Should I get a Digital SLR or film SLR?

Digital. I clung to my film camera for years before finally switching. Digital is easy and cheap compared to film (as far as producing prints goes), the images are easy to manipulate (if you’re into that), and the technology is amazing.

digital

Digital gives you more almost all the way around and costs you less because you don’t have to get film developed.
Unless you have a specific need that requires film, digital is the way to go.

What’s film?

It just seems like a lot for a camera… $1000 bucks! Where would you buy one? I have been looking at ebay and craigslist.

You can buy a prior generation model for significantly less.

If you are new to photography, you don’t need to be spending $1000 on a camera. You need to do some research and find a good starter camera.

Good point. Is an SLR worth looking at for a first camera? I mean I have a point and shoot one… it is meh.

Point and shoot photography is good for impromptu photos of casual moments.
An SLR allows for more wide angle shots without the fisheye distortion effect involved with point and shoot cameras.

You also have a lot more expansion options with an SLR should you ever want to go with different lenses, filters, or other attachments.

I recommend that when you get your SLR, you get a UV filter for your lens if only to have a thin layer of protection for your lens. You don’t want that lens to ever get scratched.

If you want a camera that will be quick and easy to use, go digital. They are often much cheaper, and easier to find, and the biggest advancements in camera technology nowadays are all for digital cameras. Additionally, with digital you can edit and enhance photos and make them look amazing. It’s also a really nice feature if for example: you wanted to take the red eye out of people’s eyes, or crop images.

If your goal is to become a really good photographer, then I would advise you to start out with film. Digital cameras make it really easy to just point and click, but with film cameras everything you do is manual. This means you spend more time thinking about what you want to capture, and how to do it. You will learn the ins and outs of all the options on your camera really quickly with a film camera.

My best advice for you is to take as many pictures as you can. Don’t use automatic settings, try and figure it out for yourself. Try different focal lengths, f-stops, and shutter speeds. Sometimes I will go out and shoot 500 pictures, only to have 2 or 3 turn out really well, but by taking a lot of pictures you get better and better over time.

I bought a digital last year and I love it. I can just take 100s of pictures then pop them up onto my computer within a few minutes. I also like that you can view the picture after you take it. That way you can delete it if you don’t like it. DSLRs also let you easily change the different styles of picture that you want to take.

Lets look at hard numbers of cost. A Nikon F100 with medium zoon lens will cost $200—$250 used and will meter and focus as well as a D90 costing $950. Developing 36 exp roll of film and putting it on a CD will cost $6 (this can vary I know). The result will be a higher resolution than the D90. Your break even point will thus be around 4500 exposers, which is quite a bit for film unless you focus a lot on sports.

The digital will give you the latitude to change ISO on the fly and shoot all day hardly needing to pause. Film will give you better quality.

The ability to “spray and pray” may sound appealing, but if it keeps you from composing correctly, than spray and pray will often not work out.

Both options will give you a digital file at the end of the day.

So I remembered my dad has a very old 35mm SLR (film) Are the lenses interchangeable?

I don’t think they are, because the DSLR has special connections that it uses with the lens. That is just a guess.