Digital slr thats comparable to the A2 35mm?

I'm still using my film camera but wondering if there are any budget ranged digitals that can compeat with the A2?

I'v still not developed any slide film and scanned it but that may be a project for wednesday. That way I can see what kind of image I get from it. So far print film at long exposures has been less than great but decent for bright light shooting.

Most new budget digital SLRs are superior to the A2.. If you buy one, you'll soon find your A2 on the shelf collecting dust )

The only problem I see is:

The crop caused by the smaller sensors will require that you get another lens for wide angle work.

I suggest picking up a 20D.......

Well, the 5D is certainly going to be the closes to the A2 feature for feature especially given the 5Ds full frame sensor but it doesn’t really fit the “budget” criteria. But if your not marries to full frame any of the other Canon cameras match up quite nicely. The XTi has about the same build as the A2 and misses on the speed topping at 1/4000 compared to the A2 1/8000 and has 3.5 FPS compared to the A2s 5 FPS. It however has a 9 point auto focus as opposed to the A2s 5 points. It is right now the most affordable Canon dSLR. Another would be the 30D. It’s a bit more costly but you get back your 1/8000 and 5 FPS and it shares the same 9 point autofocus with the XTi. But really, any body you choose will rival film in quality.

Thanks I figured even the lowest end dslr's would be about the same as the A2. I have never used the 5fps of the camera but it is nice to know its there if I need it. I guess you would use that for any fast moving target.

Hi Hcker2000,

well, I assume that with film few users would really use the 5 FPS because of cost - unless they really need it (e.g. professional sports shooters).

On a digital body, everybody can do it, as it does not cost anything
But still, it is my firm conviction that you get better results with taking a single shot and making that single shot work. Of course, with people, that single shot can often be flawed if the person just speaks, yawns or looks in another way awkward ... then it might make sense to have more than one shot to choose from.

Most things were said ... you should be able to use your lenses on all Canon dSLRs, but maybe don't expect miracles. A lens that was perfectly ok for printing 3x5 pictures still is ok for that ... but with digital, you look at the images on your screen at high magnifications, which would be akin to plowing them up to 20"x30" posters in the old days. Not many people did that, and those who did had to use their equipment in the right way. With small prints, you won't see much of a problem.

With the 1.6x crop, IMO it makes a lot of sense to get any camera at least with the 18-55 'kit lens' (most cost-effective way to get a half decent wide angle lens for 1.6x crop), or look at all the wider options (e.g. 10-22 etc.)

Other than that, my suggestions would be

- get the 400D (or 350D if finances are tight) if you are just starting out, they are great cameras
- maybe check out the 20D (used) or 30D ... they do not offer much more from the image quality standpoint, but are nicer to the touch/more robust/have a few features more that might be important
- 5D ... IMO a very good camera for those willing and able to pay $ 1,500 more to get a marginal improvement in image quality over the 30D. Now many might contradict me here, however, I have seen great images taken with very cheap gear and really crappy images taken with the most expensive. The difference is really more the photographer behind the camera than the tool itself. IMO not necessary for a beginner, unless he's thinking what would be most suitable to put in the glove compartment of his Mercedes 500 S
- more important than the camera ... good lenses. Your 50/1.8 is definitely a lens that has a potential to give you very good images on a digital SLR. The zooms a bit less so, but they should give you decent images, if you use them within their limitations (maybe stop them down to f/8 ) - or if your requirements are small prints and web images. Nothing wrong with that, but if you look at images taken with cheap consumer zooms (regardless whether they are Tamron, Sigma, Canon, Tokina) at 100% magnification, chances are that you will not be 100% happy. Other than that, use what you have (plus the 18-55 kit lens) to learn what you would like to have in your new digital world and make a decision whether to upgrade or not once you have a bit of experience.

Best regards,
Andy

Right now I'm trying to sell off the last of my guitar stuff as I never play any more. Once this is sold I should have around $400 to put into a camera. I would love to find a good used xt for less than that and if I could find a used xti I would probably go for that if it was right at 400.

I've taken a a bit of every thing from bad to great with my A2 but I think to do some good low light stuff I would need to go with a 100 iso and do a longer exposure.

This is one of the better ones I have taken or at least I think so. It does need the levels adjusted. Keep in mind this was shot at dusk about an hour from dark.
http://ww1.hnetinc.com​:82 …allery/Photos/f​lowers.jpg

I'd seriously suggest you look at the 5D - especially if you've been shooting with film all this while.

The first thing that makes you go "groan" when you transit from a film to a digital body is the crop factor, especially if you love shooting wide. Your 20mm becomes a 32mm and so on. Of course, you could get yourself those lenses designed for digital, but I presume you wish to protect your investment in the lenses you already have.

Get yourself the 5D. You'll love the full frame (though it will tend to vignette at less than 24mm). The dynamic range of the 5D, it's ability to capture detail in the shadows, coupled together the large MPs will serve you well!

nevilleb

nevilleb wrote in post #2900523
I'd seriously suggest you look at the 5D - especially if you've been shooting with film all this while....

While the 5D is an exceptional camera and I love mine, I think you missed the post where the op was looking to do this for around $400. Not even a worn out abused 5D will come below that price.

OP: For that budget, your probably looking for a XT. Some still can be had new at real close to that cost.

Be aware that digital photograpy requires some computer experience, like Photoshop.
This site is a great resource for learning (and spending)

[QUOTE=shaunknee;29006​11]Be aware that digital photograpy requires some computer experience, like Photoshop.
While computer experience is greatly and I emphasize greatly beneficial, it is not really a necessity. My neighbor and my folks in law are very happy with their digital cameras and a printer that can print right from the camera. It limits what one can do with a photo to in camera processing but it is possible to go digital without a computer.

Computer experiance is no problem. I have been using them for about 9 years now.

I have done just about every thing with them and have a few years experiance programing. I even have a wacom tablet which helps for photo retouching.

The 5D would be nice but I am prepared to have my wide angle stuff get narrower with the 1.6x. If I need to shoot wide I can always go with some film.

The big thing with going to digital is so i can see what the picture looks like and if some thing is wrong turn right around with in a few minutes and shoot it agine tell I get it right.

With the film I have shot a good bit but to learn meens I have to shoot, develop, and scan. All in all that is at least a day and a half. Longer with slide film.

hcker2000 wrote in post #2900883
The 5D would be nice but I am prepared to have my wide angle stuff get narrower with the 1.6x. If I need to shoot wide I can always go with some film.

If you can stretch a bit and also get the 18-55 kit lens, that will give you basically the same field of view as your 28-80.

Best regards,
Andy

Is that kit lens any good?

hcker2000 wrote in post #2937884
Is that kit lens any good?

The kit lens is great when compared to the investment. It usually adds about $60 to the purchase and for a sixty dollar lens it does fine. Compare it to a piece of L glass and it won’t hold up, but then a good L is 10 times the cost or more. I still find I use my kit from time to time mostly for the wide. It is small, light, and when your looking at the snapshot kind of photography, or a pic for a web site, or to pop into an email, or when you know your not going to be blowing up a pic beyond 8x10 it does a fine job.

OK I feel like I need to post here to help a fellow film lover. The last few years I tried amny digital P&S camers hoping to save money over going to the DSLR. Not one was even close to the crappiest kodak $2 roll of film in my eyes, let alone the expensive film and slides I used. I tried the XT and thought "ok this is what a DSLR can do?" and wasn't at all happy with that plus the kit lens. So instead I stupidly bought more FD lenses (I have an old A1) and had a great time messing around and getting good enlargements etc... Even won some photo contests over the digital guys! Then Paper companies started to slow down what paper they made, then the film companies started changing the film they made and I freaked out. I had to move to digital or my hobby may have made me crazy! I looked around and thought the FF 5D was the way to go. But I could only buy the body and one cheap lens. I went with the 30D instead and got a couple more lenses. As much as I'm completely in love with my 30D I wish I had gone FF. Trying to deal with the crop factors and a crop camera is frustrating. The lenses I really want aren't so great on a crop and finding a good lens that is close is hard. With the A1 my most used lenses were the 35, 50 and 85. All very good very fast versions. Now sure the 50 1.4 is good for being close to 85 and the 35 2.0 is ok for being close to 50, but it's just not the same. I want a walk around zoom (which I've never had a zoom before because the FD zooms were not good lenses) and would love the 24-105 on a FF. But trying to find one for a crop I have to weigh the pros and cons of about 5 different lenses and not be 100% happy.

So personally I know your budget is very low really look at what you want. If it's just a hobby and you like taking photos here and there get the Rebel, it'll get you what you need. You'll just have to figure out the crop stuff and learn to love it. If photography is more then that I say save save save and get the 5D. Just use your A2 for now and sock that $400 away and keep adding to it. Sure it may take a year or so, but if you're anything you may not be happy.

Go to a camera store where you can play with the cameras and see how you like them. You really have to hold them and take some shots with them. My old A1 felt heavier and more sturdy then the rebel. Just take your time researching what you want and you'll be happy. If you can try the rebel first and if you like it and may want to upgrade then use it until you can afford to upgrade. That's what I'm doing with the 30D right now.