Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

A film SLR camera

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    somnathchatterjee

    can anybody suggest me whether a film slr camera will be better for wildlife photography with telephoto lenses?

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    19 Jun 2009 - 8:15 AM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    samfurlong
    19 Jun 2009 - 8:25 AM

    No difference.

    justin c
    justin c  104518 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Jun 2009 - 8:35 AM

    I'd say a digital camera is far more of an advantage for wildlife photography for lots of reasons, some of them being, in no particular order;

    1) Unlimited shooting without having to take into account any film costs. 4 a film and 4 to get it processed for every 36 shots can become very expensive, even more so with wildlife photography when it's likely that 80 or 90% go straight in the bin and the other 10 or 20%, will do, at a later stage, as you improve or get better oppurtunities.

    2) The crop factor off a digital camera is a huge advantage.

    3) The ability to shoot on a modern DSLR up to iso 1600 (and above) and still get outstanding quality is a massive benefit.

    4) Changing the ISO setting at willl is a big advantage.

    5) Not having to change films after every 36'th shot is a big advantage.

    etc, etc, etc.

    Film still has it's place of course but you won't hear of many wildlife photograpphers who have returned to film after shooting digitally. There are just too many advantages associated with shooting digitally IMHO.

    Last Modified By justin c at 19 Jun 2009 - 8:40 AM
    cameracat
    cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Jun 2009 - 10:39 AM

    Just take a look at the work of a top wildlife photograher.....!

    Andy Rouse

    Then check out what he uses most of the time....Wink

    Fluke
    Fluke  659 forum posts Wales
    19 Jun 2009 - 10:40 AM

    but a S/H film SLR with a few telephoto lenses may be a cheaper entry into Wildlife photography, but then there is processing costs.

    You could in theory pick up a film SLR and 70-210 for under 100 easily and a 400mm telephoto could be picked up for under 100 easily too.

    gringoninjo
    19 Jun 2009 - 3:38 PM

    As a 100% film user I'd still have to say digital has the most advantages.The big bonus with digital (never thought I'd say that!) is the crappy little sensors. They add a massive amount on your focal length.
    The hardware for film is so much cheaper though, and there's a massive amount of used equipment out there as more and more people go down the rout of upgrades and squigglepixels, but you'd give a whole new meaning to the term 'filmwaster.'
    Film though, isn't as expensive as most digitogs would have you believe - 4.00 per roll? Man! You're getting ripped off. Bulk-buy and dev your own.
    Wildlife can be done with film, people were taking photies of animals well before digital.

    You might want to check these out before you make a decision.

    Last Modified By gringoninjo at 19 Jun 2009 - 3:45 PM
    justin c
    justin c  104518 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Jun 2009 - 4:08 PM


    Quote: Film though, isn't as expensive as most digitogs would have you believe - 4.00 per roll? Man! You're getting ripped off.

    I don't think so. A roll of Fuji Velvia was usually arount the 3.50-4.00 mark.





    Quote: people were taking photies of animals well before digital

    I wondered how long it would be before someone mentioned that.
    Indeed they were but there wasn't the choice between digital and film then. There is now, so it , makes sense to go with the better option, which, IMHO, for wildlife photography, is digital by a long shot.

    Last Modified By justin c at 19 Jun 2009 - 4:10 PM
    GreyMoonRising
    19 Jun 2009 - 4:43 PM

    In the long run digital will work out better value for money and gives top notch results.

    keith selmes
    19 Jun 2009 - 5:11 PM


    Quote: Can anybody suggest me whether a film slr camera will be better for wildlife photography with telephoto lenses?

    Yes. Usually it will be better with telephoto lenses.

    Everyone has assumed you meant, will it be better than a digital SLR ?
    I'm not sure if thats what you meant ?

    There isn't any obvious reason to use a film slr instead of a DSLR, but a film slr with good lenses could give better results than a compact digital.

    Fluke
    Fluke  659 forum posts Wales
    19 Jun 2009 - 8:36 PM


    Quote:
    There isn't any obvious reason to use a film slr instead of a DSLR, but a film slr with good lenses could give better results than a compact digital.

    For wildlife a film SLR would walk all over any compact digital, no shutter lag, much longer focal lengths and faster ergonomics. And photo quality will be better too IMO.

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.