[David]

I wondered whether you all think its worth waiting for higher quality 8-10 mega pixel cameras to come on the market. I'm continually disappointed with 35mm prints and have always hankered after a large format camera, but now think I should go digital. Are the current 5-6 mp cameras up to it?

[m@rk]

Even 10MP cameras will not give you the same quality as 35mm (never mind large format).

If you are not happy with your current 35mm output then perhaps you need to look at why (lense quality, film etc).

Having said that, having seen the quality from the likes of the Canon DSLRs printerd using a decent lab (not supasnaps), yes is gives film a good run and for most users will be good enough.

Why not go to some of the review sites (see the sticky at the top of this forum) and get some sample images from there and then get them printed by whoever you use so you can compare?

[nunew33]

david,
Are you disappointed with compact 35 mm cameras or are you disappointed with SLR 35mm.

IMHO (just in case) Id say that a good 3-4MP digicam will compete well if not beat a 35mm equivelent. More pixels arent needed to make it a better proposition.

On the other hand if its a compact digicam vs 35mm SLR then the SLR wins hands down, and a high MP SLR is needed to compete

[David]

Thanks for the reply's. Until recently I had a Canon EOS SLR camera with a Tamron 28-200mm zoon lens. It was good, but in truth the pictures were no better than any other 35mm I'd seen. It was stolen recently and replaced with a 38-170mm zoom compact which I'm impressed with, but for which the pictures still look to me like standard 35mm pics. Maybe it is the camera, or even the photographer, but I think some of it is the format. The only pictures that I've ever seen that looked impressive have been taken with large format cameras, and the differences between these and 35mm looked much bigger to me than the differences between high end and low end cameras taking 35mm pics. I suppose I had hoped that if the format is so important then a multi-mega pixel digital camera (even a compact) might be the answer.
David

[m@rk]

Going on the kit you were using (the Canon SLR), you should have been getting very good pictures.

After all, many pros use this sort of kit day in and day out and we have all seen some great images.

The only things that come to mind are

The lenses you were using were of poor quality?
The film you were using was sub standard
The place that did the developing was not very good?

I have seen some great pictures taken with 35mm point and shoot cameras that would put even the best digital SLR to shame but at the same time, a lot is down to the person taking the camera.

I don't think you can assume that if you have spent thousands on kit, your pictures will be any better.

On the other hand, maybe your are being over critical of your own work.

[nunew33]

One big advantage of Digital over analogue is that u effectively have darkroom control and what would be a mediocre holiday snap can quickly be turned into a well balanced shot (adjusting composition through cropping), moodily lit (using something like photo elements) and changed to grainy B&W for mood.

get a camera with RAW and you can even correct mistakes with white balance and colour on the PC!

The other thing is if you have a low hit rate with 35mm, its immediately improved with a digicam as you can instantly see results and delete, and above all its free!!! you can take as many shots as it takes to get it right.

Ive found my hit rate has upped dramatically and that I can turn snaps into shots that convey something quite easily.