NBW

I can't see Canon or Nikon moving away from their current lens mounts, at least in physical* terms, in the near future. They have too many Pro's around the world who have invested heavily in their glass and will be slow to adopt the new technology if it means ditching a bag full of lenses. Plus film will be around for a good few years yet, or at least 35mm and above will be, APS is already dying because of digital.

Also, aren't their advantages in having a 35mm lens with a sub-35mm CCD, in that the image is focussed through the central part of the lens, giving more consistent centre to edge performance in the final picture? I guess though, as CCD's get smaller (for the same no. of pixels), smaller lenses are a real possibility.

I've now swung back the other way (oooh errrr) and think I need to take a good look at the D100.

Cheers
Tim

*By which I mean they might add extra electronics that require additional contacts, but you'll still be able to mount an older version lenses, but might not get all the features that the camera body has. Mind you, once you've fed data from lens to camera that gives focus distance and aperture, plus presumaby some sort of feedback signal to control the AF, what other possible information would you need to send over the lens/body interface?



[Edited by NBW - 8/2/2002 11:02:32 AM]

NBW

My lifelong interest in photography has been re-kindled just recently, and I’m in the process of replacing my zoom lenses with fixed focal lengths. I have a Nikon F801s with Vivitar 19/f3.5, Sigma 24/f2.8, Nikon 50/f1.8, 85/f1.8, 180/f2.8 and Sigma 400/f5.6. All lenses are AF, except the Vivitar. I shoot mainly slide film, scanned in on a Canon Film Scanner and produce my own prints up to A3+ on a HP Inkjet.

I’m very happy with the F801s, I’ve had it from new, for around 10 years I guess. The only downside is the AF is not as fast as today’s models, but it’s not bad especially with the Nikon prime lenses.

My problem is that at sometime (probably in the spring), I want to ditch the 400mm lens and get a 300/2.8, probably Sigma as the Nikon is just too expensive for me. Both these lenses use the AF-S system and so AF will not work with the F801s.

So, I’m considering a replacement or additional camera body. An additional body might be useful on a small number of occasions, especially now I have no zoom lenses, but most of the time I would only carry one body. As well as needing it to work with the 300mm, I would like a high flash sync speed (the F801s’s is 1/250s). My shortlist is:

Nikon F80 + grip – cheap, light, but has flash sync up to 1/125s only. Would hang on to the F801s though, so sync speed is not really an issue.

Nikon F100 + grip – expensive, but is a ‘pro’ model, so feels a lot like my F801s, sync speed 1/250s, but I’d probably trade the F801s to get the F100.

Nikon D100 – more expensive, but digital so potential to save money long term on film, but I would need to retain the F801s for film use (or would I?).

Fuji Finepix S2 Pro – digital, similar price to D100, it’s not a Nikon, but it’s predecessor the S1 was/is highly regarded. Again would probably hold on to F801s.

I guess the question is, do I go digital now? Sooner the better in terms of saving on film, but unlike any of the film bodies (including the F801s), there are likely to be big advances in digital bodies within a few years, so the cost of ownership could be high if I decide to upgrade within a few years. Just wondered if anyone else was considering similar options?

Cheers
Tim

Luke

Tim

Had a 80 with the Mb10 (??) pack and a 801s. Both good cameras. Trouble is they just dont compare to The Canons I now use.. EOS1v's etc. The Canon is better made ,faster and cheaper to get lenses etc. The Canon s/h market is fantastic.
I would never go back to Nikon again.

NBW

I tend to agree that Canon have had the edge on AF, but I love the feel of the Nikon kit, especially the semi-pro stuff (which is why I'm a bit dubious about the F80).

Plus I'm now committed to Nikon lenses!

Brendan Hughes

Sounds like you need a reply from Josh. A few months ago he said digital was catching up fast with print film in terms of quality, and would overtake within a year, IIRC. I think he also said he is a Nikon man

NBW

Luke,

Just occurred to me you're comparing a £350 (F80) & a ten-year old (F801s) Nikon with a current £1300 Canon, not a fair comparison. Really your Canon sits somewhere between the F100 & F5.

My inclination at the moment is to spend the money on lenses rather than bodies, so probably going to go for an F80 and keep the F801s. Even if I traded the F801s, the F100 (without grip) would still cost around £500, where as I can get a F80 with grip for £350, and I still have a second body.

I've really been put off digital, and the D100 especially, after what I've read on some US photography sites.

Cheers
Tim

Hoppy

Tim, you MUST try digital before parting with this kind of cash. There are obvious pros and cons, but the cons are getting fewer.

The main dilemma is the small image format, which is a pain if you're into very wide-angle photography. On the other hand, if you generally use telephotos, it's a great advantage - your 180mm f/2.8 effectively becomes a 300mm-ish f/2.8 so you will have saved loads of money there.

You can prolly hire one from Leeds Cameras or someone like that. You'll find ads in the back of the British Journal of Photography or Professional Photographer magazines.

Josh Levey will have some good advice - he uses Nikon digital for all his work now, I believe.

Happy snapping,

Richard.

NBW

Richard,

That's a very good point, a D100 plus storage will cost about the same as a Sigma 300/2.8. As you say 180 becomes a 270/2.8 and 380/4 with teleconvertor

Need to consider though that I would have to get something like a 14mm to replace my Vivitar 19mm, to give me the same range. Since I'm going for quality, that could be expensive (Nikon £1100). Some might argue that's this is overkill, but if I have an ultra wide angle in the bag but only use it 3 times a year, that's OK as long as I get 3 cracking shots!

I firmly believe digital will be the future I guess I'm just not convinced now is the right time to buy into it. Top quality lenses are a good investment though, IMHO.

Of course, what I'm really saying is I want a F100, D100, plus 14mm and 300mm Nikon lenses

Cheers
Tim

Luke

Tim

Good point !! forgot to mention My EOS 5. For the money better than a 801's.

Hoppy

NBW, as you say, the future is digital. No question. But like you I'm not sure now is the time to buy, unless you're professional and it stacks up economically. The other thing that's slowing me from rushing off down the digital path is lenses. You say they are always a good investment, and I can't think you would ever go far wrong there, but consider this.

At the moment, 35mm lenses are designed to cover a 24x36mm format whereas most digital CCDs are about half that size. Only Contax have a full-frame digital SLR. My guess is that the smaller format will win and set a new standard.

If that happens, then a whole new range of lenses will be produced. They will be smaller and lighter and quite possibly have startling specifications and performance. I say this because at the moment a lens has to focus the image on to a flat piece of film; if that film could be made concave a major restriction to lens design is removed. Obviously, a CCD does not have to be made flat.

Sorry to throw another spanner in the works. The agony of choice

Richard.

NBW

Just been reading the review of the Fuji Finepix S2 Pro in AP, looks really good:

100 quid cheaper than the Nikon D100 (both are based on the Nikon F80).
Uses AA batteries.
12Mp (interpolated from 6Mp CCD).
CF (incl. Microdrives) and/or Smartmedia.
Firewire and USB.

Only downside I can see is the 1fps in burst mode, but my F801s manages 3.3, so that's not really an issue.

Cheers
Tim

NBW

Thanks all, especially Hoppy!

I am now the proud owner of a Fuji S2 Pro, and what a cracking piece of kit it is!

I've kept the F801s, but I can't see it getting much use!!!

Hoppy