|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The evil penguin
Joined: 24 May 2003
Location: Doing something naughty near you.....
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 4:35 pm Post subject: Cameras: digital vs film |
 |
|
After dropping my old film camera into the filthy quagmire that passes for a major river here, I now need a new one. Camera that is.
Now I'm only very much an amataur(?) (and a bad speller) but I would like to learn and get into photography pretty seriously.
I've seen the questions posted here about various types of digital cameras to buy, but I'm not sure if I even want to go digital. What are the advantages of each? I realise that digital cameras do away with the expense of film but can you obtain a quality (photograph quality) hardcopy print? Plus you need the expense of a computer etc. Is it worth it?
What says yee photographers out there?
Also, if I was to go with the film camera, and became really seriously 'into it', would it be worth investing in processing and developing equipment. Or are the new films not suitable for this....... (We did photo developing in primary school many many years ago....)
Payday next week and already the yet-to-be-given-to-me money is burning a hole in my pocket...... (ahhhhhh bugger that credit card bill I should be paying off...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
FierceInvalid
Joined: 16 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I still use film (an EOS setup), and will only switch to digital when a good digital SLR becomes more financially feasible for me. I don't want to get one of those digital point and shoots, even though the quality (mega-pixel wise, but contrary to popular belief that's not all that matters) can be pretty good.
The answer to "can you get print quality images" is yes. One cool advantage of digital is the instant feedback factor, especially if you are a beginner - being able to take a shot and immediately know if you've screwed up exposure or something is cool. I'll eventually get a digital setup, but I still need to be able to use lenses. At the moment, that means spending huge cash.
I haven't shopped much for dig stuff in Korea, but keep in mind that SLR stuff at least is hideously expensive in Korea. I have a friend who just bought a lens over the internet, and even after shipping and a whopping 20% duty, he's still saving on what he'd pay here.
A really good resource for photography equipment and technique is: www.photo.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Walter Mitty
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Location: Tokyo! ^.^
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FierceInvalid wrote: |
| I still use film (an EOS setup), and will only switch to digital when a good digital SLR becomes more financially feasible for me. I don't want to get one of those digital point and shoots, even though the quality (mega-pixel wise, but contrary to popular belief that's not all that matters) can be pretty good. |
What woudl you consider "financially feasible" for a digital SLR? Canon just came out with the 6-megapixel EOS 300D. (review here) It goes for $899, or $999 with the new EF-S 18 - 55 mm (3x) lens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lemon
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FierceInvalid wrote: |
| I still use film (an EOS setup), and will only switch to digital when a good digital SLR becomes more financially feasible for me. |
Coming, my friend!! Canon's EOS Digital Rebel, with a list price of $899 US ($999 if you take it with the lens package, though you may not need..) I think I talked my wife into letting me get one next year.
The digicam I have now, a 3.2 megapixel one a bit smaller than the Canon ELPH cameras, is great as I can take it everywhere and fits in my shorts pocket. Prints look good, even A4 sized, using decent glossy photo paper...
The advantage of the digital SLR would be a better lens. The lenses on the point and shoot digicams are by necessity pretty small, with a very shallow depth-of-focus (if you want to take a portrait of someone and have the subject clear and the background softly-blurred, for example, your options are limited because of the small amount of glass in the camera... though you could achieve it in Photoshop).
Digicams are initially expensive, but there's a psychological advantage to them that ends up making them more economical. Every time you hit the shutter on a film camera, you can imagine 1000w for film and developing costs. The cost on a digital is nil, so you take more pictures, more often, of more things. This of course results in a lot more crappy pictures, but the number of "keepers" goes way up, too. If you REALLY want a good picture of a particular thing, you can take 20 shots of it with a digital using different approaches & methods. You might not do that if that would cost you 20,000w.
If you do get a digital, get a tripod. Assuming the camera has decent low-light ability (low noise in night shots), you'll want the tripod so you can take cool shots using the natural ambient light without using the flash. The shutter is open for 1/2 second~2 seconds in those cases, and it's impossible to hold a camera still with your hand for so long. Decent tripods can be bought around here for 20,000w or less.
| Quote: |
| I haven't shopped much for dig stuff in Korea, but keep in mind that SLR stuff at least is hideously expensive in Korea. I have a friend who just bought a lens over the internet, and even after shipping and a whopping 20% duty, he's still saving on what he'd pay here. |
Yup, same for digital stuff here. Duties & the closed Korean market means absurdly high prices for camera stuff.
I bought mine in Singapore last winter, where it was 200,000w cheaper. If you're going to buy outside the country though, make sure the warranty's good here. Panasonics, Sonys, and Kyoceras have worldwide warranties - most others don't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The evil penguin
Joined: 24 May 2003
Location: Doing something naughty near you.....
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So far sounds like the digital is the better option for most people. Howeer, again there is the problem of needing a computer to view and print the photos. Bit difficult when travelling.
Is the film camera going to be fully obsolete in years to come?
I'm one of those people who like to hold the hard copy in hand. Give me a magazine over an online article anyday. Or a photo album rather then sit on the computer to look at the pics.
Even with the best printers, can you get the hard glossy long lasting print from a digital print? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Walter Mitty
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Location: Tokyo! ^.^
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The evil penguin wrote: |
So far sounds like the digital is the better option for most people. Howeer, again there is the problem of needing a computer to view and print the photos. Bit difficult when travelling.
Is the film camera going to be fully obsolete in years to come?
I'm one of those people who like to hold the hard copy in hand. Give me a magazine over an online article anyday. Or a photo album rather then sit on the computer to look at the pics.
Even with the best printers, can you get the hard glossy long lasting print from a digital print? |
Film cameras aren't going away for a while - if ever.
And it's no big deal if you don't have a computer. Many photo service places (like the ones are Carrefour) can take your memory card and make prints on regular photographic paper. A friend at work had some done their (he's got a digital camera and doesn't even own a computer) and you can't tell that they didn't come from a film camera. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lemon
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The evil penguin wrote: |
| So far sounds like the digital is the better option for most people. Howeer, again there is the problem of needing a computer to view and print the photos. |
I don't print very often anymore. The number of people who see my photos on a screen is way higher than would ever see paper prints.
| Quote: |
| Bit difficult when travelling. |
If you're talking about reviewing them while travelling, it's easy enough to use the camera's built-in LCD screen, but it's also no problem to slip into an internet cafe and plug the camera in and reviewing on real monitors. Also, storage is cheap... I can bring back 300+ pictures on my memory cards, and that doesn't include what I send back to my server via Net. that's 10 rolls of film, culling the rejects as I go.
| Quote: |
| Is the film camera going to be fully obsolete in years to come? |
Probably not. Analog tape is still used in many recording studios, though it's inferior and insanely more expensive to digital (many pros prefer the effect of analog tape compression). Film's the same way... some people like the effect of the film grain, though it can be now simulated in Photoshop. It'll never be totally replaced, and I expect you'll still be able to buy 35 mm film easily 20 years from now - just like how you can still by blank cassette tapes at the Ministop. But new digicams are quickly overtaking film cameras in sales.
| Quote: |
I'm one of those people who like to hold the hard copy in hand. Give me a magazine over an online article anyday. Or a photo album rather then sit on the computer to look at the pics.
Even with the best printers, can you get the hard glossy long lasting print from a digital print? |
The secret to a long-lasting print from a home printer is to put it behind something, out of the air and stored in a reasonably dark place - like a photo album. If you make a print and stick it on the fridge, the reds will turn ugly orange in a month or two. If it's protected, it will look as good as if it came from a professional photo place. Though I would expect some deterioration over years (no problem.. print another - the file will live forever).
If you have the print done at a real photo place, however, the print will last just as long as a film print. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sejong
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Location: Wally World
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Lemon wrote: |
If you do get a digital, get a tripod. Assuming the camera has decent low-light ability (low noise in night shots), you'll want the tripod so you can take cool shots using the natural ambient light without using the flash. The shutter is open for 1/2 second~2 seconds in those cases, and it's impossible to hold a camera still with your hand for so long. Decent tripods can be bought around here for 20,000w or less.
|
20,000? Where, exactly -- Yongsan, outside Namdaemun, or somewhere else? I've been wanting one for a while now to improve my night shots. Although I'm not keen on the swivel & pan head models, but I'm sure the ball heads cost a fortune here.
For what it's worth, I've been quite happy with my Sony F717 -- big megapixels, but also a huge lens (which is equally, if not more important). If you splash out and get a large memory card (for whatever model), you can store an unbelievable amount of photos, especially if you cut out the crap as you go, as has been said already. I was in SEA for all of August, and I had very little trouble uploading the pics at net cafes as I traveled -- either onto CD or straight to the net. Or you can invest a little $$ in a portable hard drive and just upload to that.
I agree with Lemon -- far more people see my photos online than in a printed version. Sony has an invaluable FREE photo site at www.imagestation.com. I've got about 12 albums (more than 800 MB) of photos there. Beats scanning prints all day...
Finally, a great site for comparing various digital cameras head-to-head is http://www.dcresource.com/. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lemon
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| 20,000? Where, exactly -- Yongsan, outside Namdaemun, or somewhere else? I've been wanting one for a while now to improve my night shots. Although I'm not keen on the swivel & pan head models, but I'm sure the ball heads cost a fortune here. |
There's a guy here in Kwangju with a store - great guy, good deals (which is bizarre for Kwangju) and excellent English. I'm sure my tripod isn't the world's best tripod, but it's as tall as I am and also holds my camcorder pretty well. It's reasonably light too, though it feels solid. If it dies in a year, who cares... at these prices I'll just get another. I'd expect you could get a similar deal in Yongsan.
| Quote: |
| For what it's worth, I've been quite happy with my Sony F717 -- big megapixels, but also a huge lens (which is equally, if not more important). |
That's a pretty well-known model. Have a look at www.trekearth.com and you'll see plenty of great pictures taken with that one.
Yep.. and don't overlook http://www.steves-digicams.com, either. Scroll ahead to his conclusions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
