Digital Camera

[cwsmith]

Well, my old Nikon E995 died the other day. Not sure exactly why, but I found it upsetting. I bought this in my last years of work, back in 2001 which is about the time it was introduced. It's only a 3 mega pixel camera but I found it perfect for my work and it certainly served its purpose over the many years, with its many versatile features.

I was out in the shed documenting some of the changes I was making and after three pictures i got a red statement on the screen that there was "No Card". I quickly checked of course and the card was there and properly seated. I came into the house, grabbed my other two memory cards and trying them both got the same "No Card" statement. I did a reset of the camera system, pulled and re-installed the battery, and even came in and read the cards on my computer which indicated they were fine and in fact had the photos I had just taken. So I called Nikon service and unfortunately they no longer support the 995. Funny thing is that with the card in the camera, the camera will read the photos and give me a wealth of data regarding them. Yet the "No Card" statement remains and I can no longer take a picture. Everything else on the camera is working fine... focus, both auto and manual, both the LCD and LED screens work, zoom, timer, etc. all working fine. BUT with that "No Card" indication, pressing the shutter button does nothing.

So, I went looking for service and so far I can't find anything local or really anything that looks anywhere close to being beyond a "Send it to me and we'll look at it" from Web posts of which I have no idea of the reliability of. So, I guess it's time to step up and buy a new camera!

This looks alike a painful and expensive operation. Nikon? Canon? or something else?

I have a Canon SLR film camera (remember those?) which I absolutely love and was wondering if anything I have with that system might be compatible with a new Canon digital? But a call this afternoon to Canon service left me feeling like I'm on another planet or maybe just too darned old. You see back in 1982 I was faced with unemployment when the Division I worked for went south. I took the layoff in stride and took the gamble of a trip to the Big Apple where I bought a Canon "New F1" which was the top-of-the-line for a Canon camera at the time. Built like a tank with a titanium shutter and a wealth of features, I added a motor drive, three lenses, a larger professional flash and even a bellows and many other accessories for macro-photography, slide duplication, etc. I supported my family with that camera for three years before returning to the company in 1995. Everything still works, and is in great shape...I even have the original packaging, all the manuals, attachments, and even the original brochure. There seems to be no monetary value to any of it, and frankly I really am not looking to sell any of it, as it has a lot of memories for me and to quite some extent is still useful.

However, if I'm going to invest several hundred into a new camera I thought it would be nice if I could use it with the flash (Canon 533G) that I have and the Canon Auto Bellows. The tech I talked to at Canon wasn't really very assuring. So the whole process of looking at a new DSLR is a bit of a learning curve to say the least. We have no local photo stores and the sales people in places like Best Buy just don't have any experience, much less know what a mechanical film camera is. Yesterday I got a "What's a bellows?". Understandably, I suppose, but Man, do I feel old!

Anyone on the forum have any experience or suggestions? Should I stay with Canon out of the hope of using my flash, bellows, and maybe even my flat-field copy lens, of should I just forget about it and look at what Nikon offers?

CWS

[atgcpaul]

Months ago I had asked for recommendations for a new camera for my wife. I ended up buying it from Adorama. They also buy used cameras and parts. I ended up with a mirrorless Sony which she appreciates for the small size. I also bought (from Amazon) an inexpensive adapter ring that allows the Sony to work with her old Minolta lenses. For also lot more money, there's an adapter that gives you back the auto focus features with the lenses.

There are probably adapters that will allow your old Canon parts to work with your new Canon camera.

[leehljp]

Back around 2013/14 I had the "No Card" reading on my 2005 Canon (Japanese version). It was/is an 8 meg camera. It had two sets of batteries in it, a smaller battery and the rechargeable battery. It was the smaller battery that went bad. I changed it out and went through the cleaning of contacts of every thing I could. I had not used that for a couple of years and it was a combination of contacts and replacing the on board battery I guess. Sense I hadn't used it much in the lat few years, I pulled it out to give to my daughter, who is still using it.

[woodturner]

Was talking with a gallery owner at the opening of a photo show locally last night, and she said film is coming back for fine art photography. They have been offering darkroom classes and they are full - unlike their Photoshop classes.

So maybe you just need to wait a little and your F1 will be "the thing" again.

Not really sure what a DSLR does that a point and shoot does not, at this point. Seems like a 12 Mp phone or point and shoot is more than adequate, and I see the pros using them as well. Curious if you (or anyone else) sees a real benefit to the DSLR over the point and shoot models. It seems like "DSLR" is a bit of misnomer, even the point and shoots are equivalent to SLRs, you see what the camera will see.

[cwsmith]

Thanks for the quick responses and the advice from you all.

atgcpaul: Good points and after some Google searching I think I can get an mount adapter for the old lenses and the bellows, but for those older lenses there is no autofocus capability (those old lenses are not motorized of course. But that doesn't matter to me, as most all macro work is manually done anyway. With that bellows I can get some incredibly close photos and used to use it for showing mechanical and electrical component details.

Lee: Thanks, I greatly appreciate your experience with the smaller second battery on your particular camera. I will explore that with the Nikon E995. I found a service manual online that I can download (for $10) and perhaps that's a worthwhile investment if it will point to a similar problem. A new camera is in order anyway, but the 995 would still be great to just have around.

I take exceptional care of my photo equipment, so I ruled out any problems like dust or bent connector pins. It has to be something internal, especially since the camera actually does still read the card data, even though it says it doesn't exist.

Woodturner: Film coming back would be a delight for sure... probably a lot like bringing back vinyl and turntables. Back when I was freelancing, most all of my work was on 35 mm slides, except for the occasional photos for instruction manuals. With those, I'd simply send the roll out for development and then order whatever prints from the strip prints and have them mounted so I could silouette and/or retouch. The slide stuff was best for audience presentation and I did my own processing for that. I still have the necessary equipment to process E6 film (transparencies) and much to the chagrin of my wife, I used to do that in the kitchen sink using a black changing bag. I still have the film roller, chemistry tubs, heater, regulator, and pump for all that.

I still on rare occasions use the F1, but frankly its a lot more expensive and much slower than just grabbing the digital and getting my photos instantly. Good for posting to the web or displaying on the screen and I've used it here a few times when I just want to add an image to the forum response. My little 995 offered a lot of capability and I could auto or manually focus, get really great closeups, etc.

A point and shoot just doesn't answer a lot of needs for closer work, although I am impressed with the camera on my really cheap (cost me nothing) Galaxy Express 3 that I got a couple of months ago with my GoPhone account update. ATT no longer supported my old Motorola 2G and they offered the Galaxy to keep me. I use a cell phone so rarely that the 'once a year' renewal plan more than works for me... even then the I find myself fighting to use up some time as they won't let me have more than $500 in credit.

The smartphone camera is sufficient in many ways for general 'snapshots' and I love all the other tech stuff that it's capable of, but when I'm looking for detail, nothing beats a real camera with focus ability.

I still have to do some reading and soul searching but at this point the Canon T7i is at the top of the list, mostly because I think I can adapt some of that old equipment to it.

Thanks again to you all and I'm still looking for more input if it is offered,

CWS

[leehljp]

WoodTurner,

I echo what CWS said. I could get better close-up details of the finish on my pens and even see the wood cells in some cases with my Canon EOS (Almost Rebel equivalent) that I can't get on point and shoot. This was not as much for photo presentations and prints as it was for the details of the pen and finish. IN certain light, minute' swirls or scratches could barely be seen by the naked eye on a fine finished pen. And these were especially noticeable with a 2x or 4x loupe. When making pens that sell from $500 - $1000, one wants a flawless finish. A good camera can take photos of the flaws. I haven't seen a point and shoot that can do that on a consistent basis.

I am sure there are other needs of fine or precise photos. Another aspect is that point and shoot distorts things on the edge (vertically) where as a good lens will compensate or prevent that distortion. I don't know the correct term. Probably today, there may be P&S cameras that has fixed those aberrations.

[woodturner]

A point and shoot just doesn't answer a lot of needs for closer work, although I am impressed with the camera on my really cheap (cost me nothing) Galaxy Express 3 that I got a couple of months ago with my GoPhone account update. ATT no longer supported my old Motorola 2G and they offered the Galaxy to keep me. I use a cell phone so rarely that the 'once a year' renewal plan more than works for me... even then the I find myself fighting to use up some time as they won't let me have more than $500 in credit.

FWIW, tello has a reasonable pay as you go plan. The only requirement to keep funds is to use is once every 6 months. Unlike many providers, you don't have to keep adding funds to avoid losing your balance.

[LCHIEN]

Canon has three basic lens series: FD, EF, and EF-S

The FD were for 35mm film cameras
The EF were for electronic focus cameras such as all the digital full frame DSLRs they make
EF-S was for the smaller reduced size sensors in the APS-C format, they are physically and electrically interchangeable with EF but throw a smaller image circle so you can't use them without bad vignetting on FF canons.

I believe the FD requires an low cost adapter so they can mount on DSLRs by Canon but will not have autofocus or auto diaphragm.

I'm not a Canon user but this is what I recall from past investigations.
You probably have Canon FD lenses.

[cwsmith]

Thanks Loring,

You are correct, my old "New F1" uses FD lenses. (The "F1" was the predecessor of the "New F1", and it was a heavier, slightly larger SLR. As I understand it, the "F1" was quite popular with combat photographers during the Vietnam war for it's ruggedness. My "New F1" is a bit lighter and smaller but none-the-less extremely well built and will work with or without battery. It has a titanium shutter and other very well built mechanisms. IT was great for shooting in an industrial environment. I only have three Canon FD lenses, a 50mm F1.4, a 28 mm wide angle, and a somewhat special "flat field" 50 mm macro copy lens. The latter was used mostly on the copy stand for photographing illustrations and other art work that I produced. It was practicality distortion free without showing the bowing-like distortions that a typical lens might produce. The "bellows" is sort of like an old time camera mechanism in that it attaches to the camera, and has a bellows that extends out over a track. With the proper attachments and the lens mounted in reverse you could shoot around a 4X magnification, IIRC.... it was great for picking up extremely fine details and with the film duplicator that I have can copy slides and film strips as small as 110..

One of my favorite projects with that apparatus was shooting a couple of volumes of some rather rare and, I imagine, expensive postage stamps for a collector that I knew at the time. I actually had to take the copy stand and equipment to his home as he didn't want to bring them out. That took almost an entire weekend to do

So, this is equipment that I really would like to be able to use with a new digital SLR; and, it looks like I may be able to do that with an FD to EF converter ring. That in itself would be a good reason to stick with Canon.

The other thing is the 533G flash unit, which mounts on a bracket fixed under the camera body, via the tripod mount. The flash is on a quick-disconnect handle which rests on the right of the camera and rises on it's handle to sit above and to the right. You can quickly remove it during shooting and position it to place the highlight or the shadow in the best position. It has a swivel and tilt head and excepts wide angle or telescopic fresnel lenses to focus or scatter the light appropriately. After more than 30 years it still is functioning, surprisingly. I imagine someday I'll have to replace the discharge capacitor, but so far, so good. The Canon service tech tells me that the new series still uses a hot-shoe rated for six volts, so I think I'm good to go, but I doubt that it will couple to a new digital with the same automatic functions as on the F1.

I wish that I could afford (or justify) one of their pro-series cameras, but that just would be foolish for what I need. So far the Canon T7i seems to be the target, but honestly I'm wondering if that's almost overkill. I tell you, these new cameras offer so many features that I find them amazing... like it will shoot HD movies too! Back when I did this stuff as a business, you worried about light color, having just the right film for the light environment, keeping several lens filters in the pack to compensate. My F1 has different focusing screens which were relatively expensive to have and you always worried about getting dirty or scratched. All of that kind of thing is built into a DSLR's circuitry.... it's amazing.

CWS

[LCHIEN]

You might check with KEH cameras in Ga. THey specialize in old/used cameras and if you need something five or ten years old which has sufficient resolution and features and want a Canon DSLR of that vintage that takes FD lens with adapters, they may have a suggestion for you.

Or even they might be able to replace your broken model with an identical one.

[bmyers]

I had an SLR 35mm long ago but it died just as digital cameras were being introduced.During that time DSLR was still very expensive, cell phones pics were cell phone pics will the quality expected. But if you know how to use an SLR there is just nothing like it yet.
A nikon d3300 presented itself to me 2 years ago at a cheap enough price that i decided to get back into it. With the Canon lenses you already own you might want to stick with Canon if you can get an adapter.
If I had more expendable cash and a time machine I'd go back and tell myself to just get an FX camera and skip the DX.

Bill

[cwsmith]

I want to thank everyone for their suggestions. I went ahead and ordered a Canon 80D which seems to have very good reviews. With your help and several reviews on the web, this appears to be a good choice and it allows me to expand my horizons too. With a proper FD to EF adapter ring I can use the three older FD lenses that I had purchased years ago with my Canon New F1. They'll have to be used in manual mode, but that is presently where my experience is at anyway. Also, can use the Canon Auto Bellows, film duplicator, etc. So I'm very happy about this.

The Canon 533G flash unit that I have is also usable with the 80D, although it appears that with the wide light range of this new camera, it may only be used on rare instances anyway. I much prefer shooting in natural or at least within the range of the on board lower power flash . The 533 G offers a lot of versatility for the industrial and product documentation photos that I used to take, but that's long in the past.

So, I got a great deal from Ritz Camera with a so-called bundle at a price that is $100 less than my local dealer is asking for just the camera with a single lens. The bundle includes two lenses and a pile of accessories, even a camera bag, small tripod, and a small slave flash unit. I should have it by the weekend.

Thanks again for all the great advice,

CWS

[cwsmith]

To follow up, I ordered a Canon EOS 80D and received it last Friday. The telephoto was back ordered and I have yet to receive that. Unfortunately the camera body had a problem and I had to return it this past Monday. I'm hoping to have the replacement by this weekend.

The good news is that the 80D is so much camera that it's almost overwhelming to me. Going from my Canon New F1 (top of the line camera in 1983) to a mid-level camera like the EOS 80D is like switching from an old rotary phone to a new smart phone! Just unbelievable enhancements and camera operation that was once second nature to me is now almost alien. For the last ten years I've been using my little Nikon E995 digital, but even that pales in comparison.

I also bought a EF to FD conversion ring, so that I can use my old lenses and bellows in manual mode on the new EOS 80D; and even my large 533G pro-flash will work. But the technology of the new camera may well alleviate any need for that old flash in most circumstances, as it has incredible low light capability. The new camera will also take some very handsome 1080 video too.

CWS

[bmyers]

Rely on your experience. It's a ton easier to learn how to use the camera than it is learning how to compose a pleasing picture.

[cwsmith]

Composing was surprisingly sort of second nature to me for industrial work. Probably because of the many years as a technical illustrator. I originally got into photography because I was having great difficulty finding a professional who could take product photos for the instruction manuals I was writing and illustrating for.

Funny story: At the time (back in the late 70's) I was lamenting to one of our engineers, the difficulty I was having with the local photographers and he said he'd borrow his fiance's 35 mm SLR. So, I bought a couple of rolls of film and he borrowed the camera (she was one of the secretary's). So I go down to her office with him to get the camera and she asked where he's going to be shooting and what... then she sets the shutter and aperture and tells him to "not mess with anything... just focus". She also put the first roll of film in the camera. My thought at that moment was like "this is going to be a total waste of time!!!"

Surprisingly; no, actually shockingly, those pictures came out great and were usable in my instruction manual. With that evidence, I justified buying a camera for my use in the dept. That same year, we had a new product introduction and the corporate advertising dept hired a pro from the Chicago area. The company spent days cleaning up a special area of the shop for his 'shoot' and he spend two full days there with a half dozen assistants and thousands of dollars in equipment. Later when the proofs were sent, the Ad dept called me for some shots that didn't come out correctly and/or were missing. Of the twelve pictures used in the product marketing brochure, five of them were mine!

When my division moved south in 1982, I was left on my own and took a trip to NYC and bought the previously described F1 equipment. Before my re-hire in 1984, I supported my family by freelancing with that camera, doing work for several local industries, including Ingersoll-Rand, Corning Inc, and several others.



Composition came easily for me, as seeing that view as if it was an illustration was a natural, growing out of being a fairly decent technical illustrator. Taking in a natural scene seems pretty intuitive too, but I confess, I stink at doing portraits, just don't have the eye for that. My DIL however is very good at portraits and I wish that I had that ability.

CWS