[TOPIC] Cameras

SLR, definitely. Nikon's a good brand, so is Canon. You'll also wanna make sure he's got a tripod handy.

Any particular reason why he'll use film, rather than digital?

Liberal Feminist Hippie

You're in luck! I'm sitting in our newsroom.

Unfortunately, we stopped shooting film several years ago - even our darkroom's gone. The paper I worked at before this one hadn't shot sports with film since 2004. Sports Illustrated started going digital in 2002, and almost completely (maybe fully, by now) abandoned film by 2003.

So if your character is shooting sports with film in a story set in the last 3-5 years, they're going to stick out, probably as a freelancer since some newsrooms may no longer have darkrooms for them to use for developing.

Asking around, here's some of the digital cameras our photogs use now to shoot sports, mostly high-school sports, D-II NCAA sports and some LSU sports:
Canon EOS 40D
Canon EOS-1D Mark II N
Canon PowerShot S5 IS - not a DSLR; our camera for low-priority high-school games

My last paper used almost all Nikon D1 or D2H models for all photography, including D-I NCAA sports, NFL and NBA games. Grabbing a few AP photos from today's college football games, I see a Canon EOS-1D Mark III, a Nikon D2Hs, and a Nikon D200.

If you're going to stick to film, he or she'd probably have a Canon EOS 1V or Nikon F-system camera (probably an F5), but it's been a while since anyone here's even seen anyone carry a film SLR.

Rookie year!

Thanks guys!

The photographer has weird reasoning for staying with film, mostly stubbornness and arguments aboug quality and connection to one's work.

Also, a pivotal scene takes place in a darkroom.

Pages: 45 //// Characters: 19 ////
Fight scenes: 1.5 //// Love scenes: 1? ///// Deaths: 0
Unhealthy food consumed: unmeasurable
Possibilities: endless

If he's a pro and the story is set in the past five years he won't be using film... success in the industry means beating the competition to the scoop, and he'll simply be too slow with film. He'll still be developing and processing the pictures while his competitors will already have submitted their pictures and probably seen them published.

FWIW, I saw a report recently (sorry, no longer have the link) showing that most of the pool photographers at the Beijing Olympics were using Canon equipment. That could be inaccurate, though, I just don't know.

Canon seems to have a slight edge in the world of digital photography, though Nikon is gaining ground fast. When film was still in use most of the photographers I worked with used Nikon equipment.

HTH

I have a film SLR, for the record.

Nikons are cheaper and more durable. That's why my university has them. They're also (in my experience) damn hard to focus.

But your photographer wouldn't work with film for better quality, because film just isn't better quality. If you're working with digital imaging, you can choose your colour profile, and then if you don't like it, you can change it while you're editing. You can check your exposure levels while you shoot. AND digital has greater resolution than film now.

The only reason I can think of that you'd shoot in film is if you wanted a specific effect.

If you wanted a top of the line digital camera, you'd get a Hassselblad, just in case you change your mind.

I shoot with a film SLR because I like the quality of the picture with film, and I feel like digital is cheating... I like the challenge of having one chance to get a picture right, with no way to go back and erase the mistakes. I use a Canon EOS, which I love, but it's definitely an older camera...

Michelle
ML for Chicago, IL
ml-michelle@chiwrimo.org

not to start a 35mm vs digital debate (or even a cannon vs nikon) There is nothing you can do on film that you cannot do on digital. Digital is faster and in a way 'easier'. It is also more reproduceable after.

Next in my experience all the journalists i see for politcians/celebs/people basically are nikon users. All of the sports people are weilding those lovely white cannon lenses. Maybe the white looks more telescopic and the black looks more cool for the street crowd.

As for film cameras - depends on what you're doing.. SOCOs in the UK used to use Nikon FM2s which were fully manual. However for sport you will want autofocus a nikon f80/f100 would be my nikon suggestion but i really dont know enough about sports photograpy OR higher end nikon film cameras.

http://www.joerogers.info

If the story is set in the current day, then it's going to be hard pulling off the use of film. It seriously is "just not done anymore," especially regarding black and white. Two years ago I started shooting again, using film with my old Nikon. I could only find one lab in town that would print my black and white, and then they quite later that year. They had so little demand for film processing that they let their darkroom guy go and closed the darkroom. There are hardly any places you can find in the country that will process and print black and white. Most places that still process color film then take the negative and scan it and make a digital print from that, so there's still no dark room involved.

Newspapers aren't using darkrooms anymore. Too slow. You can shoot a photo and send it via web in minutes. Film takes seemingly forever comparatively.

However, having said all of that, I can tell you that sports photogs often prefer Canons because they are reputed to have the fastest shutter of the SLRs. Nikon is the other king in the pro world. If he's a news guy, he's going to be using a Nikon or a Canon. They're the workhorses of the industry.

If you can figure out a way for him to use a darkroom, though, that's way cool. Maybe it's at a small paper that's not bothered to catch up with technology, and since he's the only shooter and insists on film they haven't pushed the issue. Just a thought.

There are still some things you can do with film that digital can't do quite as well, but those sorts of things would likely be relegated mainly to the art world, and not news. News photogs are more utilitarian by necessity.

"What could I do if I did not have to do it perfectly? A lot more than I am now."

You could always date your novel back a few years, before digital was so common. That would allow you to use your darkroom scene.

Liberal Feminist Hippie