My 23 yr old daughter wants to start photography as a hobby. She's looking for something like the Canon Elan or Rebel G. I'm of the opinion that she would be better off with a digital camera that offers a fiar degree manual control.

Comments on 35mm vs digital for a beginner?

Which dig cameras would be good for this purpose? Budget is a consideration.

Thanks-

Mike

-- Mike Neder (mneder@pagosa.net), May 24, 2000

Answers

Mike
The magic word was budget.
Digital is great - but if your daughter is looking for a photographic tool with the features of the Elan or Rebel your best value will be in those very models rather than in a digital that offers their capabilities. A digital camera with manual control, interchangeable lenses, rapid sequence firing, and other serious foto-features will cost you an ingot. Find out what features your daughter really wants. If she just wants very limited control you can get into digital much cheaper. If she's got her eye on multiple lenses, manual focus and exposure control - you're better off not mortgaging the house.
Treat her well though - remember, she gets to choose your nursing home!

des

-- Dan Desjardins (dan.desjardins@avstarnews.com), May 24, 2000.

It seems to me that the biggest advantage of a digicam for a beginner, and really anyone, is the immediate feedback one gets from the LCD display. The shoot, review, delete, scratch-head, and reshoot cycle time can't be beaten! There's nothing like KNOWING you got the shot you couldn't live without... Not to mention the MUCH lower cost for digital mistakes. :-) You just can't learn what you're doing wrong that quickly with a conventional film camera. For that alone I'd say it's a beginner's best choice.

As an example of how easy it is to learn how to use a digicam, I taught my 7 year old niece how to use my older[1 1/2 years... :-)] Toshiba PDR-M1 last Friday evening. About an hour, one charge on a set of batteries, and a bunch of images later, she had it down to a science. The following day she took about 20 great pictures out of 22 or 24 attempts at a 40th anniversary party! Pretty impressive for a 7 year old, but maybe the camera deserves some credit too? Granted she's no Ansel Adams, but then he was a bit older before he did his best work... :-)

Again, the ability to nearly immediately make prints is not a bad second reason. Further, you'd have a hard time gaining the control you have over brightness, contrast, tint, etc. with conventional photo drug store printing. It's hard to beat having your own digital photography studio(digicam, PC, editing program and printer...) :-)

To be fair, you also have to consider just what you'll be doing with the images. If you want really large printed images or highly detailed blowups, conventional film is still the better route, but much harder for a beginner to learn due to lack of immediate feedback. Although, a Photoshop plug-in like Genuine Fractals and a 3.3MP image will probably go a long way towards producing acceptable larger prints(greater than 8x10's). Expect great 4"x6's from a 2MP digicam, good 5"x7's and passable 8"x10's. When I say great, I mean to most people it looks like a 35mm print from 2" away. Good is 6-12" away and passable is 2' feet away. To be fair, an 8x10" probably is usually viewed from 2' away anyhow. All these VERY subjective observations are based on printing them on good paper with a high resolution(1440x720 DPI or better) printer and displaying them behind glass. They look nearly as good without the glass as just "plain old prints".

As far as specific suggestions go, look for at least a 3X zoom lens with low distortion, a unit with manual features, and an external flash trigger would be nice. The ability to add external lenses would also help extend the lifetime of your purchase since you wouldn't be as quick to tire of it's abilities. The flash trigger isn't necessary, since you can get external flashes that are triggered from your camera's flash, but having the camera automatically set the strength of the flash is a nice feature. If you can afford paying for 3MP go for it, if not, 2MP will suffice within the print size limitations stated above. I have a ~2MP camera with 3X zoom with threads and an adapter for other lenses and filters and think it will probably suffice for some time to come. Would I take a newer model with 3+MP and full manual features? You betcha! But, for the meantime, I think I'll manage just fine with the current model and might even try Genuine Fractals for a while before feeling the need to upgrade again. I really hardly ever need larger than a 5x7", anyhow.

As far as models go, you'll probably be happy with any model made by the top manufacturers. I'd say a Nikon, Olympus, Kodak, Sony, Toshiba, or Fuji would probably make anyone pretty happy. The same is true of a good Casio or Canon model. The best thing to do is read the reviews on Imaging Resource and other sites like Steve's Digicams and then do a price vs. features comparison by checking prices through www.computershopper.com or www.shopper.com.

All that said, I have a Toshiba PDR-M5, a good performer with fast shot to shot cycle time, and an Epson 760 printer. Are they perfect? Hardly. Are any of the competetion? Highly Doubtful!

Good Luck.

-- Gerald M. Payne (gmp@francomm.com), May 25, 2000.

None of the above.

If she's really serious, get her a Nikon FM2n and a 50mm lens. Have her shoot slides to eliminate the processing variable. Slides will give her an excellent reference to see if she is metering properly. The 50mm lens will teach her to work within the limitations of her equipment and think creatively to overcome those limitations. Using an all manual camera will teach her how to control the camera instead of letting the camera control her. When she's ready, she can move to an autofocus camera and use the FM2n as a backup.

The problems with consumer level digital cameras relegate them to the status of interesting toys. The shutter lag and low resolution are enough reasons to keep me shooting film. The poor quality zoom lenses are another. At least they're better than point and shoot cameras, but unless you step up to the $3,000 range an entry 35mm SLR is much more versatile and will yield substantially better quality.

The FM2n and a 50/1.8 AF-D lens will set you back about $600. That's an autofocus lens, by the way.

-- Darron Spohn (dspohn@photobitstream.com), May 25, 2000.

I completely agree with Darron's assessment. A digital camera is a nice "toy", but beginners starting with digital will learn exactly nothing about photography. An argument could be made that she could potentially learn something about composition, but there is much more to photography than just figuring out how to place the subject within the frame.

As a long time Minolta owner, I also agree with Darron's assessment that a simple, fully manual Nikon body with a fast 50mm lens would be the ideal place to start. Smart photographers carry along with their fancier Auto Focus SLR system a fully manual body that requires no power source incase their batteries die and they have no way to replace them. When your daughter is ready to move up to an automatic focusing system, she'll already have the manual body as a backup.

Many photographers start at the wrong end of the ladder and get muddled with all the fancy buttons and displays, and unfortunately pre-programmed modes, and again never learn what they need to learn to take truly great images. Remember, programming can't cover every contingency. The FM2n is a completely manual system that will force your daughter to learn about the technical side of photography, and from there she will be able to get the most of the fancier bodies when she grows into them. It is important also for beginners to cut their teeth with the 50mm lens, because it will produce the best images possible. 50mm lenses are relatively simple in their design, and because of this they are usually very inexpensive compared to telephoto models. This simplicity allows for manufacturers to make them with superior optics, therefore they are usually much faster than telephotos or auto focus zooms. In other words, they render the sharpest, clearest picture.

Going with Nikon ensures that when she grows into the Auto Focus SLRs and accompanying zooms, she'll be able to continue using her old manual focus lenses that she'll inevitably acquire while learning the art of photography and as her interests develop.

I also concur that slide films are the best choice for beginners. Slide films are much more difficult to use, but will force her to focus on using the camera properly. Negative films are convenient, but if the goal is to learn photography, convenience is not the goal. The images themselves are also of higher quality and she will be able to examine them right on the film to get even better feedback.

Photography is a good way to throw a lot of cash out the window on high tech equipment with features that may never be used. Digital Photography right now is an infant science and also represents an even better way to lose a lot of cash fast. Stick with the basics, develop the fundamentals, then allow the art to flow from within having learned those basics and photography can be a life-long passion. Sticking with a basic, manual film based system will minimize the risk that passion never develops and save you some bucks in case she decides she'd rather be a doctor.

Phillip Greenspun (and company) run an EXCELLENT website for photographers of all ilk at http://www.photo.net. Even though some of this information is a couple years old, it is not outdated for the most part. You'll find information on beginning photography and building a 35mm system.

Good luck to you and your daughter!

-- Jeffrey Sevier (jsevier@cinci.rr.com), June 03, 2000.