Analyze/Digitize Me Please!

juanagrin

I have been around long enough to love printing B&W prints in the darkroom and discovering the amazing warmth that can be added to your shoots. I have also had a lot of stressful days and hours waiting for things that today take seconds to upload to your computer. I want technical (maybe psychological too) help in understanding which way to go with my equipment.

I have a bunch of old Nikon lenses for my 35mm cameras that I have had a long-term love affair with. I like a camera that is fast enough to stop action in natural lighting situations. I like to have warmth in my color shots. I can't justify spending a LOT of money. What cameras should I be considering?

ziggy53

I deleted your duplicate post in the other thread.

What specific lenses do you now own?

What sort of light levels are you wanting to shoot in?

InsuredDisaster

I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure you will need a camera with a screw drive focusing system, to handle your older lenses. Several of Nikon's newer, more basica cameras lack this, and will only focus with the electronic focusing lenses with built in focusing motors.

You can manually focus of course, but in comparison to my FM2 and its focusing aids, I'm pretty crappy with the DSLRs and manual focusing. I read on some sites that its due to the view finders of moderns SLRs not being set up for manual focusing, making it more of a challenge.

The work around is to purchase aftermarket screens, but I'm sure someone will say these aren't needed. For me, while I've fooled around and actually shot soccer games with my FM2, I can't do the same with my DSLR's on manual focus.

Besides, Auto focus is so accurate and fast on my DSLR's, I don't see the reason to switch to MF.


So if you want to take advantage of AF with your older lenses (which I'm sure are screw drive) then Nikon's cheapest DSLRs are probably not an option.

Also, you might find these budget Nikons might slow you down a bit at times if you are shooting sports. They are slower to focus than my D300, and you are often limited to bursts of 3 or 4 shots before the camera slows way down. (I've got a D60 as well, which does very well in most respects, but takes forever to process an image compared to my D70 or D300. I highly recommend this camera to anyone starting out with DSLRs, but wouldn't rely on it myself. Its got some really annoying quirks.)

I'd say that perhaps you'll want to seriously look at something like a D90, D300 or D300s, or even the D700 if purchasing new or at least, the current models.

D90 is probably the cheapest optionthat gets you the screw drive. I've got a D300, and I really like it. Its very fast in all respects. You can use the equivalent of ISO 1600 with no worries for the most part, and even go up to ISO 3200 which is so so. ISO 6400 is available, but I only use it if I absolutely have to, and then convert to BW since the noise is so bad. I can't find a lot of film these days past 1600 so I'm sure the D300 is fast enough for you.

It is my understanding that the D90 has virtually the same sensor, so the image quality should be very similar. The D300s might have slight improvements over the D300, but I can't be bothered to upgrade at this point.

If you've really got some cash, you might consider the D700, since with that, a 50mm 1.4 will still have the same characteristcs you are used to. With the D90 or virtually any other camera, you'll find the 50mm is really closer to a 75mm. The other benefit is that you can use stupidly high ISO's and get brilliant results, thanks to the larger sensor.


I'd say don't be too afraid to get a used camera. Breakage and life span concerns aside, I've got a 5 year old D70 which still does pretty well thought the image quality suffers greatly at higher ISO's (max is 1600). So perhaps you might consider a D200 or D80 if you want to save some money. These are all a lot of camera. However, newer cameras will show their improvements. For example, the D70 does very poorly figuring the flash exposure in some situations. The D80 did a lot better, and I'm pretty impressed by the D60 and D300, both of which do quite well with auto flash. Of course, flash may not interest you at all. Anyway, if you are on a really limited budget, an older generation of camera may be a good way to go. Personally, if I was going this route, say, if my D70 was destroyed and I wanted to replace it, I'd probably get a D200 over the D80, and have a more robust camera with a more professional control layout.


A final consideration is how much time you are willing to put into the digital "development" process. You may want to budget for quality software, such as Lightroom, or Photoshop to really work your photos to the level you are used to with your dark room. It is largely with such programs that you will get your "warmth" that you seek.

I do find that film has a certain quality that I enjoy, and I don't have to do any post processing to get that quality, but for me, digital opens up far greater flexibility than I would have if I was shooting film.

Just my 2 cents; others are probably a lot more helpful than I am.

Joves

Like Ziggy said it really depends on which lenses you have. You can go here and see which bodies will work with your lenses http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html#type Some of the older lenses have to have their mounts converted or, modified to use them on digitals or they will damage the contacts. Right now you are looking at the D90 and, up for new bodies and, in the used or refurbished market the D50 and up.

NikonsandVstroms

Old Nikon lenses.
Great color.
You are used to B&W film.

Find a used Fuji S5 Pro, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the current cameras but I use it over my D700 much of the time (including tomorrow in about 8 hours, I really need to get to sleep ). The downside is it is not as fast as a D300/700 with slower frames per second and time to write to the card. The LCD isn't as good and the AF while nice the 51 point system in the new Nikons is amazing. Oh and the resolution is equivalent to 8-10MP VS 12MP (different sensor design/layout so the level of detail is hard to measure exactly compared to a standard sensor).

Basically the S5 has better color than any of the Nikons I have used, and the dynamic range makes great images reminding me of B&W negative film. Yes you can create great images with a D300/700 but you need to spend more time on the color, and for the contrast you can push them but to get those great images is much easier with the fuji.



So if you are printing up to say 16x20, and can live at ISO 1,600 and under then the S5 Pro is for you.