Re: For sale...

In article <timstreater-1A2619.23514807032011@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim
Streater <timstreater@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The latest Nikon D3x (24.5MP) would be close enough in quality for my
purposes. Unfortunately, I can't afford it.

And it weighs 1.2kg, that's 3 possibly 4 times the weight of my 90s
Pentax M-ZM which had all the features I needed and could also do
full-frame. I only ever used KodaChrome 2 and was perfectly satisfied
with it.

I'm still waiting for nospam to explain why there is this weight
disparity.

are you really comparing a nikon d3x pro dslr with a manual focus
pentax m-zm?? you've got to be kidding me.

You were the one who brought up the nikon, not me.

not in comparison to small dslrs i didn't.

the nikon d3x is about the same size as a nikon f5. the nikon d40 is
about the same size as a nikon fm.

you do realize that slrs, both film and digital, come in a variety of
sizes, for a variety of purposes, right?

comparing the lightest film slr against the heaviest digital slr is
flat out disingenuous.

let's compare the nikon d3x with the nikon f5 film camera, which was
nikon's top of the line film camera before digital. well look at that,
the nikon f5 film camera weighs 1210g while the nikon d3x weighs 1240g,
a difference of a whole 30 grams.

I do't want to compare it with that. I want to compare it (or any other
dslr) with my Pentax M-ZM. Why do you have such difficulty with this
concept? The train of thought is this:

1) I have a Pentax M-ZM that weighed 350gm or so, had autowind, and
could take 35mm colour slide film. I had the (autofocus as it happens)
F1.4 50mm, and a much older F3.5 135mm and a 28mm F2.8.

and as i said, you have one of the lightest film cameras. most are
heavier than that.

2) For some obscure reason KodaChrome has been discontinued, so I have
to look at a digital replacement.

the reason is not obscure at all.

film is rapidly becoming a relic of history. kodachrome processing was
*very* complex, and prior to it's demise, only one facility in the
*world* was handling it. not even kodak was processing kodachrome
anymore. it won't be long before other films become difficult to find,
or maybe discontinued like kodachrome was. the stuff just ain't
selling.

Bugger me if I don't find that they
typically weigh two or three times as much, for no good reason that I
can find, and much more if I want a 35mm sensor to match my Pentax M-ZM.

the reasons have already been explained, but basically, you get a much
more capable camera, as well as one with a lot more metal than plastic.

as i said before (and provided numbers), digital slrs are not
significantly bigger or heavier than their film counterparts, but like
everything, there are a few exceptions and you happen to have one.

No, you provided numbers that confirm that dslr's are typically two or
three times heavier than a camera I used to use, but by and large can no
longer use, and would like to replace with something that has similar
weight and functionality.

nope. i provided comparisons with similar cameras, such as the nikon fm
and fe class film slrs (both about the same size, wonderful cameras in
their day), versus the nikon d40 class cameras (low end, entry level
dslrs).

i'm really puzzled as to why weight is so critical. isn't image quality
important?

if weight is the only thing that matters, get the pentax.

Which pentax? I already own the M-ZM.

that one.

most
photographers choose cameras for reasons *other* than weight, such as
image quality, feature set, reliability and choice of lenses and
accessories. plus, any difference in weight is likely to be lost with
the lenses, because the lenses for most digital slrs are smaller and
lighter than the film equivalents,

This is true and it helps, but I'm considering the bodies.

and i'm pointing out the fallacy of that, because you need at least one
lens with the body and therefore should include its weight (and size).
an slr without a lens is not particularly useful.

and there's also no need to carry dozens of rolls of film either.

Well I've never done that. The only times I've had 30 or so rolls of
film with me that were in a handy carrier inside the handy vehicle we
were in (due to the fact that lions and cheetahs can run faster than I
can).

you still had to pack them. 30 rolls of film (assuming 36 exposures) is
1080 photos, which will easily fit on one sd card and can stay in the
camera at all times. depending on the camera and the size of the card
and the quality of the images, you can get quite a bit more than that
on a single card. extra cards slip into a pocket, without any bulges,
and no airport x-ray issues either.

how many photo opportunities did you miss by needing to stop and change
rolls of film?

You appear to continue to be unable to explain why digital slr's weigh
so much.

you appear to not want to hear the answer.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Closet Digital Shooters...Announcement:
    ... leave it to you Leica folks to care more about how the camera ... I am going to visit camera heaven tonight. ... > Nikon collection. ... I have ordered my film scanner and unless I get ...
    (rec.photo.equipment.35mm)
  • Re: Olympus E500
    ... >nothing but film cameras in the past - nothing but Nikon. ... If you still have good Nikon glass then I'd recommend buying a Nikon ... > I would appreciate your comments regarding this camera. ... 4/3 if it keeps losing money at this rate. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Shopmade grinder with winch.
    ... And -- it uses lenses from the earlier film Nikon ... But any digital camera suffers from the problem that it is usually impossible to repair and refurbish faulty parts, so when the supply of spare parts dries up, you can no longer fix the camera. ... But if you take two cameras for which spares are no longer readily available, one a mechanical film camera and the other a digital camera, the mechanical film camera will always be easier to repair when something goes wrong. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Nikon to withdraw from film camera production
    ... My condolences are with Nikon film users today. ... The odd thing is that I *still* haven't bought a digital camera. ... > virtually put an end to the company's film camera production. ...
    (rec.photo.equipment.35mm)
  • OT: Flashback - The Sunday Express - 11th Oct. 2009
    ... I was making my first film on the ... A camera was placed at a theatrical ... Or a scene at the railway station was recorded at one go. ... But even if the script had not played along, the film-makers could ...
    (rec.music.indian.misc)