dslr vs. slr

[tinton14]

So I know this is the "digital" photography school, but I also know that there are many of you here that have a lot of knowledge and experience as a photographer with dslr as well as slr. I'm currently working on a paper about photography for a class and trying to compare the differences between the slr versus dslr and how to choose when deciding to buy a camera. I was hoping for some pros and cons of each. I've been able to find a few pros and cons of the slr as well as pros of the dslr, but finding cons of the dslr has been a little difficult. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[kuvahmagh]

To be honest unless you can't afford a DSLR I see no reason to go SLR. I learned using Film and I don't think I would be producing what I am today if I didn't start there but there are no real downsides that I can see to Digital vs Film, other than storage space but with Film you have to develop everything.

[private]

The one downside to digital is "chimping" (looking at every pic as they take it - it degrades the profession IMO - you want someone who is SURE they got the pic, not someone who says oooh, oooh, oooh, like they are surprised they got the pic.

Many photographers also tend to overshoot which means longer editing time (narrowing down whats good). I was at a park and a photographer basically kept her hand on the shutter, and all I could think is that its gonna take her FOREVER to get through all those pics.

There is also the assumption of getting it right on camera means no editing what so ever - I wish...We can thank Nikon and Ashton Kutcher for that

[milosh]

Originally Posted by tinton14

So I know this is the "digital" photography school, but I also know that there are many of you here that have a lot of knowledge and experience as a photographer with dslr as well as slr. I'm currently working on a paper about photography for a class and trying to compare the differences between the slr versus dslr and how to choose when deciding to buy a camera. I was hoping for some pros and cons of each. I've been able to find a few pros and cons of the slr as well as pros of the dslr, but finding cons of the dslr has been a little difficult. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Well, I think that maybe your dSLR vs SLR topic is a bit misplaced. It is more of a digital vs film debate. Nowadays almost no one buys an SLR, except for those who want to learn to shoot in manual and without all the auto settings that are available with dSLRs, or someone who's very much used to working with film.

[tinton14]

Thank you for all your help. I do realize that the time of this is a bit dated, and it is digital vs film debate, but I was looking at the dslr n slr part of it rather than the whole digital vs film because my prof. didn't want it to be that general. I know that most people would go for the dslr without considering for the slr right now, however I do know some people who went the route of slr instead (not based on money decision), so while there are many that will go for the dslr route, I think there should be reasons why others aren't doing so. Again thank you for your help.

[gturner]

I think it is near impossible to compare the 2 without looking at their main difference.
It is like comparing horse racing to nascar without mentioning that one is a biological beast and the other is a machine

[vsa]

Originally Posted by private

The one downside to digital is "chimping" (looking at every pic as they take it - it degrades the profession IMO - you want someone who is SURE they got the pic, not someone who says oooh, oooh, oooh, like they are surprised they got the pic.

Nothing wrong with chimping when you're learning. It's instant feedback. With film you needed to wait however long it took to develop it... granted that I haven't shot film other than with them disposable cameras when I was a little kid and I wouldn't count that. :D

---

SLRs these days can be a lot cheaper than D versions. But of course then you have to buy the film. With digital you'd probably want to get some post processing software to fiddle with and to organize the photos. Then there's the waiting period to develop the film versus instant photo from digital. Whether either is good or bad thing.. well...

But I guess the biggest difference is the mentality of the photographer. With digital you can shoot to your heart's content. With film you have much fewer shots so you probably think more about what and how you shoot and light and all that. You take more time to prepare per picture since you don't have "unlimited" shots.

That's my thoughts anyways... being a 100% digital shooter. :)

[RichardTaylor]

For small format SLR's & DSLRs (<="35mm")
I will not cover the difference between film & digital technologies.

I have shot, as a hobbyst, with Canon SLR & DSLR (as well as other brands of SLRs)

From a practical point of view.
Pro for SLR
(1) With an SLR battery life is not a problem as you tend to shoot a lot less and the batteries can last years dependant on the film transportation method.


Con for SLR
(1) No changing ISO (ASA) once you have your camera loaded.
(2) A lot less information in viewfinder, especially in early models.
(3) No instant feedback of exposure results via a histogram. (basically you had to wait until you got your prints or slides back
Edit:
(4) you need to load specific colour film for shooting under different lighting conditions (eg tungsten film) unless you want to use filters. (thanks Milosh)

Pro for DSLR.
(1) Instant feedback on exposure, via the histogram etc
(2) Ability to change ISO as needed.
(3) High capacity motor drive built in (FPS)
(4) The ability to "dial in" exposure compensation almost on the fly.
(5) You don't need to carry lots of rolls of film around for larger shoots.

Con for DSLR.
(1) High initial cost
(2) Battery power is always a consideration.
(3) A bit too easy to overshoot a subject resulting in a huge post shoot workload.

In reality going from a 1991 (I think) Canon SLR (EOS1000) to a 2005 Canon DSLR (350D or Rebel XT) was a very easy step and I felt right at home.

[milosh]

+ with SLRs and colour film, compensating for white balance is not so easy as with dSLRs.

[sk66]

The biggest "advantage" the average SLR had/has over the average DSLR is durability IMO. (I tend to USE/Abuse my gear)

With my older Nikon SLRs (FM's, FE, etc) I could abuse them and they held up. Then low end SLR's became more and more plastic like most DSLRs are now... A really durable DSLR is generally only the top 2-3 models from each maker.