Excuse me, I have nowhere else to go

[rsantoscoy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear all,

 

I started taking photographs when my father gave me his canon A1 with a fixed 50 mm lens when I graduated from high school. As you all know, (especially with analog), most of the time, it´s quite hard to describe what makes you pull the trigger, what finally makes you push the button. When you throw in the chemicals and you see your shots, it also becomes a way of knowing yourself. Objectively you can tell if the picture is good or not, but regardless of the quality, it tells you something about yourself, about your view of the world.

 

Later when you begin experimenting, in particular in the long hours inside the dark room, you become a magician.

 

As you might have experienced, living in a city in early 21st century capitalism has it´s downfalls. Time seems to fly and exquisite activities are hit by inflation.

 

I recently took a trip through southern Mexico and I shoot 9 rolls of film. It cost me 250 dollars to develop my film and print maybe 100 pictures. And hence I began to think about digital photography.

 

I joined the forum and paid attention to all of your insightful conversations. This is truly a great community, fights and self-promotion included. Of course, I have been following the release of the M8 and the digilux with passion.

 

I have thought about several strategies again and again, but there is simply no way I can afford a Leica camera. At least not in this decade. (I have tried staring at the web brochures for hours while I daydream and I still don't find a camera when I wake up!!).

 

So here I come, asking for your advice. For a camera that resembles my A1 (manual controls, the size, the quality of the body), but that takes advantage of the digital era. I have perhaps 1,000 dollars to spend. How would you guys spend it? I´m planning to do my purchase around september this year.

 

Thank you in advance for the help. Replying here is great for the sake of discussion and as a resource to other people, but if you prefer to shoot me an email, fell free: raulsantoscoy at gmail dot com.

 

Again thank you.

 

Greetings from Mexico City,

 

Raúl

[jaapv]

If you can live with 28 mm as focal length, the Sigma SP1 ? Or, of course, a used Digilux2 might be just the thing.

[Thomas Edwards]

...i would seriously consider the panasonic/lumix version of the leica v-lux1 (you can get the specs off the web)...very good leica-designed lens with full manual capability at around usd450...or, as suggested, you could purchase a second-hand leica digilux2, probably the closest you will come to your a1 (save for the m8)...imho...

[stunsworth]

The Nikon and Canon SLR bodies can operate either fully automatically, or manually, so one of those should do. I think there's a new Canon entry level DSLR due soon - 450D, so you may be able to get hold of its predecessor cheaply.

 

Second hand digital cameras don't in general hold their value very well, so you should also be able to pick up something such as a used Canon 20D or even 30D and remain well within your budget. I had a 20D and it's a very capable camera.

 

I'm sure someone with experience of the equivalend Nikon models would also be able to make recommendations of those.

[luigi bertolotti]

Well, for 1K$ you have many good choices, considering that you START with Digital : but you've fallen HERE, and from HERE you can expect "Leica - oriented" advices... : mine is in line with a pair of above: used Digilux2 or V-Lux : the V-Lux enjoys a very strong zoom, but, respect to Digilux2, has, let me say, a more "standard Panasonic feel"... but here, and also directly from friends, I saw very fine pics taken with it.

 

If you are accustomed to work well with a single standard lens, a superzoom like the V-Lux' one can be a pleasant discovery, but also a risk : many photographers have became GREAT photographers using a single focal... it's a limitation that forces one to really find a style and a way of working of his own.

[lemalk]

Lumix L1.

PanaLeica DNA. Great manual controls. Can be found for less than $1000.

Can use manual legacy lenses (with an inexpensive adapter).

 

A little more scratch, and you're talking a secondhand RD-1.

[spylaw4]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Digilux 2 (provided it has a replaced sensor and despite its shortcomings) will give you superb results in a reasonably compact package. V-lux1 is also worth considering - goes longer but not so w/a.

The Panasonic equivalents of these will cost you less.

[dugby]

Raul.

 

I have both the Leica Digilux 2 (aka D2) and the Panasonic L1 (which got re-badged as the Digilux 3 by Leica).

 

They are very different cameras, and for for different occasions.

 

The D2 is:

lighter, smaller and totally silent shooting camera (no mirror ...therefore no slap)

The L1 is:

heavier, larger and a noisy shooter (has noisy mirror slap)

 

The D2 images are superb, the L1 images are even better.

 

The D2 requires careful and very deliberate shooting....often I miss a lot of candid shots with the D2. The L1 is very much faster and more flexible for candid shooting.

 

L1 also has OIS.......D2 has no OIS.

 

 

I changed from an Olympus OM4 to the D2, and it took only a few photos to bring a smile to my initially concerned feelings, as I bought the D2 without even holding one. (it was called blind-faith...)

 

There is a Panasonic version of the D2, called the LC1, which is lower cost to buy.

 

However I will say, I use the L1 90% of the time.

[photophile]

I use an m4-2, an m6 and now an m8. on the dslr side, a nikon d200. Given your budget and requirements, and the new d300 by nikon, save some money, buy a d200 ( excellent machine ) now lower priced, and a good zoom lens. That will be reliable and offer excellent image quality and also offers reasonable weather / dust seal for your part of the world. I used the d200 in mexico with excellent results. Good luck. CH

[Agent M10]

Raul, just my two cents. The transfer to digital photography doesn't involve just the camera, but also the print. I've got many, many friends who bought digital cameras and the only way they see the pictures is on a computer screen. Many of them bought the cameras not knowing what's involved in producing a good print.

 

So, I'm not saying don't buy a digital camera, but you could very well spend $250.00 in paper and ink on 100 photos with a digital print flow. Setting up a workable digital workflow for printing is expensive. Just something to think about as you move over to digital.

[stunsworth]

The transfer to digital photography doesn't involve just the camera, but also the print

 

Not necessarily. Anyone not wanting to invest in a printer can still take their digital files to a photo lab as they did with film, or indeed post or email them.

[Agent M10]

Steve, that's true (having prints made from the files), but that takes Raul back to his original dilemma - the cost of prints.

[stunsworth]

For small prints - say 6x4 or 7x5 - I'd expect a lab to be cheaper than home printing - I have an Epson 3800, but I have all my small prints printed by Jessops in the UK..

 

Another thing is that if you shoot digitally you don't need to have all the photographs printed, only the ones you want printed. So where as in the past you'd be paying for the printing of an entire roll of film - and its development - with digital you only need to pay for the 4 or 5 (or however many) you want printing.

[jerbear]

Digilux2 would be my choice. Just make sure the sensor has been replaced. You will love this camera.

 

Good luck in your search.

[Guest jimmy pro]

The Nikon and Canon SLR bodies can operate either fully automatically, or manually, so one of those should do. I think there's a new Canon entry level DSLR due soon - 450D, so you may be able to get hold of its predecessor cheaply.

 

Second hand digital cameras don't in general hold their value very well, so you should also be able to pick up something such as a used Canon 20D or even 30D and remain well within your budget. I had a 20D and it's a very capable camera.

 

I'm sure someone with experience of the equivalend Nikon models would also be able to make recommendations of those.

 

Agreed 100%. As long as you stay in the last couple generations (8MP minimum) Canon or Nikon DSLR's are the way to go. None of the Panaleicas can touch them.

[jank]

Raul, I am facing same dilemma.

I have narrowed down the selection to:

 

GX100 - very versatile camera , full manual contro and prests.Pocketable.

image stabilization, Wide angle to medium telephoto.

With electronic viewfinder great for macro.Additional lenses (extenders ) one can get a range from 18mm to 150mm equivalent focal lengths.

Most for the buck.With all accessories, w.a. and tele extenders , el vf. , exta batteries, memories, well below 1k$.

 

DP1 - pretty much same camera , as you have now, fixed lens. ,best image quality.

External optical vf will bring it to 1 k$.

 

DMC-L1= D3-

A full featured SLR,built as tank, accept. Leica lenses, huge selection of lenses from several mfg. Excellent IQ.Very expandable.With std kit lens just below 1k$.

The selection depends mostly on type of photograhy you do or rather intend to do.

Since you spent lot of time in darkroom, I expect you will spend yet more time in digital darkroom and hardy ever get anything printed outside.

Jan

[fotografr]

Consider sticking with film. You may find it much less expensive in the long run as you won't have to invest in computers with larger hard drives and more RAM, monitor calibration devices, image processing software, external storage devices, large capacity memory cards, printers & inks, etc, etc, etc.

 

Find a different lab, however. Yours seems a bit on the high side.

[rsantoscoy]

Thank you all for the input. I have read all the messages and researched your suggestions.

 

Of all the suggestions, I think the panasonic l1 get closer to my idea, meaning that the small, well-built body, and the manual controls with the ability of changing the lenses seems like the right tool.

 

Nikons and Canons seem to have great picture quality and good price for what they offer, but they fail on what I consider the basics: the feel of the camera when you handle it, which also reflects (stands out) and intimidates when you pull the camera out in normal settings, as I tend to do (I prefer "natural" photography, meaning that a situation is not induced for the sake of a photo).

 

However, when reading through your suggestions, I have come to the following conclusions:

 

will always stick with analog.

 

when purchasing digital equipment, you can't be worried about the "new" models constantly. You make a good choice, put the money down, and exploit the possibilities, without thinking and extra megapixel will make your pictures better. Nevertheless, there are moments where you do have to wait, let the sand settle, to take full advantage of a development cycle. The macs fan (and surf aficionados) know this. You never know when a new mac will come out, but with research and a sensitive analysis you can catch a new wave since it begins to form. Several bits of information point to a new cycle being announced by Leica in the next photokinia. It might not be a new camera, but we will know how the most import manufactures of quality digital cameras will go about in the next years. It probably won't make the models you suggest much cheaper, but it will still give me more tools to make a correct choice.

 

Of course, all of you already know what I'm taking about.

 

What you might not know, and I suggest you do it right now, is take a look at the pictures of Manual Alvarez Bravo. Google him or take a look at this link: MoMA.org | Exhibitions | 1997 | Manuel Alvarez Bravo | Photographs

 

May the force be with you all!!

 

Saludos,

 

Raúl

[DonQuijote]

Hola Raul,

 

Saludos de Nueva Zelandia - es una pregunta bastante dificil. Es mejor continuar en ingles porque me falta la practica de escribir en espanol (leer algo es mas facil).

 

In my mind you need to consider what type of photography you want to pursue and whether a compact digital (D-lux2, D-lux3 or PanaVersion), a single lens super-zoom camera (V-lux) or DSLR (Digilux3, Pana-L1) are the best choice for the type of photography. How often do you change camera i.e. how long does it have to last?

 

The D2 is good choice but in my view the D3 or Pana L1 is the better choice as you can change the lens and in general terms it gives you more flexibility. Also if you buy a cheap L1 body and good lenses you can always upgrade the body in the future to the Leica D4 or the Olympus E3 or future E4 body. The Leica kit lens (15-50mm f2.8) is worth the $1000 so if you can pick up a low cost Pana L1 you will get the camera body for next to nothing. Then you can add nice Leica or Olympus lenses as you go along.

 

Also whichever camera you end up considering try out the camera at a shop - feel and results.

 

Buena suerte, Miguel

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[cboudier]

...the panasonic l1 get closer to my idea, meaning that the small, well-built body

I know everything is relative, but the L1 is not known for its "small" body