View Full Version : digital or traditional?
10-22-2004, 08:35 PM
uuuh-hi. question... would you recommend rather having a digital camera or a uuuum-normal one? i have both but prefer using the digital one cos it's better for practice... but i don't handle it very well... a DSC-F828 cybershot...
and what in the world is aperture for???? and how do you get some things in focus and others blurry... ? and ect... i'm a real novice... so advice of any kind would be great!!! thanks...
10-22-2004, 10:03 PM
I prefer digital, simply because I've had photo labs ruin more than one set of pictures. In my experience, Wal-Mart seems to be the worse, but maybe I've just been unlucky and Wal-Mart isn't the only one to ruin pictures. I got tired of that real quick.
An additional advantage of digital is you can see right away if you got a good shot. This often will give you another chance to get it right if the first shot is bad. You don't get that option with film.
As for aperature, that's the size of the opening on the camera that allows light to get to the film (or sensor for digital). Shutter speed is how long the aperature stays open.
For a properly exposed picture a certain amount of light must enter the camera. Larger aperature (indicated by smaller numbers ironically) mean more light can enter per second, so the shutter has to stay open less time. OTOH, a small aperature (large numbers) means the shutter must stay open longer.
This affects focus in two ways. If objects are moving, you need a fast shutter speed or things will be blurry (sometimes you want this; most of the time you don't). In this case, a larger aperature is needed.
However, aperature size has another affect on focus. The smaller the aperature, the more things will be in focus (assuming they aren't moving). This is called depth of field (DOF). A large aperature will result in only the object the camera is focusing on to be in focus and everything else blurry. This is probably most common for people pictures. A blurry background doesn't distract from the people.
10-25-2004, 11:30 PM
If you really want to learn about photography then go to your nearest camera shop and buy a 35mm SLR with manual focussing and manual TTL (through the lens) metering. That way you will learn what aperture is all about, how it relates to shutter speed etc. My own view is that although digital can be very helpful it can also make people lazy. Lazy because they get into the mindset of "If I press the shutter release often enough I will get a decent picture". That is probably a true statement but you won't have the slightest idea why you got the result you did. Sure, film costs money, but that is why film users tend to think more about what they see in the viewfinder and what they want as an end result.
I have used film cameras for about 40 years now and still do. I also have a Nikon Coolpix 3200 sat on the desk beside me as I type this. The results are stunning and it is great to be able to check the results as I go. I still think that I wouldn't as proficient at producing half decent results if I had stayed with a point and shoot film 'compact' camera.
There are potential issues with the CCD on most digital cameras being much smaller than a 35mm negative, but I won't go there in this discussion.
I am definitely NOT anti digital but I do have concerns about the value of, specifically compact, digital cameras to somebody new to photography who wants to learn. In the UK, the cheapest digital SLR is still around £600+. You can probably pick up a second hand film camera of the spec I mention for well under £100. If you then spend half of the rest on film and processing plus membership of a local camera club, it will be money well spent.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.