Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
Larry Member
Joined: 22 Feb 2003 Posts: 1084 | TRs | Pics Location: Kitsap |
|
Larry
Member
|
Wed May 21, 2003 6:16 am
|
|
|
Maybe someone can give me some personal opinion.
I've been saving for a Canon 10D digital. But, I also like the reviews and features of the G3.
Here's my modus operandi: I don't make a lot of large prints, but sometimes I will make an occasional 11x14 or even 16x20. I will continue to use my medium format along with whatever digital camera I purchase, and even will use my 35mm on occasion. So...most of the time I will duplicate my efforts with both the digital and the medium format on the same image, if I think it's worth it on that particular image.
So...the medium format will take care of those "better" images that I want to make a large print from.
Would I be just as well off with the G3 for my purposes as I would with the 10D? The digital would mostly be used for "memory" images and for occasional web postings and email images.
I'm not cheap, but if I can get acceptable images from the G3, why not save some money?
Thanks for any suggestions. Tom? Newbie? Any others who are camera technophiles?
|
Back to top |
|
|
El Puma Member
Joined: 13 Nov 2002 Posts: 341 | TRs | Pics Location: Inside, wanting outside |
|
El Puma
Member
|
Wed May 21, 2003 12:16 pm
|
|
|
I am at the MOST a hobby technophile, but have used a friends Big Nikon as well as owning a 5000 (same basic decision-making process). While I like taking the few enlargeable shots, I value the portability and versatility of the 5000. Having processed a couple of 11x14's they turned out quite well. If you get close and examine the detail, you can start seeing some decrease in quality, but for something that hangs on my wall and not at a gallery it's plenty - for ME.
While it seems from your contributions that you embark predominantly on photography-oriented missions, you also mention carrying the medium format unit on those - for just those special enlargements. I like digital photography but feel nevertheless that there will always be a place for 6x7's etc. From that standpoint, I would personally choose the camera that complements the Medium with something that, in ability and resolution, lies somewhat between 35mm and medium-format (did you say Mamiya?), yet offers the versatility and storage of a digital...
You may find yourself liking it and carrying it more and more for those spur-of-the-moment finds (like a ferry in the sunset from the Alaska Way "parking lot" etc.). My 5000 accompanies me everywhere reasonable, something I wouldn't do with the D1X.
As I mentioned, I'm a hobbyist at best - this was my personal preference and still feels right - though it may not suit your individual needs. Best of luck and let us know what you decide (with samples of course )!
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Wed May 21, 2003 12:36 pm
|
|
|
To tell you the truth Larry, I'm debating the same thing myself. Sold my G2 after getting the 10D and really miss some things. The flip out LCD on the Gx gives you so many more options and shooting perspectives - with the 10D you need to compose thru the viewfinder due to the lack of live preview. This is also a disadvantage when adjusting exposure - you have to take the shot before you can see if it's properly exposed (probably not a big deal to a film guy but some of us have been spoiled by digital). I also have a hard time reviewing picture quality and exposure in the 10D LCD in bright sunlight - the Gx LCD has a superior anti-reflective coating IMO. Gx battery life is also much better (I get half the number of shots in the 10D as I did using the same battery in the G2). My G2 was small enough to slip into my front hiking short pocket - it was more accessible so I shot / experimented far more during the hike. The 10D is much heavier than I thought it would be, and the penalty grows if you carry multiple lenses (which you'll need to do if you want a 35 mm perspective due to the 1.6 multiplier and lack of zoom lenses with good range starting at 22mm x 1.6 = 34mm). For shooting landscapes, the Gx offers another significant advantage due to the huge DOF - shooting at f/4 everything is in focus from 3 feet to infinity. To get that on the 10D you need to stop down the aperture to f/11 - f/16 at which point sensor dust starts to appear . I'm concerned the sensor dust issue could become problematic in the field, particularly from changing lenses on the trail or in dusty surroundings. Of course, the 10D offers the ability to shoot at high ISO, opens up the world of long exposure / astrophotography, gives you ultimate lens flexibility, etc. I'd say the choice depends on your needs and what you plan to use the camera for. Unless the bulk of usage will be for telephoto, action, long exposure, or macro, the G3 will serve well.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Larry Member
Joined: 22 Feb 2003 Posts: 1084 | TRs | Pics Location: Kitsap |
|
Larry
Member
|
Wed May 21, 2003 9:32 pm
|
|
|
El Puma / Tom:
Thanks SO MUCH for REALLY good, incisive, detailed perspectives on the camera issue. I appreciate the intelligent and helpful information.
I'm truly leaning toward the G3, and you guys have made great points based on my needs.
I might have an opportunity to test drive a G3 from the local photo shop. I will be asking them next Tuesday if it's a "go"...
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate NWHikers.net earns from qualifying purchases when you use our link(s).
|