Lots of stuff going on in my head

[theopenmind]

I am a bit if a happy snapper. Perhaps I use the polaroid methodology?

My camera is a Kodak Z700. Bought for price and convenience and I didn't have aspirations of becoming an 'amateur professional' at the time.

I also have a Cannon AE-1. Back in the day I fumbled about with this camera, some Illford b&w film, no light meter or grasp of exposure/light/speed settings but always liked the results. Alas, film processing seemed a real inconvenience so I gave up - though have fond memories of this camera.

I was wondering how professional the kit is that people use here. I guess the question is as stupid as what turntable should I buy with zero context. I have no shame.

There are some excellent photographs posted here but wondered whether this was just good workmanship or good tools.

So, if I want to start broadening my horizons should I be looking to 'upgrade' my cameras and if so to what? One of the things that I feel is most restrictive on both of the cameras I have is lack of ZOOM capability for detail and distance shots. Should I just adapt my AE-1 with a bigger lens and get boots (the pharmacist) to put all my film shots onto a CD (I hear the grumbles now) or forget throwing good money after bad and just go for some groovy new better digital thing??? I don't want to spend much money..

If anyone laughs, I warn you I am adept at making pin hole cameras with results that I would quite happily enter into a face-off with!

 

[Cesare]

The AE-1 is a pretty conventional manual focus SLR. If you found you got on with it, and are happy with the size/weight, then a contemporary DSLR is probably the way to go. If you will find yourself leaving it behind because it's too bulky then you need a different solution.

If you got the DSLR route then your choices are many and basically come down to budget. If money is a major concern the Sony Alpha cameras can be had for good money and will be very rewarding compared to your Kodak.

If size is a serious concern and you can wait if I were you i'd wait for Olympus to bring out their micro 4/3rds camera that is due in the summer. I believe this will be a very interesting development in the sense that it is a small P+S style body with interchangeable lenses, and a decent sensor for a change.

If you want long zoom lenses i'm afraid you either have to spend loads of cash, go with a compromised camera/lens design (like a canon SX 1 IS) or crop heavily once you've shot. Personally i don't shoot long lenses and have little interest so i'll leave any other details to others.

On the film vs digital front, it really isn't a case of one or the other, but both. I shoot DSLRs and SLRs, TLRs and rangefinders. It really depends on my mood as to which camera I take out with me, what I want to do with the results, whether I think there will be light etc. Today I shot some HP5 through a 35mm SLR.

Cesare

 

[Alex S]

The important thing is to get something that makes you actually want to go out and take pictures again. In my case this was the entry-level DSLR, Nikon D40 (although I share it with my daughter). I just don't have time or space to do any processing or developing. With digital the 'film' is free which makes a big difference, and instantly viewable. Kit zooms are reputed (largely correctly) to be rubbish but although in build the Nikon is, in optics its not.

As you can tell, I'm very much an amateur, taking the odd reasonable shot. Very few have done anything other than go straight from the camera onto the net - I don't like mucking about with images on computers and each attempt I make is dire anyway.

Even at a mere 6mp, It'll be some time before I replace the Nikon body, instead collecting a few prime lenses. Luckily, I grew up with fairly basic 35mm SLRs, I'm not interested in most DSLR features. Most of my pictures are for internet use; I won't print bigger than A4 for the foreseeable...