Which one was a most easiest to operate, Digital SLR or Conventional SLR Camera?

Answer 1

In terms of taking photos, they are virtually identical to operate. There's a few key differences:

1) instant review on the digital SLR--you can instantly check your shots for composition, check a histogram for exposure accuracy, and check for people who blinked during your shot.

2) no need to reload after 24 images, and reloading is easier. With film, you have to worry about how many shots you take, since even bad shots cost you money. With a digital SLR and a large memory card, it's easy to take hundreds of shots before having to swap memory cards. It's very liberating.

3) battery life. Despite claims that film SLR batteries last longer, it's just not true. A film SLR with a motorized transport eats up batteries after a dozen rolls or so, and that's around 300 frames. With reasonable use of the LCD screen, you can get 500 to 600 images or more with a digital SLR. Most film SLRs I recall using required some kind of disposable battery, whereas digitals use rechargeable batteries which work better in high drain devices.

4) storage media--memory cards hold more AND they take up less space.

5) post processing vs darkroom work. You need to know your way around a computer and how to manipulate images in programs like Photoshop instead of how to do darkroom work (although you can perform darkroom tasks on the computer).

6) changing film on the fly: with digital you can change ISO, you can change saturation, and pretty much you can change most of the characteristics of the image at any point. Shooting RAW gives you more flexibility. It's equivalent to having a roll of film and then in the middle of the roll being able to switch to a different film entirely (say a higher ISO film or a high saturation film or B&W film) without wasting any shots.

For what it's worth, I rarely use my film SLRs since going digital. The big exception is for color slides, which have a real-life quality to them that is missing from digital images.

Answer 2

Knowing how to operate one certainly makes understanding the other easier. In a sense, there is more to understand with the digital SLRs, since an understanding of white balance and how to change it to a preselected setting or create a customized white balance setting is important. But once this is understood, it is much more covenient that having to use filters in film SLRs. It is also so much more convenient to be able to change ISO from shot to shot, which can't be done with film. Being able to see an image and making adjustments with a digital camera is a huge advantage over film.

Answer 3

I've used both. I used a 35mm SLR for many years but have recently switched to digital. They're both Pentax, so that I can use the lenses from one camera to the other. The main advantage for me with digital is that I can see the pix instantly, retake them if necessary, and then print only the ones I actually want. It does have autofocus (which I don't use) and antishake (which I do). It gets through batteries more quickly than the 35mm. Hope this helps.

Answer 4

Any of them in Auto mode,you don,t have to load a film into digital which some 35mm SLRs can be tricky..

Answer 5

my friend it will be very difficult for any one of us to suggest which DSLR you shud buy . you havent mentioned are you a professional fotographer or not.

but for suggestions you may look at PENTAX K100D super, it is an amazing DSLR and you will not go wrong with it .do check it out and find out .

for all your camera needs please visit. www.dpreview.com