP? This is a common image with 3PP and it can be done with no movements at all.

The most common use was in product photography where the top, the front and one side of a product are shown and all lines are not converging. So the picture was taken from above and to one side of the object.

Your example does not show the roof top and the building is exhibiting keystoning as the sides are not parallel to each other.

[Kirk Gittings]

The most common use was in product photography where the top, the front and one side of a product are shown and all lines are not converging. So the picture was taken from above and to one side of the object.

Your example does not show the roof top and the building is exhibiting keystoning as the sides are not parallel to each other.

You are using a different definition than I have learned. Caption for the above image from WP:

The Palazzo del Lavoro in Mussolini’s Esposizione Universale Roma (EUR) complex south of Rome, photographed in 3-point perspective. All three axes are oblique to the picture plane; the three vanishing points are at the zenith, and on the horizon to the right and left.

Could you show an example? Because as I understand your description it would be no problem with a t/s lens simply positioning the camera above, leveling it and then shifting the lens down? But I have never been a product photographer.

[SergeiR]

If your budget is only $500 then which decade will you get the digital back?

You understand that an older digital back will be outperformed by a modern full-frame 35mm-sized SLR which is why you can find the backs that cost $40,000 in 2004 for practically nothing nowadays... they have to be depreciated within 3-4 years by which time a $3000 DSLR will match or outperform them. The medium format digital backs are not consumer electronics that follow a declining price curve because the market is so small... you will never see a "cheap" MFDB.

Nope. It won't. I compared them side by side quite a number of times. Ancient by now Mamiya ZD 22mp old back would still outdo anything that Canon or Nikon dSLR can throw at it (unless you like high ISO).
Of course it won't happen with ones for 500$ - those are barely large enough to cover 35mm frame (Valeo back and tiny Kodak ones)

[SergeiR]

There's almost nothing that you can do with a LF camera that you can't do with your Canon and TS-E lenses. If your pictures aren't good enough, then changing cameras won't help.

While changing camera won't help - and i totally agree with it.

TS-E + Canon still won't give you decent shot at hour(s) long exposures. Wont give you same quality of shadow-light gradients as larger format. Simple laws of physics, which can not be fought - reproduction from larger medium always would be smoother. Also you can't do rear standard movements. Only front.

And of course - you won't be able to have as much fun