Hi everyone,
This is my first post in this forum and i am very delighted to be a member of this forum,
I would be very grateful to all the respect member to make me to come out of the dark,
1) Is digital slr camera's better than the film ones.
2) I do have a nikon n65 a film slr camera and aashi pentax 1000g film camera with zoom lenses, wide angle lenses , etc.
3) Is the present canon 500d or nikon D90 better than camera's which i have.
Do i have to upgrade.
I am not a professional photography but i am interested in photography and videography.
Thanks once again.

I used to be a film camera photographer and now I am a fully digital camera convert. I think the main advantage for me is that I can see the results immediately on the camera after taking the picture.

Here are some other views:

Nikon D200 versus Film

Film vs. Digital

Is Film Going Away? © 2005 KenRockwell.com

Originally Posted by nandakumar

Hi everyone,
This is my first post in this forum and i am very delighted to be a member of this forum,
I would be very grateful to all the respect member to make me to come out of the dark,
1) Is digital slr camera's better than the film ones.
2) I do have a nikon n65 a film slr camera and aashi pentax 1000g film camera with zoom lenses, wide angle lenses , etc.
3) Is the present canon 500d or nikon D90 better than camera's which i have.
Do i have to upgrade.
I am not a professional photography but i am interested in photography and videography.
Thanks once again.

Hi,

These are Golden questions:

1) Is digital slr camera's better than the film ones.

Film cameras use film where each frame is 36mmx24mm while the dslr sensor would be lesser in size. Ofcourse you do have dslrs with sensors which have size that equal the 35mm film. These are called full-frame cameras. Most dslrs have a sensor of 22.4x14.xmm. Because of the smaller sensor size there would be a crop from the full frame. Crop refers to the portion that is cut-off in a dslr which would otherwise be available in a full-frame version. The amount of crop is called crop-factor. Most dslrs have a crop factor of 1.6. However cheaper dlsrs or other point & shoot have much higher crop factors, i.e. smaller sensors.

The larger the sensor the better the quality. Which is why its often said megapixels would not be enough to judge the quality of a camera.

Digital cameras have the advantage of electronically taking pictures and storing them, without the need of film, which proves much cheaper. Also you have the option of taking pictures and editing them to suit your need. Furthermore, you do have a lot of inbuilt options for post-processing, if you're the lazy type not to capture in RAW and processing later using software such as DPP.

Such options are limited in film cameras. Again, the quality of the development equipment largely affects the quality of your prints - which explains why most professional photographers have their own dark rooms. Dark rooms are expensive to have and maintain.

The quality of photos/camera also depend on the lenses you have. The golden rule is to purchase a dslr that suits your need and then 75% or more of you investment on the glass! Its of no use buying that expensive eos 1ds or 5d mark II if you're simply going to shoot for family and friendly functions where you wont require a 19 point autofocus or 8 frames per second features or the 36 metering functions! On the other hand a 70-300 IS USM L series lens would be far useful!

Finally megapixels are used to judge the size of prints you're going to have and NOT always the quality of photos.

2) I do have a nikon n65 a film slr camera and aashi pentax 1000g film camera with zoom lenses, wide angle lenses , etc.

Personally, I would recommend you a DSLR as mentioned above. If you can give me your budget and use, I shall suggest a model.

3) Is the present canon 500d or nikon D90 better than camera's which i have.
Do i have to upgrade.

Both are good cameras (body), however, you need good glass to go with it! Above all, would you be using all the features of these DSLRs?
You would definitely need an upgrade from a film camera to a DSLR, but the actual model depends on your usage.

I am not a professional photography but i am interested in photography and videography.

I would suggest you to buy a DSLR & a camcorder separately. Strictly speaking you would not enjoy using a DSLR for video and camcorder for still pics!

As I'd mentioned above, please let me know of your budget and I shall help you select a model, if you wish.

regards,

Nitin.

OOOOOOOh my god nitinbose,
Thanks aaaaa lot for your detailed reply,
My budget is around 50 k and my interests are natural reactions of faces like when they are shopping, shouting etc and macro photo's where i would like to get details of a flower, butterfly, etc.
I would never mingle the video and photography into one camera.
thanks a lot once again
with regards

Hi,

With this budget you could opt for the EOS 1000D with kit lens (18-55mm) and a 50mm Canon Macro lens or SIGMA 50mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO LENS.

The camera with kit lens would be about 28K while the canon macro would be about 24K, while the sigma macro would around 19k.


If you're simply taking pictures for personal use, you could even opt for PowerShot SX20 IS, PowerShot SX20 IS - Digital Cameras - Canon India

This is pretty much like a DSLR but without the ability to change the lenses.

You could also visit www.dpreview.com for a detailed review on cameras & lenses, though such sites may be too critical at times.

regards,

Nitin.

thanks once again nitinbose,
I would not like to buy an entry level camera and later on feel bad about it or to go in for an upgrade it. I would like to put my money in decent camera and later on add up lens,etc.

Well, In that case, why dont you consider a full-frame camera? that would be a good buy for a body.

However do remember the differences and the features you're going to use! Simply because the website mentions "entry level" does not mean it has less features, its a view from a professionals' point of view.

If budget is not a problem, an EoS 5D mark II would be a good choice!

All the best in your purchase and do let us know when you buy.

Hi,
Yesterday i visited the canon shop in bangalore and he recommended eos 50d instead of 500d and what's you views on this.

Hi,

I would suggest you to take a look at the comparison:

Product Comparison of EOS 500D * and EOS 50D * - Digital Cameras - Canon India

Both 500D and 50D use Digic-4 processor. The major feature hike for the 50D is in the larger number of continuous shots, UDMA storage type and some minor changes. On the other hand 500D has video support, so you can take video clips at HD.

You have to take a call over there, and see what features you really require and see if you can justify the additional 20K for the body alone.

Do remember that an investment on the lenses is always better as camera bodies come an go.

The shutter life of the 500D & 50D is also about 100,000 so there wont be a benefit over there.

I own the EOS 500D with 18-55mm IS II lens and the 55-250mm Lens, and find the 500D to be more than enough that sometimes even wished that I'd purchased a 1000d and the balance adjusted on a macro lens!

I find the 500D to be a good camera.

What is your requirement? Are you info any professional photography. If you're really concerned about the camera body, the best reference currently would be the EOS 7D, else the 1000D, 450D or 500D would be more than enough for upto a semi-professional.

Do understand that the camera body also requires a good lens!

If you're based out of Bangalore, you may even pay me a visit and I can show you the EOS 500D and how it benefits me.

You may also PM me for my telephone number, if you wish for a personal discussion.

regards,

Nitin.

Hi nitinbose,
thanks for your detailed comments on these 2 models and I am not a professional personal at all. I use it only when i go out on holidays and sometimes when i am really free at home.
I will pm you with my phone to have a personal discussions,
thanks once again,