Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=76808&Start=1&Artist=Cheers&ByArtist=Yes

...but I gave in and part exchanged one of my Canon SLR's for a brand new FujiFilm S602 Pro digital. I have always been nervous about crossing the line from film to digital, but so far I am extremely pleased. The great benefit for me, is to be able to reject an image immediately after taking the shot...no more reject piles of prints LOL! Hopefully, it will mean a greater success rate with my extreme weather photography...fingers crossed ;o) http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=76808&Start=1&Artist=Cheers&ByArtist=Yes Cheers

Cheers, Cheers. Welcome to the Forum. Do let us know how the digital works out for you, particularly for your lightening shots. BTW, it helps to be crazy here. Ask anyone.

Uhh no i dont think your crazy as he slowly inches his way twords the door. Accually i do have a bit of experience with both digital and slr cameras. I love them both but in photography each one has its uses and limmits. The down side of a digital ( ok not the real expensive ones ) is your NOT going to get a quick shot off 70% of the time . Shooting kids is a good example . its hard enough with a regular camera . If your not in good light digitals most often have to think of God knows what and some times it must be the meaning of life . By the time its done the subect is long gone or all you have is a blurry foot or elbow. If your looking to take instant shots in mediocher lighting good luck. The upside is if your subject doesnt move you can do it all day long in what ever kind of light. For me the best part of a digital is the cost . I have a CD Mavica and it cost me pennies per shot . I have progress allot faster in my skills with a digital and saved $1,000s of dollars in developing cost that i can now pay to willing models who happen to like to pose in there opps never mind dont want to get Donald all wound up again. The point is digitals are great but it depends upon what your subjects are.

Thanks for the welcome to the Photography Forum, guys :O) You make some interesting points there tasquah. I could never give up my SLR's, which is a good thing as I'm yet to experience the limitations of digital. I must admit that the main reason that I decided to buy the 602 Pro, was because it retains all those the manual features, that I find I'm confortable with in a normal SLR. As soon as I'm comfortable with it Misha883, I'm sure I will be boring you all with my photos ;o) Thanks again. Cheers

Enjoy your stay with us......

Tas - Hey..I don't really care that you get to hang with beautiful models, especially those with stunning eyes and flowing hair ... nope, don't care at all. Take your old pictures ... doesn't bother me ......... not one single bit. Ummmmm .... you wouldn't happen to need someone to carry around your camera bag or reflectors or something, would you? I don't eat much..really. :) Hehehe...I'll get there one day. Actually thinking of taking a portrait/glamour workshop this winter. Seriously, I do have a question. I've thought about getting a digital camera just for something you mentioned. Practicing my technique and composition. As it stands, even when I have a bag full of film I tend to budget my shots because of the film/developing costs. There are times when I would like to go crazy and pop off a couple dozen shots using different angles and whatnot, but can't bring myself to "waste" that many frames. Wondered what everyone thought of using a digital for those times (thinking 3+ megapixel)? Or do you think sticking with film is a better idea, since part of the technique is understanding your film and how it will capture what you see. Realisticly, unless I went to a high-end digital SLR; I'm not going to get the quality I can get with Provia or Velvia, the incredible speed/low-light capability of an Ilford Delta 3200 or the beautiful rich blacks and white-whites of a Fuji Neopan Acros (and in some respects, even the highend DSLRs can't achieve these yet). -=>Donald

I cant speak for all digital cameras but if you dont sell your soul to get one you will come out ahead in the long run . And i am not even talking about one that will fit in your pockit. It has to have a REAL lens on it. You can set up a shot with it see how its going to look before you use the SLR . I can adjust my iso and go up and down a f-stops or 2 to see what will work best for a SLR. Things like that. If you have Photoshop you can fix most of the color problums with digital shots. You can even experiment with shots you never would have wasted film on that might leed to some good stuff . I can think of lots of reasons but they are mine and work for me. Do whats right for you. One last thing I went and bought mine at circit city because they gave me 2 weeks no questions asked return policy and i went through 3 before i bought the one i wanted . They also sell a extended warrinty for a resonable fee.

With 35mm film I tend to make a lot of exposures exploring the subject from different angles and lighting. [For me, "a lot" is 2 to 5 of the same thing, maybe 72 to 150 of the same session; e.g. a particular railroad car, and many different railroad cars. For serious "professionals" this is not even close to what they call "a lot."] Many times, the results turn out to be pleasant surprises. Sometimes this is not noticed 'til months later when I get around to photoshopping. And even years later, I may find something that, given a different treatment, turns out quite nice. Never throw away anything! I think if I had a digital my next purchase would have to be a DVD writer... It has been pointed out here in other threads that the LCD viewer on the digitals is really not accurate enough for critical evaluation. [One wonders though, when photographing people, it would seem to be great for evaluating facial expression, pose, etc... If nothing else, can immediately show the model what you are trying for.] For landscape, architecture, rocks & plants, etc., I've lately been trying to go in the other direction. Lugging 20lbs of medium format + tripod, all day with maybe 30 exposures. Forces me to look and think very carefully before pressing the shutter. We'll see how this experiment progresses over the next few seasons; it got REAL cold juggling the roll film in the woods yesterday... My people pictures have never been very good; good lighting, careful abstractions, but little personality... So, the point to all this rambling seems to be that different equipment works well for different manners of operating.

Crazy... not at all !!! Digital is what really got me started with photography; the fact that you can (almost) immediately see what you're doing means that "digital" is one big invitation to experiment ... and learn. There's very little obscurity about it. I find that with film (esp. colour), my work is bound to dissapear in "the black hole" for a couple of days until I can actually see what I was doing. Just a couple of weeks ago, my father lent me his Hasselblad medium format camera. Impressive stuff, but oh so frustrating having to find a half decent lab and waiting for nearly one full week to get the film developed (quite expensive too) and scanned. Nice results (nothing really really impressive), but in retrospect, I would have liked to experiment more "on the spot" building on the feed-back from each previous shot. Only Digital can offer that. So I really like my Dimage 5 (3 Mpix) : from various forums on the internet (+ the occasional "lucky shot") I've learned that there's a lot of potential yet to unleash from that camera, so the "experiment" continues. I've been able to test a wonderful semi-pro D-SLR : the Canon D60 and I've truly fallen in love with it. Virtually "noise-free" (grainless) pictures up to 400 ISO is a very hard number to beat. A wide range of very high quality glass and... again that immediacy of results making the learning curve very very gentle and exciting. So now I'm saving to get one myself (it'll take a while though, these cams are quite expensive...) So, welcome to the forum and I'm really looking forward seeing your work.

wheeze wheeze Welcome to the forum, Cheers! (Misha beat me to the Cheers, Cheers thingy...) It's okay. I think you found the perfect place. Everyone is crazy around here. Heh heh :-) (*

No thinking involved... THe word is out. You are crazy ;-)

Once again guys and girls, thank you for such a warm welcome...you sure are a nice (if not a bit mad) bunch of people ;o) Cheers

Hey! What's this, "not a bit mad" stuff? Some of us are certified a whole byte mad! [Que Dobby for bad pun...]

Dobby wants to know if Master Misha is insinuating something? Dobby is not mad. He is merely a house elf with a few eccentricities.

Congrats on your camera, but SLR and digital are not mutually exclusive. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Kodak--all make digital SLR's--that use normal lens mounts, etc.--just like a 'real' SLR LOL.

At the moment, I am using a Canon D60 with Canon 24-70L f/2.8, Canon 70-200L f/4, Canon 50 f/1.8, Sigma 15-30 EX f/3.5-4, Tamron macro 90 f/2.8 lenses.

LOL--we aren't crazy and glad you are joining us.

Hey there Alpha!!