converting from film to digital

[cfcstl]

I was an experienced u/w photographer before digital cameras and stopped diving for a while. I'm back into diving again and was wondering how hard is it for a film u/w photographer to adapt to the digital format. I'm not asking for a digital photo class but paradoxically speaking do I have to completely redo my mindset from film to digital?
I used and still have my underwater housings and canon f-1 with a speedfinder and my macro and wide angle lenses. I shot everything manual with k64 film.

I spoke with someone at Ikelite and they told me my substrobe 150 and substrobe m were no good for digital photography. I was playing with my substrobe ms and my canon sx110, and I was getting a good slave flash from the ms so I am not sure what ikelite was talking about.

One thing I noticed about digital even though you don't have the limitation on frames, I seem to go through batteries a lot.

So if I decide to try digital still photography underwater, is my old way of thinking going to confuse me or help me?

 

[shoturtle]

It should be no issue. The battery consumption issue varies with camera and the size of the battery. On my dslr, the lithium batter will last for 500 photos and about 900 with no uses of the flash and IS on. Brothers AA battery power dslr, he gets close to 1100 photos no flash with 4 AA 2900mnh batteries. And even more with lithium non rechargeable in his K-x. If you turn the IS off, it conserves the battery a little.

Think ikelite is trying to have you move up. But the only way to be certain to test it out for yourself.

 

[fdog]

If you were very experienced as a photographer, you will find that the hardest leap is your mental perception of framing. A 20 mm just isn't as wide as it used to be. A 300 f 2.8 is looooong.

Unless you spend the $ for a full-frame camera.


...And switching from K64? Say goodbye to shadows you could pull detail out of with perfectly toned highlights (at the same time) in full sun...at first, digital will turn you into a seeker of flat light.

They're just different. <shrugs> Learn the tool's advantages and play to them.

All the best, James

 

[Nemrod]

Yeah, you will have problems. The new digital people talk about "noise" and don't understand light meters and yak on about something called a "histogram" and then they take their "files" that are some how RAW rather than NEGATIVE and put them in something called a Photoshop and manipulate them into something that may resemble an image but might also look like a LSD induced dream. They also have no idea what Tri-X is, don't appreciate grain, B&W is done apparently by just sliding the color bar to zero and Kodachrome is a song????? Beats me what a mega pixel is except more is gooder unless noise is badder and then lesser is more-er. Apparently the sensor size is about half that of an Instamatic 110 unless you pay more than a s----load of money for a camera that will be obsolete in three months. Oh, and you need a computer, but it seems you have one of those.

The camera you have chosen, that would not be my choice for an all around underwater camera. The super zoom cameras are problematic for accessory lenses, if that is on your radar screen at all.

Oh, and with film, your 15 year old camera could be immediately updated to use the newest sensor (film) and now you just buy a new camera every other year.

Oh, and your old F series Canon could live in the real world, one drop of errant water on these digi jobs, you will need a new camera sooner than later.

N

 

[shoturtle]

Nimrod,

That is why I will never get ride of my canon Eos 1 or canon AE-1 program. They are build like bricks. And with he right film, you have better dynamic range then digital, though HDR is getting pretty impressive. I must admit.

 

[bvanant]

Yeah, you will have problems. The new digital people talk about "noise" and don't understand light meters and yak on about something called a "histogram" and then they take their "files" that are some how RAW rather than NEGATIVE and put them in something called a Photoshop and manipulate them into something that may resemble an image but might also look like a LSD induced dream. They also have no idea what Tri-X is, don't appreciate grain, B&W is done apparently by just sliding the color bar to zero and Kodachrome is a song????? Beats me what a mega pixel is except more is gooder unless noise is badder and then lesser is more-er. Apparently the sensor size is about half that of an Instamatic 110 unless you pay more than a s----load of money for a camera that will be obsolete in three months. Oh, and you need a computer, but it seems you have one of those.

The camera you have chosen, that would not be my choice for an all around underwater camera. The super zoom cameras are problematic for accessory lenses, if that is on your radar screen at all.

Oh, and with film, your 15 year old camera could be immediately updated to use the newest sensor (film) and now you just buy a new camera every other year.

Oh, and your old F series Canon could live in the real world, one drop of errant water on these digi jobs, you will need a new camera sooner than later.

N

Slow down there big fella. Lots of digital photographers know what Tri-x is and some of us know what Scala was too. I still shoot Tri-x in a 4x5 view camera when I want a good B&W picture and I know what Kodachrome was too. But underwater when I think of film, I believe that most folks who were really serious were shooting Velvia not Kodachrome. Some of us know what light meters are too and in fact there are even cameras today that have light meters in them, imagine that. In fact most modern cameras take pretty nice pictures out of the box. As for sensor size, why do you care at all if the pictures are nice. The same arguments have been going on in film for many years and there are lots of landscape guys who think a 6x6 Hasselblad means you aren't a real photographer and in fact if I take my 4x5 to a workshop, I often get asked where did i get the toy camera. Since I can't figure out how to house my 4x5 and still change films (1 photo per dive is a bit limiting) I just take my DSLR and occasionally I can actually get a pic I like.

As for the OP, I would agree that his camera choice wouldn't be mine. And if you didn't have a computer, how could you waste time reading Scubaboard.

Bill

 

[idocsteve]

I'm back into diving again and was wondering how hard is it for a film u/w photographer to adapt to the digital format. I'm not asking for a digital photo class but paradoxically speaking do I have to completely redo my mindset from film to digital?

White man speak in strange tongue!

What is this "film" that you speak of?

 

[Nemrod]

Slow down there big fella. Lots of digital photographers know what Tri-x is and some of us know what Scala was too. I still shoot Tri-x in a 4x5 view camera when I want a good B&W picture and I know what Kodachrome was too. But underwater when I think of film, I believe that most folks who were really serious were shooting Velvia not Kodachrome. Some of us know what light meters are too and in fact there are even cameras today that have light meters in them, imagine that. In fact most modern cameras take pretty nice pictures out of the box. As for sensor size, why do you care at all if the pictures are nice. The same arguments have been going on in film for many years and there are lots of landscape guys who think a 6x6 Hasselblad means you aren't a real photographer and in fact if I take my 4x5 to a workshop, I often get asked where did i get the toy camera. Since I can't figure out how to house my 4x5 and still change films (1 photo per dive is a bit limiting) I just take my DSLR and occasionally I can actually get a pic I like.

As for the OP, I would agree that his camera choice wouldn't be mine. And if you didn't have a computer, how could you waste time reading Scubaboard.

Bill

Dude, y'all done took my Kodachrome away :depressed:

Sooner or later some of you guys will figure out that I am just fooling with you :kiss2:

Stink'n Velvia, is that some sort of cheese or something

N:blinking:

 

[cfcstl]

Thanks for the replies, especially about not using the Canon sx110. I was thinking about buying a case but now I think I'm going to try and put together my old setup for my next trip. I think I will use print film and when its developed, transfer to digital from the negatives.

 

[bvanant]

Dude, y'all done took my Kodachrome away :depressed:

Sooner or later some of you guys will figure out that I am just fooling with you :kiss2:

Stink'n Velvia, is that some sort of cheese or something

N:blinking:

You were KIDDING? Would have never guessed.
Dive Safe
Bill