Bit of advice please: full frame digi or crop digi and film camera?

fontmoss

fontmoss

Messages
1,227
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
Ok this could be a long post.

I've got a fuji s5 (love it) and only had an SLR, digi or film, since just before Christmas. Since then I've become more and more obsessed with photography and love it, carry a camera everywhere. To clarify I dont think new kit will make me any better, my eyes are the most important kit i have but a camera which doesnt get in the way ie allows you to take the shots you visualise would be awesome.

It's no secret I've lusted after a D700 for a while, i just love it-the colours and awesome awesome low light performance just blow me away. There have been lots of pics I tried to get but couldnt because of low light.
But the price tag and lack of skills (see flickr) have been 2 things that put me off, too much kit too soon and not being able to use or justify it.

I was thinking of buying a cheapish film body, fully manual nikon, as a compromise. It would provide that lovely texture I'm after and be a nice contrast to the digi SLR. However, my old work just contacted me to say they owe me £360! So with the money I would have spent on a film camera plus this plus selling all my kit (a body and 2 lenses) I could get a D700 with a 50mm lens. I think.

Ok so the drawbacks- its a lot of dough. I have graduate med school on the horizon (although to be fair a camera even at this price is bit of a drop in the ocean overall)

i'm not a pro. Although Im going to start putting together a folio and try and get some work at the moment and at least for the moment I'm not earning money from pics.

Id probably be down to 1 lens for a while. My sigma wont work on full frame and funds will dictate a fasting period before get a telephoto. I use a short fixed 905 of the time so not the end of the world but longer lens is helpful for portrait stuff.

Um that's it really, I think I'll go full frame at some stage but had been thinking in a couple of years or when I graduate. All thoughts and advice appreciated, are my eyes bigger than my belly or is it a worthy investment (I dont imagine buying another camera, i dont want more pixels or better low light performance)

(and i wouldnt be using credit cards btw, I know there has been some chat on her about something called 'saving')
 
at the end of the day, only you can decide what you want, advice I was given a while ago, was if it feels right then that helps you take a better picture, if you can afford it, even if you wont be able to do everything with it at the moment due to lack of knowledge or glass, you will grow in knowledge in time and practice, and a single lens will make you think about your composure etc, then when you can... add glass

hope thats of some help
Phil
 
cheers philtrum, anymore for anymore? you dont have to be nice btw
 
I could quite happily survive on full frame and one lens for 12 months. In fact, I use my 17-40 99% of the time. If 50mm would be a good length for you, then do it. I love full-frameness!
 
I think it's a case of eyes bigger than your belly mate.

Your camera and you are evidently perfectly capable of capturing what you see in your minds eye.
If you can't, I really doubt it's a kit issue.
I say, get a film camera to tide you over and get a full frame camera when you can afford and justify it :thumbs:

While the quality of your images would no doubt improve, can you really justify £2k for it?

I am craving a 5DmkII at the moment, but it wouldn't improve my photography enough to justify it, plus I wouldn't have the lenses to do it justice. I'd be looking at spending £2k on the 5D and £1k on a 24-70L
 
cheers for replying. I think you could be right poison, although there are definitely several occasions (in low light) where my current kit can't produce the goods whether it's justifiable for the cost is another question.

The film camera and lens would run me £250-350 so cost isn't a million miles off the new kit but I def see your point.
 
Do consider the cost of film & developing - I was spending about £40pm on it so moved to a 5D for the same £40pm. But it needs to survive four years or I'm out of pocket (considerably) obviously.
 
It'd be a long term investment certainly but the very valid point poison made is still valid, is it worth it?

I was thinking that the D700 would give me a 'film' feel to my photos whilst having all the benefits of digi plus it's shockingly good in low light.

keep the replies coming please
 
If you want FF and are selling all your Nikon Kit, why not pick up a used Canon 5D (I sold my nr minty one for £750, although it isn't nr minty anymore) and a Canon 50mm f1.4 total cost should be under £1000. Okay the high ISO isn't as high as either the 5DMk2 or the D700, but its still quite useable up to about 3200 (although below 1600 is better), I sold an EF 28-105 MkII on here for about £80 and it was a nice sharp lens, so for little extra money you could also have a versatile zoom.

Just a thought! Good luck, I doubt you will regret moving to FF unless you are into sports or wildlife photography!
 
Cheers Ed, I probably wouldn't go down that route (although tempted by sheer volume of lenses available) because while good performance at ISO 1600 is great it isn't enough to persuade me to sell up. I've seen scary good stuff at 2500 and 3200 from the D3/700 sensor and it would be that jump in performance I'd be after. I'll end up with one at some point it's whether I hang fire until the prices come down or jump in with both feet now.
 
fontmoss said:
I was thinking that the D700 would give me a 'film' feel to my photos whilst having all the benefits of digi plus it's shockingly good in low light.
Click to expand...

If you want a film feel then try a film camera. You should be able to get sometrhing nice for a lot less than your £250 - £350 budget.


Steve.
 
fontmoss said:
I was thinking that the D700 would give me a 'film' feel to my photos whilst having all the benefits of digi plus it's shockingly good in low light.

keep the replies coming please
Click to expand...

A D700 won't give you a film look.

If you want things to look like film, you will need a CCD (not CMOS) sensor, and I'd look at something gritty like a D1X or maybe a D100.

The Fuji S5 Pro is actually more film-like than the D700, the D700 is too smooth and has no film-like characteristics apart from the sensor size.
 
puddleduck said:
If you want things to look like film, you will need a CCD (not CMOS) sensor, and I'd look at something gritty like a D1X or maybe a D100.
Click to expand...

I have a D100 from that dismal nine months when I though I wanted to be a digital photographer.

I would not describe it as giving a film look.



Steve.
 
I would go for a film body but not an older manual everything one, more likely an F80 or F100. Once you've got that, start replacing the Dx lenses with FF compatible ones as and when they appear 2nd hand. Eventually, you'll have the FF lenses you want and can start saving for a D700 (or even one of its successors) which may be available 2nd hand by then.
 
cheers for replying all

perhaps I´m misrepresenting what i mean by a film feel? colours like these http://www.flickr.com/photos/tgkw/3503404143/

and http://www.flickr.com/photos/8671261@N05/3481393637/ and also from this forum

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=127029

but ultimately i think maybe i should just bide my time, maybe get a cheap film body and see where it takes me. Im still very new to a lot of things and while im sure i will invest in a D700 at some stage perhaps right now isn´t the best time. fingers crossed Nikon release a few more uber models and push the D700 price down. D1X is also a possibility, ive seen a few pics from it that are close to what im after.

EDIT: meant to say to Nod, not sure why but im drawn to manual, used manual lens (and until recently my auto lens manually) since i started a few months back. Only use 2 lenses and only the telephoto is DX so having to replace loads of lenses not so much of a factor
 
fontmoss said:
cheers for replying all

perhaps I´m misrepresenting what i mean by a film feel? colours like these http://www.flickr.com/photos/tgkw/3503404143/
Click to expand...

Thats just been done by a polaroid type action (Nik ColorFX or something)

Even a film camera won't produce that sort of colour unless you use that type of film ;)

Its a post-processing look, not a sensor property.

It would be hard to produce that sort of look out-of-the-camera from any digital, I don't think you could do it with the D700's built-in picture controls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top