Choosing a camera to shoot film now, digital later

[Richard Johnson]

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)

Well those weren't really available until late 2005 and the actual sold listings on eBay range from $1500 to $3500 with various lenses and accessories. Old 2003-4 Kodak DCS645 backs sold for $2500 or so.

Which is about the same pricing as a D800. Which would you rather have? I haven't done a comparison either but I'd bet on the D800, both cameras used similarly.

[Kirk Gittings]

Many of the top APs worldwide use tech cameras while many use DSLRs. Which you use is frankly much more of a personal decision that a market requirement. I have yet to see a mediocre AP shooting DSLR jump to MF who improved their vision or market presence.

[dsphotog]

For the instances your existing outfit won't suffice, why not shoot on LF film and scan?
That should be within budget.

[analoguey]

It's nearly 3 times your budget, but why not use the Horseman LD* system with your Canon system?
Since your goal is digital anyways?
You'll get all the digital benefit with the Movements of LF?

*thats what the 35mm version is called I think

[Bob Salomon]

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




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.

Look at most advertising photos of a box of cereal.

[Kirk Gittings]

Jeez, this is like having a tooth pulled. Ok, I did-looked at dozens online. Here is a common one:



Explain why a T/S can't do that.

[threebythree]

Hi all - thanks for your comments. To answer the queries and clear up the confusion on both sides:

1. My $500 budget is *just* for the analog camera - not the digi back or a high end digital lens - if I get the work that demands the digital solution, then I will invest (buy or rent) in the lens and the back - I'm looking for a body for now that will last me until that time comes, and I can shoot film until it does.

2. Bob - you said analog cameras and lenses are not precise enough for high end digital and that digital view cameras are 6x9cm? The current Sinar P3 for e.g. is a digital system view camera and it's 4x5? Which digital view cameras are you referring to? I'm not sure I understand fully, but if I pair an IQ180 back with a APO-Digitar lens and put an analog body in between, then don't I have a high end digital view camera? (I understand that I'd need very fine and precise geared movements to get the best out of the system and that a cheap, coarse body won't cut the mustard though, so maybe that excludes most older bodies?).

3. Bill_1856 - this really isn't to do with how 'good' my pictures are or are not. If a future high-end client demands utmost quality and resolution from my files and is willing to pay for it, then my Canon doesn't come close to a current digital back?

4. analoguey - I have considered coupling my dslr with the Horseman or the Cambo X2 / Ultima but to my mind the weakest link would then be the sensor

so - to summarise - is there an affordable technical camera that will allow me to shoot film now, and move to digital (by adding a back and lens) later?

Many thanks

[Bob Salomon]

Jeez, this is like having a tooth pulled. Ok, I did-looked at dozens online. Here is a common one:



Explain why a T/S can't do that.

Here is another with more of the top.

[NickyLai]

so - to summarise - is there an affordable technical camera that will allow me to shoot film now, and move to digital (by adding a back and lens) later?

Many thanks

What ever camera to choose, keep in mind that the back standard must be rigid enough to hold the weight of the digital back firmly (plus the adapter weight if necessary). Some digital back don't like leather bellow.

Camera with the "L" shape standard isn't a good idea for that kind of weight.

[Oren Grad]

2. Bob - you said analog cameras and lenses are not precise enough for high end digital and that digital view cameras are 6x9cm? The current Sinar P3 for e.g. is a digital system view camera and it's 4x5? Which digital view cameras are you referring to? I'm not sure I understand fully, but if I pair an IQ180 back with a APO-Digitar lens and put an analog body in between, then don't I have a high end digital view camera? (I understand that I'd need very fine and precise geared movements to get the best out of the system and that a cheap, coarse body won't cut the mustard though, so maybe that excludes most older bodies?).

A P3 is not a $500 camera. The issue is indeed that the kind of LF camera you're going to find for $500 is not going to have sufficient stability or precision to do an IQ180 + Digitar justice. And unless you're only ever going to use lenses that are long for your digital capture formats, the typical $500 view camera may not have a short enough minimum bellows draw to even focus the lens, to boot.