below $1000 film vs digital

"Michael Benveniste" wrote in message
...
"Mike Henley" wrote in message
om...

I'll use a budget of no more than $999.99.

What is your budget for recurring costs? The incremental cost to put
a shot "in the can" and to preview it is effectively free for digital
but not for film.

I care most about *image quality*, as this will be the only reason I'd
want to step up from my film compacts. By image quality I mean both in
its original form (film/digital) or transferred to other media
(printed/scanned).

I know what I mean by "image quality," but the term has different
meanings for different people. To me, the single most important factor
in image quality is to properly adjust the nut behind the finder.

But if you're more concerned about technical issues such as sharpness,
given a one-time $1000 budget for equipment, of the choices you mention
a medium format camera is today's winner. New, you can purchase a
Mamiya 645E Pro Value pack with an 80mm f/2.8 lens for $775 at Adorama.
Add a lens hood ($31), cable release ($23), and something like a
Manfrotto 3001N tripod and 3030 head ($144) and you can start shooting.
You can do even better with used manual-focus medium-format (MFMF?)
gear. Recently, I purchased a Pentax 645 with a 120 insert, a 75mm
lens and a 135mm lens for about $500.

OTOH, if your definition of "image quality" includes digital editing,
with your budget you may be better off starting digital. If it
includes very selective focus or the ability to tailor apparent
perspective by choice of focal length, you may be better off with
35mm.

--
Michael Benveniste --
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.



Hello Michael

I wonder if I may add a dash of realism to the topic you raised?

Earlier posters are quite correct. If you go digital you will need to think
about having a good computer and certainly if pro standard is your overall
aim pro standard equipment in not without cost, You will (may? should?)
consider some image processing software too.
computer - software - hardware is reasonable for any standard digital setup.

On the other hand goinf film based means darkroom equipment, chemicals,
dedicated space for it that is lightfree to a very strict standard. On top
of all the chemicals, incidentally some of which are closely linked to
dermatitis, waste disposal (effluent) problems you will still need a
computer - software - hardware (pro standard scanner)

Please do not let anyone tell you otherwise.

The wise choice IMHO is digital Why bother with a darkroom? Besides that,
a computer always comes in handy even if it is just for posting to
rec.photo.digital From an ecological point of view re-usable memory cards
are far more eco-friendly than rolls and rolls of film, paper, developres
fisers, fixatives, ...

The beauty of digital is that it so easily integrates with what one may
already have. There again, I amd a P&S amateur :-)

das B

ps - the way digitals work with flas is fantastic, well it is on my Fuji (no
burnouts :-)

d B