Digital BW, The Print

Interspersed.



djon43 wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Walt Mucha"
> <wkm@k...> wrote:
> 
>  >
>  > Photojournalists, fashion photographers, wedding photographers and
> many other pros having been shooting digital for years.
> 
> Of course.
> 
> 
>  > >The severe shortcomings of digital (eg involving exposure index, wide
>  > >lenses, physical bulk of higher level digital cameras) make it less
>  > >suitable for many situations than film. I'm sure this will change
>  > >dramatically when current Nikons/Canons are retired.
>  >
>  > The exposure index on most pro cameras ranges from ISO 100-1600.

100-3200 or 200-3200 for most semi-pro and pro bodies. ISO 50 is now 
starting to show up on pro and semi-pro bodies. 3200 is increaisngly 
common on consumer bodies. All the Pentax DSLR's are 200-3200 and the 
Konica Minolta bodies are 100-3200.

> 
> Right, they are limited.
> 
> Canon has a full frame sensor so there is no wide angle problem
> 
> Wrong, there's a big problem...they don't have anything to equal
> typical film lenses of 20mm, for example.

Yes, they do. A 20mm on a Canon 5D or 1Ds mkII has the same field of 
view as a 20mm on 35mm film. For APS-C sensors, there are a number of 
options, getting you out to 15mm equivalent on 1.5x crop cameras (Sigma 
10-20 zoom) and 16mm on the Canon 1.6x crop bodies (Sigma 10-20, Canon 
10-22). Canon, Tamron and Pentax all make primes in the 14mm range 
(21-22mm equivalent for 35mm) and I'm pretty sure Nikon has something 
similar.  Not to mention fisheyes (Nikon has a 10.5mm DX fisheye, Pentax 
is about to ship a 10-17mm fisheye zoom for digital)


> 
>  > and their bulk is about the same as their pro film cameras.
> 
> Wrong of course...they're huge and bloated. But they'll be
> discontinued within a year or two for smaller models, more comparable
> to film SLRs.

Umm, no. The EOS 1v (film) and EOS 1D/1Ds are the same size, apart from 
the digitals being about 1cm thicker. The Nikon D2x and D2Hs are the 
same size as an F5 or an F6 with the BG40. The EOS 5D and EOS 3 are 
similar sized. And given that this is the standard size for pro SLR's, 
and has been throughout the AF era (Dating back to the F4s and EOS 1 in 
the late 80's) this isn't going to change.


>  >
>  >
>  > >Many of us are thrilled with the incredibly fine films that have been
>  > >introduced only recently, easily enabling beautiful color and B&W
>  > >rated at 1600 and 3200.
> 
>  > >
>  > >As obviously, many of us need physically small cameras with
>  > >24mm-and-wider lenses, many of us want our standard lenses to be
>  > >rectilinear, and many of us don't find the inferior viewfinders of
>  > >most digital cameras acceptable.
>  >
>  > Physically smaller cameras are generally the rage of amatuers.
> 
> Yes, and photojournalists. While I agree that amateurs (note the
> spelling) aren't the whole market, they do tend to drive the market.

You need to check out Pentax then. tiny DSLR's, excellent viewfinders 
and a 12-24mm f4 (18-36 equiv) rectilinear zoom as well as a inexpensive 
but good 14mm f2.8 (21mm equiv) digital prime. Oh, and they work with MF 
lenses (My Pentax DSLR currently has a Super-Takumar 50mm f1.4 on it). 
Note that the PJ market was the first to go seriously digital, back when 
there were only massive DSLR's, and is solidly buying 1D's and D2Hs's 
right now.

> 
>  > Take a look at the Canon 5D. Same size as the 20D with full frame
> sensor. If you want retilinear lenses they are the same for film as
> digital and are found in mostly 14-16 mm and expensive.
> 
> Expensive is OK...it's a matter of whose wallet. Why would you assert
> that money was a problem?
>  >
>  > >Unfortunately the only digital camera that approaches certain specific
>  > >professional/amateur requirements, long met by film, seems the Epson,
>  >
>  > You can't possibly be serious!
> 
> Walt, fwiw I'm impressed by the work of people like Edward Weston and
> even Sebastio Salgado (who is way past mere 12mp gizmos already, but
> as you may know has recently done some of photography's best work on
> fillum).
>  >
>  > Regards, Walt
> 
> Walt, It's great that you enjoy your collection of digital cameras,
> but this is a B&W printing Group: it tends to be friendly to people
> who shoot film, even including Leicas and wooden view cameras...if you
> can imagine!
> 
> I look forward to committing to digital cameras myself, probably as
> early as 2007/8, when Fujiblad or Mamiya's got 22MP under control and
> the price drops. They're already relatively cheap, no more expensive
> than your gas station's smog testing equipment.
> 
> Regards, John

-Adam