Medical reasons for going digital... !

Discussion in 'UK Photography' started by Jim, Oct 31, 2003.

  1. Jim

    Jim Guest

    Okay, well I love my F80 and all the assorted lenses,
    filters and bits and bobs - but carrying it all around is a
    problem because I'm having increasing trouble with
    osteoarthritis, and on a recent trip to Paris I really was
    asking myself if I could cope with the extra weight of my
    camera bag for even short walks of 20 minutes or so. A real

    I've been thinking of taking the plunge and going digital
    for some time, but I have been happy with my negative film
    and scanner. But this weight problem, while not
    justification in itself, might just tip the balance.

    I'm looking at something that must be light and as near as
    possible replicate the features I have on my F80.... Any
    suggestions? I'll check out the review sites, but there are
    so many choices, I'd appreciate a few recommended cameras to

    Jim, Oct 31, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jim

    Reid Guest

    Following up to Jim
    BTW another current pro digital factor, postal strike :-(
    Reid, Oct 31, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jim

    jean Guest

    Hey, that's a new one, I just did a tantrum to justify my new toys ;-)

    Seriously now,

    I went rough 3 digital cameras (Kodak DC240, Nikon coolpix 995 and Nikon
    coolpix 4500) and now I **think** I may have found the right combo. I have
    a Canon S400 I carry ALL the time and I have just bought a Canon digital
    Rebel. If you like your F80, you may not like a P+S digicam, even a good
    one like the coolpix series with all manual or auto settings. The
    difference between an SLR and a P+S is IMOHO too much. The Canon 300D
    digital Rebel is light enough for travelling and except for the large "eos
    digital" on the strap looks more incognito than the Canon 10D, not to
    mention the 10D is VERY heavy.

    The only thing heavy is the investment and the losses you suffer selling
    used equipment ;-)

    jean, Oct 31, 2003
  4. Jim

    Don Stauffer Guest

    I wonder if that is a good reason. You could go to a film P&S, scan
    negs, and have much the same results as you would get from a P&S
    digicam. Unless you pop for an expensive digital SLR, with
    interchangable lens, what you will buy will be a digital P&S that will
    give no better images, if as good, as a good film.

    If you go for a digital SLR with interchangable lenses, you may end up
    with a bag almost as heavy as you have now.

    To me, the reason to go with a digital camera is quick response in
    getting digital images, and not waiting for film to be developed.

    If you are digitizing film, you are already into digital photography. A
    scanned image is as digital as one from a digital camera.
    Don Stauffer, Oct 31, 2003
  5. Why not go for a Nikon 5700 for example - as you are a Nikon man.

    This is small and compact and has an 8x zoom as standard. It also has a very
    wide range of features.

    It is hard to see any difference between 5 and 6 million pixels in practice. I
    prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio anyway to the Canon 3:2, for my big enlargements,
    and with this aspect ratio the actual pixel count is very similar (I tend to
    crop the top and bottom of 3:2 ratio pictures)

    The advantage of this is that the camera can be always ready for use- no
    worrying about which lens to take ourt of the gadget bag etc., and for travel
    shots I find it more convenient.

    Snags- well I actually do a bit of commercial work as a photographer to
    supplement my pension. A nice black digtital SLR and bag of lenses looks a
    lot more professsional!

    Also, the Nikon 5700 has very poor low light focussing, is very noisy at higher
    asa ratings, and has a power hungry electronic viewfinder.

    But...if pictures and not status concern you, then the ability to have
    something like the 5700 always available means for me anyway that I tend to get
    more useful and interesting shots taken with this than my DSLR!

    CGannonOxford, Oct 31, 2003
  6. Jim

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Unfortunately the current crop of DSLR's are still relatively
    heavy (at least heavier than the F80), the lightest being the
    new Canon Digital Rebel, which I don't believe isn that much
    lighter than the F80 (N80 in the US, in case someone is
    wondering what kind of model that is.)

    If you want to pack lighter, I'm afraid your only choice is
    one of many P&S digitals available on the market. If you want
    to stay with Nikon, consider the 5700 (top of the line Nikon
    P&S.) Certainly not the lightest, but lighter than that may result
    in a compromise in picture quality and features, especially in
    comparison with the results you have been getting from your
    excellent F80.
    Paolo Pizzi, Oct 31, 2003
  7. Jim

    PlaneGuy Guest

    I disagree. The level of manual control in digi P&S's is far higher than
    that available in film SLRs
    PlaneGuy, Oct 31, 2003
  8. Jim

    Jim Guest

    Oh tantrums was my old approach, but I think carrying an SLR
    bag with several lenses and having my legs give way while
    crossing the Rue de Rivoli in the rush hour just has that
    more impact and panache ... certainly is a hell of a lot
    more dangerous! :)
    Thanks for that - I've had a look and the S400 is a serious
    contender in terms of size and specification for a
    take-everywhere P&S. Small, not very pretty (though I
    haven't handled one yet), but definitely seems to do the
    business... Come to think of it, that might describe me too,
    so maybe we will get along!
    Even worse - I'm thinking of hanging on to the SLR kit for
    occasions when quality is important and carrying is not. I
    really am not up to carrying a full bag of gear very far
    these days, but I love the F80 to pieces and would hate to
    lose it...

    Jim, Oct 31, 2003
  9. Jim

    Jim Guest

    Hi Don,

    I see your point, but as I mentioned, I do intend going to
    digital in anycase, but not until the kit is a little less
    expensive and performs a little better. So the F80 is
    probably safe, as is my scanning equipment. But a digital
    compact or ultracompact offers me the digital world's
    advantages as well as allowing me to carry my camera more
    than 50 yards at a time, so it looks like a good place to
    start. Won't suit everyone of course, and as they say,

    Jim, Oct 31, 2003
  10. Also look at the Canon A80 if you haven't already. It's basically the
    same sensor and possibly the same 3X zoom lens as the S400, but it has a
    flip-out LCD like the G3/G5 and real manual exposure modes. It is
    larger and lumpier than the S400 though.

    Dave Martindale, Nov 1, 2003
  11. Jim

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Look to the Digital Rebel and the new Pentax *ist for weight reduction. If
    you are willing to forgo lens changing there are a lot of very good digital
    P&S about.
    Tony Spadaro, Nov 1, 2003
  12. Jim

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    This is a blanket statement, it depends on the P&S
    and the SLR.

    Yes, the Nikon 5700, the Olympus E-20 or similar
    high-end P&S digicameras have a higher degree of
    manual control than the cheapest Canon Rebel or
    equivalent on another brand, but what about
    high-end SLR's?
    Paolo Pizzi, Nov 1, 2003
  13. Jim

    jean Guest

    I can just picture it, lucky you are still alive! Crossing any street in
    Paris is a challenge for anyone.
    Then you will miss the most appealing aspect of digital photography, you
    don't have to wait for the film to come back from the store and you can
    check your shots right after they were taken and retake a bad shot. I have
    heard there are adapter for Nikon lenses so you can put them on Canon EOS

    jean, Nov 1, 2003
  14. Jim

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Indeed? Like what?
    Ray Fischer, Nov 1, 2003
  15. Jim

    Bandicoot Guest

    Such as? (you stupid dago wop)
    Bandicoot, Nov 1, 2003
  16. Jim

    Jim Guest

    Actually I *do* intend to move to a digital SLR at some
    stage, but for the moment my priority is a lightweight
    camera. I played with a 300D (in Paris as it happens!) It's
    larger and heavier than my F80, the weight of which is where
    this thread began. In fact the 35mm lenses are more of a
    problem than the body as the weight soon adds up. An
    ultracompact for carrying around, and my F80 for higher
    quality, prepared, reflective shots might be the answer.
    Eventually, however, I do expect to go fully digital, but
    for the moment scanned negatives from the F80 still seem the
    more cost effective and "hi-fi" solution.

    Jim, Nov 1, 2003
  17. Jim

    Jerry Guest

    Don't overlook the Olympus c5050z. It is a very capable camera.
    Jerry, Nov 1, 2003
  18. Jim

    jean Guest

    You think too much before making a move, tantrums will cloud your tought
    process and let you make knee jerk reactions so you can buy that nice new
    *digital* SLR which you will eventually get anyway ;-)

    Whatever you do, you will not be disappointed with the Canon S400, it is
    small, easy to carry but for true happiness in a single digital camera, look
    at the Canon models with a little more manual control. Even if they are
    slightly larger, the increased flexibility will probably save the day on
    some occasions. Whatever camera you do get, carry it around ALL the time
    then you will never say "I wish I had my camera with me" After initial
    purchase, there is practicaly no cost to taking pictures.

    jean, Nov 1, 2003
  19. Jim

    Dave Smith Guest

    Hello, Jim,

    I can empathise with you on the arthritis problems. Have you thought of
    putting your camera kit in a rucksack, rather than carrying it in a
    shoulder bag? Works for me.

    I don't know what facilities you have on the F80 - I'm a Canon user, but
    I've also got a Fuji S602. Lighter than an SLR, but quite capable. I
    make considerable use of it professionally.


    Dave (also of UPSA)
    Dave Smith, Nov 1, 2003
  20. Jim

    Tim Smith Guest

    Yep. One of the smallest and lightest is the Canon S400 (USA model
    designation--see for other international designations).

    When I was in France last year, I took only my Canon S100 (precursor
    by several generations to the S400). Got some good pictures, probably
    not anything National Geographic would want to publish, but OK by my
    standards. When I got back home, I sold the S100 and got a Canon
    G3--more MPs, and more features. But still not an SLR, and I didn't
    like it much. (Just for my uses--for many people it's a great camera.)

    So I decided that since I'm going completely digital, I sell the G3,
    and get an S400 for a very (*very*) portable P&S, and a Nikon D100 for
    the more serious stuff. And D100 because I did have some Nikon lenses
    (now more telephoto than ever).

    Both cameras are brilliant for what they do! I don't think you'll find
    much weight difference among the current crop of dSLRs. The 300D and
    the *ist seemed to me to be the lightest of the crop as I was handling
    them in the shops. Oh, and let's not forget the very nice Olympus E-1,
    if you have no investment in Canon or Nikon glass.

    What I try to do, as a fellow arthritis sufferer, is just reduce the
    stuff I carry with the SLR. Just a couple of light prime lenses, you
    don't need much in the way of filters for digital, and CF cards weigh
    less than film cannisters (yes, every gram counts).
    Tim Smith, Nov 2, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.