«

Hello Group,

Hope someone has a bit of time and insight to share with me. Here's my
situation. I'm currently a Contax/Yashica 35mm SLR system . . . good line up
of lenses and several bodies. A near-complete list is at the bottom of this
post. Furthermore, I am using a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED film scanner
(roughly 20MP image, scratch and dust removal, grain removal, etc.). I am
looking to go digital and I am willing to compromise in certain areas and to
certain degrees. Here's a rough breakdown of what I shoot:

Weddings: 30%
Still Life Studio(Motorcycles, furniture, small items like food and stuff):
30%
Portraits: 15%
Street/Event: 25%

Of the above, about 25% is black and white and the rest, obviously, is
colour. Other than the studio stuff and half of the wedding stuff,
everything is existing light.

I'm guessing I should probably hold on to some of my manual Contax/Zeiss
gear for black and white stuff since it's holding it's own pretty well
still. However, I intend to pick up a digital set up that's good for almost
all of my colour needs. From the lens list below, you'll see that most of my
shooting is within the 35-90mm range complemented with a fisheye and a nice
macro. Is there a digital SLR or high-end prosumer camera that you could
recommend? Image quality is the last thing on the sacrifice list. I can live
without autofocus if necessary. Same deal with portability. Also, since that
the setup isn't a complete replacement of my gear, I'm not willing to shell
out more than about $2500US for the camera, lens(es) and flash . . . so
excluding memory. I was considering the Olympus E-1, Sigma SD10, Fuji S2 Pro
and probably a good wide-angle zoom with each body and a decent flash. In
addition, I have access to a Contax 645 AF system. I know this system is
compatible with lots of digital backs but I haven't found one that's still
portable for a reasonable amount of money . . . everything's like $5000US+
(used) and needs another $3000 worth of accessories to make portable.

Or should I wait?

Thanks for your input. =)

- K

Cameras

Contax RTS-III
Contax AX
2 x Contax 167MT, one with databack/intervolometer
Contax 139MM
Contax 137Q
Contax G1

Lenses
2 x Zeiss T* Planar 50/1.4
Zeiss T* Planar 85/1.4
Zeiss T* Sonnar 135/2
Zeiss T* Distagon 35/1.4
Zeiss T* Full frame Fisheye 16/2.8
Zeiss T* Makro-Planar 60/2.8 1:1
Zeiss T* G-mount AF Planar 35/2
Zeiss T* G-mount AF Sonnar 90/2.8

Will you consider to buy a good quality film scanner? I am using a Nikon
4000 for 35mm because it can scan roll film and a Minolta Dimage for my
medium format now. I can keep the quality of film as well as digital files
now.

"Klyment Tan" <> ¦b¶l¥ó
news: ¤¤¼¶¼g...
> Hello Group,
>
> Hope someone has a bit of time and insight to share with me. Here's my
> situation. I'm currently a Contax/Yashica 35mm SLR system . . . good line
up
> of lenses and several bodies. A near-complete list is at the bottom of
this
> post. Furthermore, I am using a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED film scanner
> (roughly 20MP image, scratch and dust removal, grain removal, etc.). I am
> looking to go digital and I am willing to compromise in certain areas and
to
> certain degrees. Here's a rough breakdown of what I shoot:
>
> Weddings: 30%
> Still Life Studio(Motorcycles, furniture, small items like food and
stuff):
> 30%
> Portraits: 15%
> Street/Event: 25%
>
> Of the above, about 25% is black and white and the rest, obviously, is
> colour. Other than the studio stuff and half of the wedding stuff,
> everything is existing light.
>
> I'm guessing I should probably hold on to some of my manual Contax/Zeiss
> gear for black and white stuff since it's holding it's own pretty well
> still. However, I intend to pick up a digital set up that's good for
almost
> all of my colour needs. From the lens list below, you'll see that most of
my
> shooting is within the 35-90mm range complemented with a fisheye and a
nice
> macro. Is there a digital SLR or high-end prosumer camera that you could
> recommend? Image quality is the last thing on the sacrifice list. I can
live
> without autofocus if necessary. Same deal with portability. Also, since
that
> the setup isn't a complete replacement of my gear, I'm not willing to
shell
> out more than about $2500US for the camera, lens(es) and flash . . . so
> excluding memory. I was considering the Olympus E-1, Sigma SD10, Fuji S2
Pro
> and probably a good wide-angle zoom with each body and a decent flash. In
> addition, I have access to a Contax 645 AF system. I know this system is
> compatible with lots of digital backs but I haven't found one that's still
> portable for a reasonable amount of money . . . everything's like
$5000US+
> (used) and needs another $3000 worth of accessories to make portable.
>
> Or should I wait?
>
> Thanks for your input. =)
>
> - K
>
> Cameras
>
> Contax RTS-III
> Contax AX
> 2 x Contax 167MT, one with databack/intervolometer
> Contax 139MM
> Contax 137Q
> Contax G1
>
> Lenses
> 2 x Zeiss T* Planar 50/1.4
> Zeiss T* Planar 85/1.4
> Zeiss T* Sonnar 135/2
> Zeiss T* Distagon 35/1.4
> Zeiss T* Full frame Fisheye 16/2.8
> Zeiss T* Makro-Planar 60/2.8 1:1
> Zeiss T* G-mount AF Planar 35/2
> Zeiss T* G-mount AF Sonnar 90/2.8
>
>

[POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Nikon D70 w/Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 kit lens ($1300)
-> effective 35mm focal length range 28-105mm
Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF DX AF-S Autofocus Lens ($1000)
-> effective 35mm focal length range 18-35mm
-> review at <http://www.bythom.com/1224lens.htm>
Total w/o flash: $2300

If the on-camera flash isn't sufficient, there will soon be the new SB-600.
My guess is a street price of about $250, which almost makes your budget.
There's also the SB-800 if you need more power.

The Fuji S2 Pro is excellent, but blows your budget with the wide zoom, and
I personally don't think it makes sense to compromise the glass for a better
body.


In <> on Tue, 6 Apr 2004 05:23:38 -0600,
"Klyment Tan" <> wrote:

>Hope someone has a bit of time and insight to share with me. Here's my
>situation. I'm currently a Contax/Yashica 35mm SLR system . . . good line up
>of lenses and several bodies. A near-complete list is at the bottom of this
>post. Furthermore, I am using a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED film scanner
>(roughly 20MP image, scratch and dust removal, grain removal, etc.). I am
>looking to go digital and I am willing to compromise in certain areas and to
>certain degrees. Here's a rough breakdown of what I shoot:
>
>Weddings: 30%
>Still Life Studio(Motorcycles, furniture, small items like food and stuff):
>30%
>Portraits: 15%
>Street/Event: 25%
>
>Of the above, about 25% is black and white and the rest, obviously, is
>colour. Other than the studio stuff and half of the wedding stuff,
>everything is existing light.
>
>I'm guessing I should probably hold on to some of my manual Contax/Zeiss
>gear for black and white stuff since it's holding it's own pretty well
>still. However, I intend to pick up a digital set up that's good for almost
>all of my colour needs. From the lens list below, you'll see that most of my
>shooting is within the 35-90mm range complemented with a fisheye and a nice
>macro. Is there a digital SLR or high-end prosumer camera that you could
>recommend? Image quality is the last thing on the sacrifice list. I can live
>without autofocus if necessary. Same deal with portability. Also, since that
>the setup isn't a complete replacement of my gear, I'm not willing to shell
>out more than about $2500US for the camera, lens(es) and flash . . . so
>excluding memory. I was considering the Olympus E-1, Sigma SD10, Fuji S2 Pro
>and probably a good wide-angle zoom with each body and a decent flash. In
>addition, I have access to a Contax 645 AF system. I know this system is
>compatible with lots of digital backs but I haven't found one that's still
>portable for a reasonable amount of money . . . everything's like $5000US+
>(used) and needs another $3000 worth of accessories to make portable.
>
>Or should I wait?
>
>Thanks for your input. =)
>
>- K
>
>Cameras
>
>Contax RTS-III
>Contax AX
>2 x Contax 167MT, one with databack/intervolometer
>Contax 139MM
>Contax 137Q
>Contax G1
>
>Lenses
>2 x Zeiss T* Planar 50/1.4
>Zeiss T* Planar 85/1.4
>Zeiss T* Sonnar 135/2
>Zeiss T* Distagon 35/1.4
>Zeiss T* Full frame Fisheye 16/2.8
>Zeiss T* Makro-Planar 60/2.8 1:1
>Zeiss T* G-mount AF Planar 35/2
>Zeiss T* G-mount AF Sonnar 90/2.8
>

--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
<http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]

[On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:26:59 GMT, John Navas
<> wrote:]

>
> Nikon D70 w/Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 kit lens ($1300)
> -> effective 35mm focal length range 28-105mm
> Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF DX AF-S Autofocus Lens ($1000)
> -> effective 35mm focal length range 18-35mm
> -> review at <http://www.bythom.com/1224lens.htm>
> Total w/o flash: $2300
>
> If the on-camera flash isn't sufficient, there will soon be the new SB-600.
> My guess is a street price of about $250, which almost makes your budget.
> There's also the SB-800 if you need more power.
>
> The Fuji S2 Pro is excellent, but blows your budget with the wide zoom, and
> I personally don't think it makes sense to compromise the glass for a better
> body.

John, you know a lot more about this than I do, but I am
surprised you left out the Canon 10D. $5000 US would get a
very nice, very complete set-up.

I would still be reluctant to get a D70. They look wonderful
in terms of their specs -- better than the 10D's -- but they
are still very new. The 10D's are known to be good cameras.

The OP seems to like European cameras and equipment. I don't
disagree, but I also don't think he should lean that direction
when it comes do digital. Especially not to Contax.

My opinions...

[POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <> on Tue, 06 Apr 2004 14:35:27
-0400, The Other Harry <> wrote:

>[On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:26:59 GMT, John Navas
><> wrote:]
>
>> Nikon D70 w/Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 kit lens ($1300)
>> -> effective 35mm focal length range 28-105mm
>> Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF DX AF-S Autofocus Lens ($1000)
>> -> effective 35mm focal length range 18-35mm
>> -> review at <http://www.bythom.com/1224lens.htm>
>> Total w/o flash: $2300
>>
>> If the on-camera flash isn't sufficient, there will soon be the new SB-600.
>> My guess is a street price of about $250, which almost makes your budget.
>> There's also the SB-800 if you need more power.
>>
>> The Fuji S2 Pro is excellent, but blows your budget with the wide zoom, and
>> I personally don't think it makes sense to compromise the glass for a better
>> body.
>
>John, you know a lot more about this than I do, but I am
>surprised you left out the Canon 10D. $5000 US would get a
>very nice, very complete set-up.

I agree that the 10D is a great DSLR, but the budget is "$2500US for the
camera, lens(es) and flash."

>I would still be reluctant to get a D70. They look wonderful
>in terms of their specs -- better than the 10D's -- but they
>are still very new. The 10D's are known to be good cameras.

True, but I have a lot of faith in Nikon, and the early reports on the D70 are
very good indeed (e.g., <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/).

--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
<http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]

Thanks for your reply. =) I am currently using the same Nikon film scanner
and with the Contax 645 that I have access to I also have access to the
Nikon 8000 ED but it's just a pain to work with and doesn't have any auto
load stuff. I reasoned similarly to what you suggested . . . that I could
keep my film and still get digital copies but after using some digital
setups I noticed that if I'm working primarily in digital media, even with a
system with poorer optics, you get similar, if not sometimes better results.
And for studio work, I recently had the opportunity to play with a medium
format system equipped with a Phase One H20 and the shots are better than I
have seen on anything from medium format film. Furthermore, using a scanner
hinders smooth work flow . . . I'm going first through film which takes at
least two hours round trip (for film, 1 hour photo) or longer if for slides
and to top it off, even just multisampling 4x, a 35mm 4000DPI scan takes
about 5-10minutes. Cost of the film and processing also adds up. =)

- K

"Camera" <> wrote in message
news:407297ec$0$20219$ u...
> Will you consider to buy a good quality film scanner? I am using a Nikon
> 4000 for 35mm because it can scan roll film and a Minolta Dimage for my
> medium format now. I can keep the quality of film as well as digital
files
> now.
>
> "Klyment Tan" <> ¦b¶l¥ó
> news: ¤¤¼¶¼g...
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > Hope someone has a bit of time and insight to share with me. Here's my
> > situation. I'm currently a Contax/Yashica 35mm SLR system . . . good
line
> up
> > of lenses and several bodies. A near-complete list is at the bottom of
> this
> > post. Furthermore, I am using a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED film
scanner
> > (roughly 20MP image, scratch and dust removal, grain removal, etc.). I
am
> > looking to go digital and I am willing to compromise in certain areas
and
> to
> > certain degrees. Here's a rough breakdown of what I shoot:
> >
> > Weddings: 30%
> > Still Life Studio(Motorcycles, furniture, small items like food and
> stuff):
> > 30%
> > Portraits: 15%
> > Street/Event: 25%
> >
> > Of the above, about 25% is black and white and the rest, obviously, is
> > colour. Other than the studio stuff and half of the wedding stuff,
> > everything is existing light.
> >
> > I'm guessing I should probably hold on to some of my manual Contax/Zeiss
> > gear for black and white stuff since it's holding it's own pretty well
> > still. However, I intend to pick up a digital set up that's good for
> almost
> > all of my colour needs. From the lens list below, you'll see that most
of
> my
> > shooting is within the 35-90mm range complemented with a fisheye and a
> nice
> > macro. Is there a digital SLR or high-end prosumer camera that you could
> > recommend? Image quality is the last thing on the sacrifice list. I can
> live
> > without autofocus if necessary. Same deal with portability. Also, since
> that
> > the setup isn't a complete replacement of my gear, I'm not willing to
> shell
> > out more than about $2500US for the camera, lens(es) and flash . . . so
> > excluding memory. I was considering the Olympus E-1, Sigma SD10, Fuji S2
> Pro
> > and probably a good wide-angle zoom with each body and a decent flash.
In
> > addition, I have access to a Contax 645 AF system. I know this system is
> > compatible with lots of digital backs but I haven't found one that's
still
> > portable for a reasonable amount of money . . . everything's like
> $5000US+
> > (used) and needs another $3000 worth of accessories to make portable.
> >
> > Or should I wait?
> >
> > Thanks for your input. =)
> >
> > - K
> >
> > Cameras
> >
> > Contax RTS-III
> > Contax AX
> > 2 x Contax 167MT, one with databack/intervolometer
> > Contax 139MM
> > Contax 137Q
> > Contax G1
> >
> > Lenses
> > 2 x Zeiss T* Planar 50/1.4
> > Zeiss T* Planar 85/1.4
> > Zeiss T* Sonnar 135/2
> > Zeiss T* Distagon 35/1.4
> > Zeiss T* Full frame Fisheye 16/2.8
> > Zeiss T* Makro-Planar 60/2.8 1:1
> > Zeiss T* G-mount AF Planar 35/2
> > Zeiss T* G-mount AF Sonnar 90/2.8
> >
> >
>
>

Thanks for the replies, John and the Other Harry. =) At least with the 10D's
released in Canada, several wedding photographers have been noticing
focusing issues with the cameras, even if they are from completely different
batches. You'll get three nearly perfectly focused images and then one image
that's perfectly sharp . . . but if you don't snap the images all in a row
you usually don't get that perfectly sharp one. And the feel of Canon's
lenses when it comes to manual focusing makes manual focusing difficult. I
actually prefer manual focus but unlike the Zeiss lenses, Canon's were
designed to be primarily auto. =)

Also, for only a partial solution, even $4000 US is more than I really want
to spend.

That reminds me, though . . . whatever happened to Silicon Film? Thought
they had a working prototype for this digital film insert-like thingy at PMA
'01. Though it was only a 1.3MP and only for some Canon and Nikon pro
bodies, were there any updates and adaptations for different camera bodies?

- K

"The Other Harry" <> wrote in message
news:...
> [On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:26:59 GMT, John Navas
> <> wrote:]
>
> >
> > Nikon D70 w/Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 kit lens ($1300)
> > -> effective 35mm focal length range 28-105mm
> > Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF DX AF-S Autofocus Lens ($1000)
> > -> effective 35mm focal length range 18-35mm
> > -> review at <http://www.bythom.com/1224lens.htm>
> > Total w/o flash: $2300
> >
> > If the on-camera flash isn't sufficient, there will soon be the new
SB-600.
> > My guess is a street price of about $250, which almost makes your
budget.
> > There's also the SB-800 if you need more power.
> >
> > The Fuji S2 Pro is excellent, but blows your budget with the wide zoom,
and
> > I personally don't think it makes sense to compromise the glass for a
better
> > body.
>
> John, you know a lot more about this than I do, but I am
> surprised you left out the Canon 10D. $5000 US would get a
> very nice, very complete set-up.
>
> I would still be reluctant to get a D70. They look wonderful
> in terms of their specs -- better than the 10D's -- but they
> are still very new. The 10D's are known to be good cameras.
>
> The OP seems to like European cameras and equipment. I don't
> disagree, but I also don't think he should lean that direction
> when it comes do digital. Especially not to Contax.
>
> My opinions...
>

[On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:43:51 -0600, "Klyment Tan"
<> wrote:]

> Thanks for the replies, John and the Other Harry. =) At least with the 10D's
> released in Canada, several wedding photographers have been noticing
> focusing issues with the cameras...

There are supposedly some focusing problems with the Canons.
I don't have one (not a digi) and I have never used one. The
new Nikons supposedly have a problem or two also.

I'm just partial to Canons.

Look here (I have cited this website before), and then tell me
that this is not good enough for what you want to do:

<http://www.gillyworld.co.uk/ee15/index.php?groupid=10&lang=eng&pass=public>

Now I'll go bring my new Leica Digilux 2 off the front porch.
I'm actually afraid to open the box.

[On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 23:37:19 GMT, John Navas
<> wrote:]

> but the budget is "$2500US for the
> camera, lens(es) and flash.

I stand corrected. I focused on the largest number in his
post.