upgrading from analog to digital - less wide-angle

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by kris.vandevijver@gmail.com, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Hi, currently I still have a 'old' Nikon F301/N2000 analog slr. For
    many years, I enjoyed this camera and I will probably keep it forever.
    :)
    Still, I'm thinking of moving on towards a DSLR and of course, because
    I could still use some of my lenses, I'm thinking of a Nikon D70. Read
    some reviews, looked at some pictures and it's all very promising.
    This way, I can choose between my old analog and my newer digital, so I
    don't miss anything. Why would I move on to a D70. Well, that's pretty
    obvious I guess: easy, because I don't have to run to the shop to get
    my film developped, cheaper in the long run (no development costs),
    better body with more possiblities, built-in flash, better
    metering-system probably, no more time lost scanning all my negatives
    and slides, etc.
    But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?

    /Kris
     
    , Mar 15, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. tlianza Guest

    The do complain about the lack of wide angle all the time. In your case you
    could add the wide angle 12-24 DX lens from Nikon or one of the other
    variants from Tokina or another third party vendor. The Nikon DX line is
    quite extensive, 7 lenses, and it has been designed with the smaller sensor
    in mind. I own a D100 and a D2X as well as a large number of analog bodies,
    and I haven't found it a problem. When I went digital I purchased the
    12-24mm DX Nikkor and the 17 to 55 f2.8 DX (that was a very expensive
    lens....) . Those two lenses basically cover the bulk of the range that I
    use when I travel. I also have the 70-200VR which works well on my F100. I
    always bring the F100 along just incase of digital disaster. The F100 also
    works on AA batteries which means you can basically get power anywhere.....
    I have the 24-120VR as well, So basically 5 lenses and 3 bodies cover both
    the analog and digital workflows that I use. Realistically speaking, the
    D100 doesn't see much use these days...and the F100 sees even less, but they
    are always along for the ride.

    --
    Tom Lianza
    Director of Display and Capture Technologies
    GretagMacbeth LLC
    3 Industrial Drive
    Unit 7&8
    Windham, NH 03087
    603.681.0315 x232 Tel
    603.681.0316 Fax


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi, currently I still have a 'old' Nikon F301/N2000 analog slr. For
    > many years, I enjoyed this camera and I will probably keep it forever.
    > :)
    > Still, I'm thinking of moving on towards a DSLR and of course, because
    > I could still use some of my lenses, I'm thinking of a Nikon D70. Read
    > some reviews, looked at some pictures and it's all very promising.
    > This way, I can choose between my old analog and my newer digital, so I
    > don't miss anything. Why would I move on to a D70. Well, that's pretty
    > obvious I guess: easy, because I don't have to run to the shop to get
    > my film developped, cheaper in the long run (no development costs),
    > better body with more possiblities, built-in flash, better
    > metering-system probably, no more time lost scanning all my negatives
    > and slides, etc.
    > But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    > to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    > capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    > 35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    > because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    > analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    > DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?
    >
    > /Kris
    >
     
    tlianza, Mar 15, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ian Tindale Guest

    wrote:
    > In this case, when I'm going
    > to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    > capabilities.


    When they get that old, some parts do become loose. It's generally not
    a problem, but if it bothers you, take the offending item in to a
    camera repairer to have it tightened up.
     
    Ian Tindale, Mar 15, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    wrote:
    > I wonder why not more
    > DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?


    It might be because there is no such lack?
    But you shall add the price tag of one specific nikkor DX or sigma DC
    wide lens to the one of the body.
    There wasn't much choice in this area a few years ago, but plenty (or
    at least sufficient) now.

    You might also remark that this is great news if you lacked some tele
    at the other end ;o).
     
    , Mar 15, 2006
    #4
  5. mrsgator88 Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    > to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    > capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    > 35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    > because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    > analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    > DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?


    We are complaining, but we're not getting far. I've got a nice (IMO) Canon
    setup, with four nice lenses carefully chosen for the way I shoot. If I
    went digital, I'd end up replacing all the lenses (probably even my 70-210).
    For that kind of money, to basically start over, I'd consider the other
    systems, including Oly (newer designs, not trying to leach off 35mm
    equipment), Pentax (same sensor as Nikon and probably less expensive to
    outfit), and Minolta (built-in antishake, Tokina and Tamron lenses still
    available if Sony kills it off).

    The other things I prefer about my Elan - the battery lasts FOREVER, true
    "instant on" - the DSLR cameras are just starting to do. There are real
    technological issues that make a full-frame sensor more expensive. You
    can't just increase the size of the sensor, it also has to be able to accept
    light rays that hit it at a sharper angle. To have such a sensor at a
    consumer price point hasn't happened yet. By the time it is available at a
    consumer price, it may be irrelevant if there's enough penetration of "crop
    factor" bodies and lenses into the marketplace.

    I expect that in a few years Canon will offer a full frame sensor camera
    body similar to the Elan, at an "almost reasonable" price, to get laggards
    like me on board their DSLR program. But by then I might have gone with a
    new system. In the meantime, most of my "day-to-day" shooting is with a
    digital P&S.

    Products that succeed are not always the best at what they do, but rather
    offer the right set of compromises. I think the jury is still out on DSLRs,
    but the opinions on this newsgroup certainly show which way it's leaning.

    Steve
     
    mrsgator88, Mar 15, 2006
    #5
  6. On 15 Mar 2006 05:01:45 -0800, wrote:

    snipped

    >But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    >to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    >capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    >35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    >because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    >analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    >DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?


    Just get a Canon 5D all my wides are backing being wide.

    Full Frame sensors don't have the problem you are describing.


    *****************************************************

    "Vietnam is what we had instead of happy childhoods."

    Tim Page in
    "Dispatches"
    by Michael Herr
     
    John A. Stovall, Mar 15, 2006
    #6
  7. Scott W Guest

    I have been complaining about it for sometime now. In fact when DSLRs
    first came out I said I would not buy one until they had a full frame
    one. It was the EF-S Lenses that finally convinced me to buy a 20D.
    But there are a lot of lenses missing in that line up, like a wide
    angle prime lens, say 12.5mm.

    For now I get my extremely wide angle shoots by stitching photos, this
    allows for some very wide angle shoots that would be hard to get with a
    lens. As an example this photo has a horizontal field of view over 180
    degrees.
    http://www.sewcon.com/temp/pan12.jpg

    The same shot with a 15mm rectilinear lens on a full frame 35mm camera
    would look like this
    http://www.sewcon.com/temp/pan12b.jpg

    Still I would love to see a 12.5mm EF-S lens at some point in time.

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Mar 15, 2006
    #7
  8. wrote:

    > I like taking pictures at 24mm. I wonder why not more
    > DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?


    On my Pentax DSLR I use a Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 semi-fisheye lens. Freeware can
    "de-fish" the image to perfectly rectilinear. The Pentax DSLR 1.5 FOV factor
    turns it into a nominal 24mm lens, but many say the FOV seems closer to 21mm.
    It is sharp and a joy to use, if you like WIIIIDE.

    Also available in Nikon mount:

    http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/zenitar_n_fisheye_lens.htm
     
    Charles Gillen, Mar 15, 2006
    #8
  9. Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    > Just get a Canon 5D all my wides are backing being wide.
    >
    > Full Frame sensors don't have the problem you are describing.


    On the other hand the 5D is not that good at wide angle, with current
    lenses.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330 and E500 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus E500 resource - http://myolympus.org/E500/
     
    Alfred Molon, Mar 16, 2006
    #9
  10. Ian Harding Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > wrote:
    >
    >> But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    >> to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    >> capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    >> 35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    >> because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    >> analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    >> DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?

    >
    >
    > Everyone complains about it.


    I don't ;-)

    My film SLR is a Praktika LTL. No one makes a DSLR with M42 mount, and
    all but the Carl Zeiss 50/1.8 lens are so crappy I don't want to use
    them anyway now I can afford something better. Buying a DSLR, I had no
    choice but to start from scratch.

    My kit is D70, 15mm FF fisheye, 18-70mm kit lens, 30mm, 50mm, and
    80-200mm. Covers everything I want to do, and at a lower cost than the
    full frame equivalents of those lenses.

    Granted, if I had already owned a good set of lenses, I wouldn't be
    happy and would have been facing at least one new purchase to keep the
    wide end. However, I think there are a lot of people in my position who
    owned an obsolete 35mm SLR or never owned one at all and are happy
    because they couldn't care less about sensor size and can put together a
    new set of lenses for less money.

    Ian
     
    Ian Harding, Mar 16, 2006
    #10
  11. SMS Guest

    Ian Harding wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    >>> to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    >>> capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    >>> 35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    >>> because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    >>> analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    >>> DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?

    >>
    >>
    >> Everyone complains about it.

    >
    > I don't ;-)


    Okay, everyone except you.
     
    SMS, Mar 16, 2006
    #11
  12. Neil Ellwood Guest

    On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 08:48:13 -0800, SMS wrote:

    > Ian Harding wrote:
    >> SMS wrote:
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    >>>> to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    >>>> capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    >>>> 35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    >>>> because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    >>>> analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    >>>> DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Everyone complains about it.

    >>
    >> I don't ;-)

    >
    > Okay, everyone except you.

    Get a full frame digital and you can stop moaning.
    --
    Neil
    Delete 'l' to reply by email
     
    Neil Ellwood, Mar 16, 2006
    #12
  13. wrote:

    > But .... everything comes with a price... In this case, when I'm going
    > to use my old lenses, I'm going to loose a part of the wide-angle
    > capabilities. For example, my 24-85mm lens will be 'converted' to a
    > 35-120mm lens when I connect it to a DSLR. Now that's a real shame,
    > because I like taking pictures at 24mm. I know, I could switch to the
    > analog body every time 24mm is desired, but I wonder why not more
    > DSLR-users are complaining about the lack of wide-angle?


    I noticed it when I acquired my Maxxum DSLR with a 1.5 magnification factor,
    my old Tokina 20~35 zoom suddenly became rather mundane. Fixed this with a
    Sigma 12~24. Added plus is the full-frame Sigma also works on my older film
    Maxxums as an amazingly wide angle lens!

    Since my real interest is aviation photography, I had no complaints at all
    when my 500mm tele became a 750mm... ;^)

    Bob ^,,^
     
    Bob Harrington, Mar 17, 2006
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    10
    Views:
    745
    Paul Rubin
    Jan 9, 2006
  2. rowan194
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    819
    J. Clarke
    Jul 2, 2006
  3. Dauphin de Viennois

    Re: DSLR lenses not good wide open at wide angle?

    Dauphin de Viennois, Jul 16, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    533
    Roy Smith
    Jul 16, 2008
  4. PeterN

    Re: Wide gamut vs less wide gamut monitors

    PeterN, Feb 16, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    837
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Mar 1, 2013
  5. Wolfgang Weisselberg

    Re: Wide gamut vs less wide gamut monitors

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Mar 1, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    181
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Mar 1, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page