Reader's Writes

Every so often, we grab an email for the Editor to answer - this one concerns the 'should-I-shouldn't-I-go-digital' dilemma

Q. As a keen photographer and computer user I'm not sure which route to take to marry the two technologies

I have an old but excellent Nikon SLR. My Computer is an Athlon 700 with a Geforce graphics card and a HP720c printer.

Should I keep my Nikon and invest in a scanner to scan and manipulate my prints or should I invest in a digital camera for all my photography.

My main photography interests are family photographs with the odd landscape, rarely printing larger than 10' x 8'.

I realise I will need to upgrade my printer.

I have a budget of £1,000 so any advice on which is the best option and any recommendations on equipment would be appreciated.

Thank you

A. As a photographer from the old school, with getting on for 30 years of experience under my belt, I've got to say that the only Digital cameras that would satisfy you fully are way out of your price range. The bottom line is resolution, and even though 3.2 million pixels plus won't give you the kind of quality of print you're used to from fine grained slow film, you'd get very good 10x8 pictures with the right printer.

The problem, of course, is the question of lenses. You're used to the best quality lenses, if you use marque kit (ie. Nikon badged lenses), and a compact 3.x million pixel camera won't give you the zoom quality you're used to. You could go for Nikon's F5 based D1 or the D1X/D1H, but that's a very expensive range of pro kit - several thousands of pounds, but at least your lenses would fit! Changing to a Canon EOS D30 is, similarly, out of your budget range.

There is a possibility at top of the Olympus range, where they have non-changeable lens SLRs with list prices starting at around a grand - but that leaves little scope for changing your printer. The same applies Sony's new Dimage 7 camera, which looks nice on paper, but leaves something to be desired in the viewfinder stakes and eats batteries like an elephant eats strawberries.

So, on balance, I think I'd go for a top quality scanner/printer package, maybe including a slide scanner to scan negatives. The choices are legion, but the principles are simple. You want the highest possible native resolution from the scanner that you can get - note that interpolated resolution doesn't count here - you want real, not calculated, pixels. That really means that any scanner under a hundred quid ought not to be on your shopping list - aim to pay closer to £300 - mid to high range Epsons and HP units spring to mind. For slide scanning, Minolta's Dimage range looks good, and I've been very pleased with the results from my Epson FilmScan 200, which will also handle APS format films.

Printing your pictures after manipulation is probably the most important consideration. As you print at 10x8 mostly, an A4 printer will suit - I'd highly recommend the top of the range Epson Photo printers, with the very top of the range Lexmark units well worth a look. Of the two ranges, Epson's are consistently cheaper to run than Lexmark's.

Canon's latest range of photo printers is also getting the thumbs up in many quarters, although we've yet to try one here at PPC towers.

Next up is the paper you print to, and I'd strongly suggest that you try a few small packs of glossy and matte papers before deciding which one you want to use. Once you've made that decision, be very wary of changing - colour fidelity is a precise science and changing the paper can easily alter your colour balances. I can give no hard and fast recommendations here, since it's largely dependent on which scanner/printer combination you choose.

 

David Dorn