Your Cameras

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/417BYFY2A2L._SL500_AA280_.jpg

My wife teases me because I've been using this same HP camera since 2001. I like it since apparently, they stopped making digital cameras with viewfinders, and to me, looking at a digital image to record your digital image is getting a few too many degrees from the subject you're shooting. But then again, I'm an old man with a bad lawn.

How much can you depend on software to improve the quality of your pics in regard to the cheaper the camera? In other words, how much can you make up in Photoshop for an image captured by a camera that didn't cost $2000?

•--• --- --- •--• (Pleasant Plains), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 16:59 (eleven years ago) link

That's a harder question: used to be that the camera was just a light-tight box and the lenses were all that counted. Now the camera is also the film, so if you put a great lens on an ancient digibox there's not much photoshop's going to be able to do with it.

I've got a 20d
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS20D/Images/frontview-001.jpg
which is still in great shape, but the autofocus isn't all that, and I'm desperate to get my hands on one of those super-ISO modern numbers. Can't justify it in the slightest, though.

stet, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:09 (eleven years ago) link

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/10/04/lw_camera_wideweb__470x377,0.jpg

Quality wise it might not be up to yer canikons but there are things i like about it - ability to capture an image for preview without saving to memory card, saves much deleting time later. It takes AA batteries so easy and cheap to get spares. And for the time it had high ISO (3200). Cons - too much stuff hidden behind menus, auto white balance is not all that.

ledge, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:14 (eleven years ago) link

anti-shake built into the body, too, which is nice.

ledge, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:15 (eleven years ago) link

Canon EOS 40D (about half original retail off eBay)
Canon EOS 300D (about one-third original retail off eBay 2.5 years ago, now dead)
Canon EOS 10 (Freecycled)
Canon EOS IX7 (six quid on eBay)
Canon FTb (1970s manual SLR, about 170 quid from Jessops Classic nine years ago)
Bronica SQ-A (one-squillionth of original retail, US eBay purchase)

Plus some compacts and things.

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:20 (eleven years ago) link

http://www.quirkcollective.com/images/redux3.jpg

Michael Jones, last Thursday.

•--• --- --- •--• (Pleasant Plains), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:29 (eleven years ago) link

I should point out that the Bronica, FTb and the EOS 10 are all nominally Pam's, seeing as she (respectively) initiated the research/bidding, was the giftee, was the Freecycle mail-list subscriber/collector of item. But, let's be honest, I play with them more often.

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:45 (eleven years ago) link

is this a new board? i never noticed it b4

GROLIOUS NIPPON ;_; (cankles), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:45 (eleven years ago) link

yeah, it's less than an hour old.

joe, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:48 (eleven years ago) link

Hanimex something something 110
Olympus OM10
Fujifilm MX-1200 (1.3MP, bought back in early 2001)

snoball, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:53 (eleven years ago) link

minolta maxxum 400si

i've had it for 12 years, great basic camera. i'm not getting a digital one until it breaks down.

from crass encino (velko), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 17:55 (eleven years ago) link

EOS 30D. Just got the EF-S 10-22 for it, and I'm not sure if I'm pleased with its "wideness".

plenty chong (libcrypt), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 18:03 (eleven years ago) link

I have a Canon 450D for fancy things and a Canon Powershot A710is for taking with me when I don't want to lug around an SLR. The A710 has a viewfinder; I seem to recall Canon being pretty good with keeping them in their cameras but I'm not sure about the newer models. To be honest though I don't use it too often on that camera, and I only just realised that I couldn't see the numbers in my 450D viewfinder because I wasn't wearing my glasses and was trying to use my severely nearsighted eye to see them. Duurrrrr. So I either have to train myself to instinctively use my right, farsighted eye or wear glasses more often.

Oh yes, and I have a polaroid camera. One with a little rainbow stripe on it. It's at my parents' house but I plan on bringing it back to UK with me after the next visit.

salsa shark, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 18:03 (eleven years ago) link

The ones that I use and can remember: Ricoh (shit) and a Canon1000D. I have a couple of other compacts but I can't remember the makes/whatevers and I don't even know if I can charge'em cause I lost the chargers. They're somewhere but can't find'em.

Ah well. I also have a regular Canon but it's my mum's and I don't think I'll really use it. Like ever. Did try using its lens but it was crappy/difficult to control. Ah well.

the tip of the tongue taking a trip tralalala (stevienixed), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 19:09 (eleven years ago) link

I suspect I own too many cameras.

Digital SLRs:
Pentax K20D (Bought just before the price went up and I got £100 cashback!)
Pentax *ist DS (Cheap from Canada)

Film SLRs:
Pentax MZ-50 (Bought as a cheap backup body for wedding shoot)
Minolta Maxxum 7000 (Bought from a friend when I realized the K1000 needed a repair, rarely used)
Pentax K1000 (Dirt cheap off ebay - needs repaired)

Compacts:
Canon Powershot A590IS (Direct replacement for the A85)
Pentax Optio M20 (A terrible camera for stills - great video mode)
Canon Powershot A85 (Superb camera now showing the abuse it's had over the years)
Fuji Finepix A204 (First digital camera, bought on a whim)

treefell, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 21:18 (eleven years ago) link

ive got this but wish id spent the extra money on a canon rebel xti maybe:

http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/sony_a300_1.jpg

and for fun and surprisingly good video this:

http://www.itechnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/Sony-Cyber-Shot-DSC-T100-4.jpg

I wish I was the royal trux (sunny successor), Wednesday, 25 March 2009 21:58 (eleven years ago) link

Ooh, we've got a Pentax K1000 too. Best viewfinder of any of our cameras, I think. It also needs repair (can't meter), but, with some guesswork (or another camera doing the metering), it's certainly usable:

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/pernfors88/2778799283/"; title="Format frenzy by JerryBones, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3144/2778799283_270f6b5d27.jpg"; width="500" height="333" alt="Format frenzy" /></a>

(That's a Polaroid taken with the Bronica).

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 23:12 (eleven years ago) link

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3144/2778799283_270f6b5d27.jpg

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 23:13 (eleven years ago) link

(Whoops; photo of a Polaroid, which was taken with Bronica, taken with the K1000...)

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 25 March 2009 23:14 (eleven years ago) link

SS, judging from your pix, no need to regret anything. AWESOMENESS! :-)

the tip of the tongue taking a trip tralalala (stevienixed), Thursday, 26 March 2009 09:05 (eleven years ago) link

a Nikon D80. its very very nice

Ant Attack.. (Ste), Thursday, 26 March 2009 09:28 (eleven years ago) link

thanks! xp

I wish I was the royal trux (sunny successor), Thursday, 26 March 2009 13:10 (eleven years ago) link

Oh wow! I Love Photography! STOKED.

Well, I have:
Canon 20D - my new baby
Canon 350D for emergencies
Canon EOS650 film love
I don't have a compact. I really should get one.

#/.'#/'@ilikecats (g-kit), Thursday, 26 March 2009 13:26 (eleven years ago) link

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3215/3061186304_484f58a062.jpg

Canon 1000d (what the above was taken with), plus what's in the picture - couple of ancient SLRs that belong to Emma, Polaroid, and a Canon IXUS 40. Used to own a Fuji Finepix thing that had 2mp and 6x optical zoom, many years ago (can't remember model number).

Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, 2 April 2009 08:20 (eleven years ago) link

three weeks pass...

I have a Olympus E-520. I got it partly because it was the cheapest DSLR with in-body image stabilization and a sensor-dust cleaner, and because my first "serious" camera was an Olympus OM-G I got from my father. I used to have a Canon 10D, but I sold it because it was too heavy - then I went through a period of owning various Panasonic point and shoots before settling back on a DSLR.

I am eagerly awaiting Olympus's entry into the Micro Four Thirds platform, which is rumored to be a rangefinder style design. The Micro Four Thirds standard is an interchangeable lens system using a sensor slightly smaller than an APS-C sensor but without the mirror box. Hence the body and lenses can be made much smaller than a normal SLR. For an example, look at the Panasonic G1, which is like a DSLR shrunk in all dimensions by 30%.

DJ Khaled El-Amin (dyao), Friday, 24 April 2009 07:46 (eleven years ago) link

I was just wishing the other day for a digital camera about the size of my old AE-1. The size of my carry-around setup is preposterous. I like the sound of the little Olympus, but a smaller sensor isn't great -- 35mm would be much more appealing.

stet, Friday, 24 April 2009 15:23 (eleven years ago) link

Well to be fair the 4/3 sensor inside the Olympus and Panasonic cameras is very nearly the size of the sensors used in all non-full frame DSLRs - the vertical height is about the same, the sides are shorter on account of the squarer aspect ratio of 4:3 compared to 3:2.

The Panasonic G1 is about the size of an old school 70s SLR:

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/8734/6a00df351e888f883401053.jpg

Panasonic also is releasing a version capable of shooting HD video:

Make sure to click through to the Youtube page and watch it in HD.

DJ Khaled El-Amin (dyao), Sunday, 26 April 2009 15:21 (eleven years ago) link

That video's really nice, aye. I generally think even the APS-C sensors are too small as well: the depth of field is deeper than you get on 35mm, even wide open, and you can sort of see that in the video: the not-quite-oof area is wider than you'd expect at f2.

Saying that, I've just read a review of the Sigma DP2, and it looks like a great camera so the trade-off could be worth it.

(Also: what is it with the hand grips everywhere? AE-1 > T90)

stet, Monday, 27 April 2009 13:05 (eleven years ago) link

Couldn't see much evidence of skew when the camera was panned on the tripod either, which suggests Panasonic have a very fast-refreshing sensor, optimised for video (Nikon D90 is apparently a bit of a joke for video skew, Canon 5D2 much better but still not pro standard).

This seems to be the way to go if they've achieved fast contrast-detect AF. Sticking video in an SLR design just seems flawed from the get-go really.

Michael Jones, Monday, 27 April 2009 15:24 (eleven years ago) link

nine months pass...

http://www.thecamerasite.net/02_Rangefinders/Images/Minolta-AL.jpg

Super psyched about this camera! Been wanting to use a rangefinder for awhile, spent too much money on an impulse-buy craigslist purchase of a Yashica Electro 35 (which I now can't seem to get working), but found this at the Salvation Army store in the Inner Richmond a week later (for anyone in SF, that store seems to generally have a pretty decent camera selection. I saw at least one or two other rangefinders, plus maybe four or five SLRs, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc. Lenses too).
No worries about getting this one working since it's all manual. No battery troubles like with the Yashica! Feels more solid too, although I think the Yashica's supposed to have a better lens?
I probably took some dud photos with it. It'll be a little while before I'm totally used to the focussing and manual exposure, I think.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 9 February 2010 18:02 (ten years ago) link

not actually *my* camera pictured above, btw

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 9 February 2010 18:03 (ten years ago) link

What a beaut! I've been hankering after a Voigtlander Bessa for a long time. Maybe one day, when I get my arse in gear and sell some stuff.

Michael Jones, Tuesday, 9 February 2010 22:20 (ten years ago) link

that's cute. i'm permanently dithering over a rangefinder, too. i've used an om-1 for maybe ten years and am always jealous of other SLRs which maybe render texture & contrast a little more, like whenever i see shots taken on a pentax. i think i'd go for the yashica, not really knowing what's what, but maybe something else will fall in my path first.

mainly my attitude towards deciding i need another camera is like finding out what kind of guitar jimi hendrix played and being all, oh so that's why my guitar playing's so limited.

Norman Mail (schlump), Tuesday, 9 February 2010 22:24 (ten years ago) link

Film SLRs, as Stet says upthread, are basically just light-tight boxes (with some clever electronics if yr lucky). You're really entirely at the mercy of your lenses (and the film type/processing).

Meaningless comparison of Pentax and Olympus by me...

(Oly OM-20 aka OM-G, Zuiko 50/1.8, ISO 200 colour neg)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3554/3812478734_383d1e95dd.jpg

(Pentax K-1000, SMC 50/2.0, ISO 200 colour neg)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3015/2779648338_4a63c01040.jpg

Michael Jones, Tuesday, 9 February 2010 22:50 (ten years ago) link

Conclusion: Olympus makes your hair longer.

Michael Jones, Tuesday, 9 February 2010 22:51 (ten years ago) link

A Pentax Super Program (early 80's SLR with a lot of auto functions) has been my main film camera (inherited) for quite awhile. I'm pretty happy with it. We'll see how happy I am with the Minolta after a few rolls I guess, but it's sure fun to hold.
I wouldn't have gone buying multiple new cameras in a couple of weeks, except that the "off brand" rangefinders can be kind of cheap. It's kind of dangerous now. I could see myself buying another.
Up until recently I've been mostly using a Canon Digital Rebel, so the film phase is the revival of an old expensive habit. I owned and used the Pentax back in high school and college (late 90's/early 2000's).

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 9 February 2010 23:47 (ten years ago) link

film just gets so many things right doesn't it MJ? lovely

99. The Juggalo Teacher (dyao), Wednesday, 10 February 2010 03:07 (ten years ago) link

Most fun I've ever had was when I got past my first couple of photography classes and gained access to my school's color print processing machine. Nothing I've shot has looked better than Kodak NC printed on Fuji Crystal Archive.

FIST FIGHT! FIST FIGHT! FIST FIGHT IN THE PARKING LOT! (milo z), Thursday, 11 February 2010 04:39 (ten years ago) link

digital:
Nikon D700
Pentax k20d (about to sell
Canon 5d (need to send off for cleaning, then sell)

film:
Canon EOS Elan 7e - my first real camera, amazing how dark the viewfinder is compared to the above dSLRs
Leica M7 - purchased with gambling winnings, need to sell
Bessa R2A - will probably keep when I sell the Leica, at least I'll have a film rangefinder left
Canonet G17 - picked up at a flea market, needs new seals
Bronica SQ - my medium format tank, has sat unused since I haven't had access to a decent scanner or darkroom. Should sell, but it has sentimental value (shooting square has always been remarkably comfortable for me) and it's worth a pittance
ShenHao 4x5 - Chinese field camera
Crown Graphic (mid-50s, built in rangefinder) - loved shooting Polaroids with it.

toy:
coupla Holgas, some Alfa toys from the '50s

useless:
Polaroid SX-70 converted to expose correctly with Polaroid pack film... which got discontinued shortly after

FIST FIGHT! FIST FIGHT! FIST FIGHT IN THE PARKING LOT! (milo z), Thursday, 11 February 2010 04:46 (ten years ago) link

Bronica SQ - my medium format tank, has sat unused since I haven't had access to a decent scanner or darkroom.

I was so discouraged by my usual* mail-order E6/120 lab failing to provide the scans that I'd paid for early last year (and so many frustrating attempts to capture the girls on 120 in less than wonderful light) that our SQ-A is also gathering dust. It has Astia 100 in it at the mo'. Perhaps I can finish it off in the spring.

(* - hark at me; like I even knew what a medium format camera was three years ago)

Hilarious attempt at scanning 120 with a the 35mm film scan option on a Canon 4400F (this is the Ekta E200 the lab failed to scan):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2703/4323839266_d2aa733a1f.jpg

Pam's Blackbird Fly remains in its case - yet to run its way through the Delta 400...

Michael Jones, Thursday, 11 February 2010 16:27 (ten years ago) link

(Ed - enough Lulu already)

Michael Jones, Thursday, 11 February 2010 16:31 (ten years ago) link

three months pass...

Digital: A Canon SD300 that I really need to upgrade to one of their newer pocketcams with image stabilization and HD video.

Film: Nikon 35Ti, whose wonderful illuminated analog gauge cluster I wish I could transplant to my next digital camera. Likewise its bulletproof titanium housing and grippy, retro textured leather trim and SLR-quality lens and metering.

Phone: LG VX8360, whose mediocre camera I use way too often because I always have it with me.

Also, the 640x480/30fps video from my iPod Nano 5th gen.

Lee626, Friday, 28 May 2010 14:09 (ten years ago) link

Nikon 35Ti:

http://corsopolaris.net/supercameras/35mmwide/NIKON_35Ts.jpg

Lee626, Friday, 28 May 2010 14:18 (ten years ago) link

whoa that nikon looks trippy and a joy to shoot with!

I've been having intense gear lust over the zeiss ikon:

http://flor27.free.fr/forums/rangefinders/Zeiss_Ikon/case/content/bin/images/large/05.jpg

apparently just about better at everything a leica does except being a leica. it's also about $1300 new, $1000 used - lol at spending $1000 on a film camera in 2010. : |

Face Book (dyao), Friday, 28 May 2010 14:29 (ten years ago) link

sigh :(

gbx, Friday, 28 May 2010 20:37 (ten years ago) link

"Even" cheaper than the Zeiss Ikon, as I'm sure you know, is the Voigtlander Bessa range. Better viewfinders too. Leaving more money for the lenses...

Gbx - still without camera?

Michael Jones, Friday, 28 May 2010 20:46 (ten years ago) link

yeah

gbx, Friday, 28 May 2010 20:51 (ten years ago) link

it's summer! I wanna take pictures! I mean I guess technically I could get another one but yeesh

gbx, Friday, 28 May 2010 20:52 (ten years ago) link

My friend owns a Zeiss Ikon. Looking through its 1:1 viewfinder is awesome. He also just got a Zeiss Ikon SuperWide which lacks a viewfinder/rangefinder - it's a scalefocus body for use with wide angle lenses.

kreidleresque, Wednesday, 2 June 2010 17:42 (ten years ago) link

two weeks pass...

Ah, the SX-70! I forgot all about Polaroids....

I also forgot about the first camera I bought when I was a kid, which I still have. Kodak Pocket Instamatic 50. That was one of their two higher-end 110 cartridge cameras (yes, there was such a thing!). I saved up months of allowance money to buy it. You had to manually focus every shot and guess the distance, because I cheaped out and didn't buy the top-of-the-line model 60 which added a rangefinder. And for years afterward, I missed shot after shot as I had to futz with the focus slider on top before almost every shot. Taught me to buy what I really want in the first place thereafter.

Lee626, Saturday, 19 June 2010 20:23 (ten years ago) link

So I could just about trade my D700 straight up for a 5D II...

1080p video and the megapixel advantage is very, very tempting.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Thursday, 24 June 2010 03:30 (ten years ago) link

Didn't you already go Canon -> Nikon, Milo? Selling some glass to fund the switch? 5D2 is v nice though - I suspect it's an inferior stills camera in some respects vs the D700, but obviously there's the video...

I've always been quite impressed with Nikon sticking steadfastly to 12MP in every camera but the D3X. Ducking out of the race.

Michael Jones, Thursday, 24 June 2010 08:27 (ten years ago) link

I got a 5D 2 a month or so ago, and it's kicking my ass. I'd forgotten what actual depth of field was, so am having to stop down more than usual. It also makes my lenses look much softer, including the Ls, wide-open.

some of the things it does in low light are absolutely astounding, though.

stet, Thursday, 24 June 2010 13:18 (ten years ago) link

I kind of switched but not really - the benefits of not buying more than a couple of lenses, I guess. I still have my 50/1.4 and 35L (and a 5D body that's about to be sent off for a recall repair and cleaning - if I stick with Nikon I'll sell it all, if I switch back to Canon I'll keep it). I'd eventually have to get a flash, but I really only use that for Ebay photos.

And in Nikon, I only have a 50/1.4D and the 24-70/2.8. Which is a lovely lens, but one of my planned projects is to carry a camera with me all the time for six months or year, and it would be body plus either a 50/1.4 or a wide-angle prime - I basically use zooms at the extreme wide end or somewhere around 50 and it's not worth the weight and inconvenience.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Thursday, 24 June 2010 17:27 (ten years ago) link

replacement gf1 to arrive today :D

flapjackin (gbx), Thursday, 24 June 2010 18:23 (ten years ago) link

one of these:

http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/camera/popup/image/pop26_om10.jpg

caek, Thursday, 24 June 2010 18:26 (ten years ago) link

Currently these are selling for $430 in roughly like-new condition (at KEH, rated EXC). If they drop below $300 I'm going to have to get one just to please inner 18-year old me.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/NikonF5/images/NikonF5front80mm.JPG

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Thursday, 24 June 2010 20:58 (ten years ago) link

It also makes my lenses look much softer, including the Ls, wide-open.

resolution issue?

crüt it out (dyao), Friday, 25 June 2010 00:17 (ten years ago) link

Yup, just the sheer megapixelage of the thing, as they only look soft at full-size 4000-odd pixels wide. By the time you reduce the images down to something more standard you can't tell. It makes a mockery of the cheaper lenses though. 50mm f1.4 was always a bit soft at 1.4, but is basically vaseline'd on this.

stet, Friday, 25 June 2010 00:29 (ten years ago) link

Watching some 5DII videos and I'm really getting tempted now. I'm sure the next D700x will have video capability, but God only knows when that will come out and it'll probably be $3k to start with.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Friday, 25 June 2010 01:37 (ten years ago) link

one month passes...

so uh I sold all my digital stuff (well nearly all of it, keeping the 20mm f/1.7 til they make a m43 body I can be down with) and bought two leicas. dead broke atm but having a lot of fun shooting film!!

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 03:12 (ten years ago) link

(also I only planned to get 1 leica but I found another one at a 'killer' price so now I have the good problem of having two leicas and no money.)

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 03:13 (ten years ago) link

lol at spending $1000 on a film camera in 2010. : |

― Face Book (dyao), Friday, May 28, 2010 10:29 AM (2 months ago) Bookmark

lol at me loling at myself two months ago lolin at spending $$$ on a film camera in 2010

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 03:14 (ten years ago) link

Apparently the 35 'lux ASPH I bought used for $1000 in 2003ish is going to net me like $2500 thanks to Leica raising their prices monstrously. Wooooooo.

Scared of selling anything that valuable on the Internets, though.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Friday, 6 August 2010 03:25 (ten years ago) link

What did you get? M6 and an M3? My Leica lust was always for the M4-P, it seemed like the least stylish and most workmanlike Leica.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Friday, 6 August 2010 03:26 (ten years ago) link

M3 and a M4-2 - M4-2 is the same exact thing as the M4-P except with 4 framelines instead of 6.

for lenses, have a 35/2 biogon and awaiting a 50/2 summitar in the mail. also have a 50/1.8 canon LTM I picked up from KEH last year

sold my e-p1, assorted new cosina-voigtlander lenses (lost like 400 on the e-p1 due to olympus releasing the e-p2/e-pl1 so quickly after the e-p1, ugh, digital rot.)

hopefully if I ever decide to sell these leicas the only thing I'll lose is the cost of film...

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 03:31 (ten years ago) link

re: selling on the internet, I've bought and sold a lot from: getdpi.com, rangefinderforum.com

use common sense (always ship insured w/ tracking #, look @ feedback, list truthfully) etc. and there shouldn't be too many problems. you could even do fredmiranda

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 03:51 (ten years ago) link

yeah i spent €300 on a shitty digital camera a couple years ago that takes ugly photos and i never use it, and i bought an old praktica for tenner last summer and lately i've started trying to learn how to use it and even though I shoot a lot of blurry shadows the ones that come out look great and also its so much more fun having to wait to see ur photos.

plax (ico), Friday, 6 August 2010 18:06 (ten years ago) link

yr leicas show me them

pies. (gbx), Friday, 6 August 2010 18:09 (ten years ago) link

the ones that come out look great and also its so much more fun having to wait to see ur photos.

otm! I saw some from that thread on the church your photos look great!

gbx I have been meaning to take a picture I will soon

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 18:18 (ten years ago) link

thanks man! i srsly dont understand why anybody shoots w/ digital anymore unless they've got a crazy expensive camera.

plax (ico), Friday, 6 August 2010 18:24 (ten years ago) link

i god i HATE waiting for pictures to be developed. and paying for it. and inevitably getting the exposure just wrong enough that it looks kinda shitty.

pies. (gbx), Friday, 6 August 2010 18:27 (ten years ago) link

lol gr8080 I have the bottom one (olympus xa2) just replaced the light seals too

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 18:28 (ten years ago) link

like i were a PRO and bought film in ridiculous bulk and had the time/inclination/facilities to develop my own film and/or scan it into my computer, i'd absolutely love to have a voigtlander or leica

as it is, even going through recent digital photos is tough to fit into my day (i've got like a 100 pics from the wedding that need attn)

pies. (gbx), Friday, 6 August 2010 18:28 (ten years ago) link

that's true gbx, I'm probably gonna be banging my head against the wall in a few months tbh

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 18:32 (ten years ago) link

tbh i just started taking photos bc i realised that since my baby photos i only had holiday and drunk photos. just wanted to have some photographs of ppl how i remember them. Like if you need actual results tho i'd be screwed.

plax (ico), Friday, 6 August 2010 18:44 (ten years ago) link

i god i HATE waiting for pictures to be developed. and paying for it. and inevitably getting the exposure just wrong enough that it looks kinda shitty.

― pies. (gbx), Friday, August 6, 2010 8:27 AM (43 minutes ago) Bookmark

i LOVE this part. except for the paying for it part. actually i kind of like that part too.

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 19:12 (ten years ago) link

dyao- i haven't messed w/ my XA2 much-- the shutter button is really weird! its like... not a button? any tips?

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 19:13 (ten years ago) link

yeah it is kind of weird, it's like conductive or something. my only tip (besides getting the light seals replaced if yer getting light leaks, it's like a $10 kit off ebay) is to use silver oxide SR44s instead of alkaline batteries - they are much more reliable

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 19:58 (ten years ago) link

Plus a Flip and a Holga for LOLs

Tolaca Luke (admrl), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:03 (ten years ago) link

Might also spring for a Ti like s1ocki's one of these days, but I still <3 film

Tolaca Luke (admrl), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:04 (ten years ago) link

i LOVE this part. except for the paying for it part. actually i kind of like that part too.

i just about manage to keep buying film, buying old expired rolls whenever i can get to a place that sells them, but i can hardly afford developing: i have a b&h plastic bag full of fifteen undeveloped rolls. whenever i can afford to, i get one processed, usually something i shot a year or eighteen months ago; i can never remember what i took; when it's from; have no idea how they'll come out or what kind of dumb strategy i had about how to control the light or do something cool with lighting. it's such a pleasure getting them back. quite a lot of the attention that film photography gets now's as an anathema to the instant gratification of digital, its efficiency and its capacity, and it's like the direct opposite of that. would love to see your first leica experiments anyhow. this sounds tiny, but since it's one of the things that always piqued my interest reading about the guys who used them - are the exposures silent?

those praktica photos were great btw plax

baby i know that you think i'm just a lion (schlump), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:16 (ten years ago) link

If I had access to a full darkroom, I'd probably still shoot FP4+/HP5+. I miss 6x6 dearly, even with the hassles of drying and spotting fiber prints, etc.. Sending it off to be developed and lab-scanned and so on takes the magic out of it for me.

Would never go back to shooting color film, though. Digital printed on a good baryta gloss paper just looks too good.

I'm hoping that if dSLRs crest at the 18-20mp range, they'll start focusing on improving dynamic range. Or that digital medium format (which already has the DR of film, AFAIK) comes down to reasonable prices. And there's my hope beyond all hope that someday Hasselblad or Bronica (do they still exist?) will come out with a square format digital camera.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:25 (ten years ago) link

(obv. some cameras are beyond the 18-20 range, but I think they'll remain outside the norm - the D3S makes a lot of people v. v. happy at 12mp, and if you could get D3S noise at 18mp the only possible improvements would come in DR)

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:28 (ten years ago) link

dyao- i haven't messed w/ my XA2 much-- the shutter button is really weird! its like... not a button? any tips?

I've owned an XA2 for almost 20 years! It's a button alright - just one with very little action or give behind a stiff plastic film as far as I can tell. I used to use my fingernail to take the picture.

i srsly dont understand why anybody shoots w/ digital anymore unless they've got a crazy expensive camera

Well...secondhand 2002-04 era 6MP DSLR with a thrifty fifty...200 quid? But, yeah, the plethora of film options now for not very much money is amazing. I mean, I can't believe I own a medium format SLR! That would've been so far out of reach 15 years ago.

xxp (no, Bronica disappeared in the late-'90s...hence my cheap SQ-A)

Michael Jones, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:31 (ten years ago) link

developing film isnt that expensive!

its like $4.50 for a roll and a CD of scans

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:38 (ten years ago) link

do you not get them printed?

plax (ico), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:39 (ten years ago) link

i just about manage to keep buying film, buying old expired rolls whenever i can get to a place that sells them, but i can hardly afford developing: i have a b&h plastic bag full of fifteen undeveloped rolls. whenever i can afford to, i get one processed, usually something i shot a year or eighteen months ago; i can never remember what i took; when it's from; have no idea how they'll come out or what kind of dumb strategy i had about how to control the light or do something cool with lighting. it's such a pleasure getting them back. quite a lot of the attention that film photography gets now's as an anathema to the instant gratification of digital, its efficiency and its capacity, and it's like the direct opposite of that. would love to see your first leica experiments anyhow. this sounds tiny, but since it's one of the things that always piqued my interest reading about the guys who used them - are the exposures silent?

those praktica photos were great btw plax

― baby i know that you think i'm just a lion (schlump), Friday, August 6, 2010 4:16 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark

this is also true, I've been looking at mail order - some places can develop a roll for as little as $3, but factor in shipping/return shipping etc. and you need to send off quite a few rolls at once to make it worthwhile. oh and you'll need a film scanner or flatbed if you want digital copies... I've heard that if you go to a wal-mart, and write "process only" in the special instructions box, they'll only develop it for like 88 cents, but the one time I tried they ignored me and charged me $6 for the prints and the negs.

well the leica's are not that *quiet*, but the shutter sound is...different? it's a low pitched click, that doesn't really sound like a shutter at all, especially if you're used to SLR shutters. like if someone heard you but didn't see you shoot a frame, they wouldn't think you were shooting, whereas they would if they had heard the shutter sound of a SLR. does that make sense?

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:39 (ten years ago) link

xp

not usually. saves $$ and space. you get decent scans that are suitable for putting on the web or for small to medium sized prints. you can always get prints of just the ones you want made later.

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:41 (ten years ago) link

i guess, i have a lot of photos that are really just blur+lightleak

plax (ico), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:42 (ten years ago) link

costco, wal-mart, wallgreens will all do "process only" for a buck or two and then charge $3-$4 for a CD cd scans. which seems like a lot but fuck it scanning negatives on your own is such a pain in the ass, especially when you have 6 or 7 rolls to do.

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:43 (ten years ago) link

sorry to hijack this thread-- maybe you guys have a FILM thread somewhere?

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:45 (ten years ago) link

Typical high-street prices in the UK:

36exp C41, dev+print+scan - about £7
36exp E6, dev+mount+scan - about £10
36exp B&W, dev+print+scan - approaching £15 (and it takes two weeks!)
Medium format - £15+

You can get better deals sending away to some of independent labs, or with the likes of Truprint (but you get what you pay for - the scans are dreadful).

xxxxp

Michael Jones, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:48 (ten years ago) link

ouch! one of the things I'm looking forward to is developing my own B&W. once my job starts again and I start getting paid I might pick up a plustek film scanner - dedicated scanner similar to the old konica minolta dual scan IVs. one good workflow might be: epson v500/v700 to make a quick contact sheet of a roll, plustek/some other dedicated to make high quality high res scans of keepers. maybe replace the first part with a light table and a loupe instead.

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:51 (ten years ago) link

yeah ive been paying €10 for 36ex 5x7s but thats cheaper than every other place around town and the prints are way nicer too.

plax (ico), Friday, 6 August 2010 20:52 (ten years ago) link

for USA people: if i have lots of slide/B+W/Medium format to do at once, its worth it to send to dwane's: http://www.dwaynesphoto.com/

then again, i live on an island with only one lab that does slide film

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:55 (ten years ago) link

also I've heard that some places are selling DIY c-41 kits (i.e. freestyle photo) and that with one kit you can do at least 10 rolls, usually more, and it's a pretty simple 'dunk and dry' process

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 20:58 (ten years ago) link

hmmm... isnt the whole thing with C-41 that there's a lot less range wrt water temperature? like you have to keep your bath at EXACTLY 103F for 15 mins, wheras b+w it can flux a little?? hence no one doing C-41 at home?

gr8080, Friday, 6 August 2010 21:00 (ten years ago) link

\(o_O)/ just passing on what i've read

dyao, Friday, 6 August 2010 21:02 (ten years ago) link

Just got back some Neopan 1600 prints (put it in at Jacobs a month ago and forgot about it) - ridiculously contrasty, not a lot of midtones. Shot quite a bit of it with a hired 12-24mm back in June - I'll pop the best on the photos thread eventually. Which might not be much.

Michael Jones, Friday, 6 August 2010 21:05 (ten years ago) link

i never worked out a happy medium in terms of b&w re: midtones - i love shooting 1600 or 3200 for the insane contrast; 100 comes out way too grey, no ink black in sight, and i'm still waiting on seeing what 400s look like. don't think ilford or fuji make an 800 ...

developing wisdom is useful - i don't think i could ever put a film in the mail. do you send it registered or something? i'd worry.

baby i know that you think i'm just a lion (schlump), Friday, 6 August 2010 21:23 (ten years ago) link

I've got some Neopan 400CN in the fridge - be interested to see what that's like (and, as a C41 film, it'll be cheap and quick to get back).

I trust the Royal Mail maybe more than I should. I liked using Metro in Birmingham for E6/120 - their scans were super - but the last time I used them they neglected to include the CD-R I'd paid for and didn't respond to any emails. So sod them.

Michael Jones, Friday, 6 August 2010 21:33 (ten years ago) link

Regular Neopan 400 was the bomb. Tonality akin to Tri-X or HP5, grain more like the Deltas/TMaxes.

Got a Canon S90 tonight to keep with me for times when the D700 is inappropriate.

a cross between lily allen and fetal alcohol syndrome (milo z), Saturday, 7 August 2010 02:12 (ten years ago) link

as promised

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4868821090_2735a9b560_z.jpg

dyao, Saturday, 7 August 2010 13:31 (ten years ago) link

oh shiiiiiiiiit

pies. (gbx), Sunday, 8 August 2010 14:41 (ten years ago) link

two months pass...

Totally psyched: I have an Olympus RC which is missing the shutter dial (my fault) so I eBayed a lot of 5 broken models, got em for $30, received them today and am pretty sure that at least 3 of them are in very good working order. Yanked the dial from one of the broken ones, and now I've got gift cameras for my friends and family!
I realize that my last camera post on here also began with the words "Totally psyched." It's a good life I guess.

I'm mostly lurker here anyway, but had to brag.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 29 October 2010 01:07 (ten years ago) link

those are very good cameras

dayo, Friday, 29 October 2010 01:22 (ten years ago) link

three weeks pass...

A couple weeks later and I'll say how much I agree: great cameras and they all work (or uh at least the three I've tested). So sharp! So small!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 21 November 2010 15:50 (ten years ago) link

two months pass...

After downloading a few of the X100 sample images and playing with them in LR, I really hope the camera handles well - ie autofocus is half decent and it's responsive. The files on Fuji's website are unsharpened and the B&W ones are particularly badly processed - five minutes in LR and a bit of sharpening does wonders for them.

boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Friday, 11 February 2011 04:56 (nine years ago) link

A beater Leica M2!! Couldn't resist the price. I will still be skipping a few luxuries for a bit though, since I'm normally a thrift-store and flea market cameras kind of guy.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Thursday, 17 February 2011 04:07 (nine years ago) link

i might be buying a new camera today but idk i feel like i would be betraying my old one, still it would mean i could put some 800iso film in it for taking night time photos and i wouldnt have to use the whole roll before i could go back to my normal ones.

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 10:46 (nine years ago) link

cool! come w a lens? how beater? details? xp

dayo, Friday, 18 February 2011 10:48 (nine years ago) link

Eh, it's pretty beat looking. It would mostly be just normal scratches and occasional flaking vulcanite, but on the counter-side corner there's some significant denting. Looks like it took a nasty fall at some point. Functions (seemingly) fine. Shutter speeds seem accurate etc. but I'll know better when I finish off the roll I've started going through.
No lens. So I am just starting off with a low-end Voigtlander 35. Will be on the lookout to upgrade when I have the money or a deal comes up on CL etc.

And xp: I also feel as if I've betrayed my Olympus RCs! After lauding them so much and all. And I feel sorry for my Pentax, and my Minolta AL, and my borrowed Nikon F2, or the FED, or the XA etc. I'm a little nostalgic about every camera I pick up and feel kind of guilty when I get new one. I think the goal is to settle on just a few that each have their purpose.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 18 February 2011 12:36 (nine years ago) link

plax i usually roll w/ 2 cameras: 1 loaded w/ b&w and one w/ color/slide film

gr8080, Friday, 18 February 2011 12:41 (nine years ago) link

i dont do b+w but i wanna be able to take night photos that dont look like something christopher doyle vomited on

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 12:47 (nine years ago) link

but yeah, looking into soviet copies of leicas and stuff on ebay.

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 12:47 (nine years ago) link

now that i have a job and shit

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 12:49 (nine years ago) link

anyway 2 cameras = roll w/ 2 diff types of film

gr8080, Friday, 18 February 2011 13:02 (nine years ago) link

yeah this is something that actually only occurred to me for the first time last night!

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:08 (nine years ago) link

its awesome try it

gr8080, Friday, 18 February 2011 13:09 (nine years ago) link

as long as nobody outbids me I will!

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:09 (nine years ago) link

one of them comes w/ like additional lenses. Idk it all seems a bit much, this is my only camera except for this shitty digital thing i never used and a crappy one an ex gave me when he was done w/ it that survived abt a month w/ me as owner

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:10 (nine years ago) link

i dont do b+w but i wanna be able to take night photos that dont look like something christopher doyle vomited on

lol. go for 1600 i say.

your LiveJournal experience (schlump), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:11 (nine years ago) link

really, i only start getting handshake at 1/8 and most of my night shots are 1/2 - 2s atm, i thought 800 would be fine?

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:16 (nine years ago) link

god i used to think u just had to press a button

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:17 (nine years ago) link

new board description

ullr saves (gbx), Friday, 18 February 2011 13:50 (nine years ago) link

plax russian cameras are kind of hit or miss

dayo, Friday, 18 February 2011 16:44 (nine years ago) link

chinavision strangely enough I also bought a beater M2 recently, that's dented in the same area as yours :o

dayo, Friday, 18 February 2011 16:44 (nine years ago) link

I have a disease

dayo, Friday, 18 February 2011 16:44 (nine years ago) link

really, i only start getting handshake at 1/8 and most of my night shots are 1/2 - 2s atm, i thought 800 would be fine?

1/2 sec @ what ISO?

I'd just buy the new Portra 400 that can be shot from 400-1600 on the same roll without issue, and shoot 1600 when light demands it.

boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Friday, 18 February 2011 19:34 (nine years ago) link

200 is the only iso i've used even though i have some 400 but its all 24exp so im too cheap to use it.

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 19:56 (nine years ago) link

well i bought a supercute little FED-3 for £31 incl deliver and a leather case. goes from 1s-1/500+B so i figure it can be my night one for throwing some 800/1600 (depending) into. feel v. excited about all this btw!

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 20:32 (nine years ago) link

i mean, its not a leica but i've never used a leica so idk what im missing and its a helluva lot more appro for my budget.

plax (ico), Friday, 18 February 2011 20:34 (nine years ago) link

My parents bought themselves at 60D (which I will probably be selling for them in a year when they realize it hasn't been used). I've played it with for a few hours here and there - definitely an improvement over the T2i/Rebel series (which is what my brother just got, giving them the impetus to buy something one step better), and the viewfinder is pretty big and bright for a crop sensor (except at night indoors, with the kit zoom).

The fold out screen is interesting - I could see maybe using it during the day, when shutter speeds are high enough to not care (holding a camera at arms' length to view an LCD screen is less stable than elbows locked and braced against your face). But OTOH, in daylight is it going to be visible at all? Guessing it would be more useful to someone who has some idea WTF they're doing with video.

boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Tuesday, 22 February 2011 19:32 (nine years ago) link

i got my fn ФЭД

plax (ico), Saturday, 5 March 2011 02:15 (nine years ago) link

i get the focusing thing, it made no sense to me when it was explained. dying to get a test roll but its like it takes forever to take all those photos.

plax (ico), Saturday, 5 March 2011 02:29 (nine years ago) link

it doesnt have to.

gr8080, Saturday, 5 March 2011 02:32 (nine years ago) link

well i had work all day and i got it today. i might be 2/3 through a 36 roll

plax (ico), Saturday, 5 March 2011 02:39 (nine years ago) link

KIU!!!

gr8080, Saturday, 5 March 2011 03:28 (nine years ago) link

eleven months pass...

My friend's dad gave me his Pentax Spotmatic F w/ 50mm f/4 macro lens tonight, he used it for 30 years to copy slides for his classes and Powerpoint made it obsolete. I love the feel of the camera, so solid and smooth.
Need to order a cheap fast 50 from KEH.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 22 February 2012 06:22 (eight years ago) link

That was my dad's camera too! Had a 50mm lens with a big wide f/1.4 aperture. Still has it, although it was replaced with a ZX-5n that he only used for a couple of years before switching to a high-end Canon digital.

everything else is secondary (Lee626), Wednesday, 22 February 2012 07:41 (eight years ago) link

two weeks pass...

just wanted to say I dig this thread. keeping it from slipping the surly bonds of new answers.
I like the timeline of everyone's continued interests and acquisitions, etc.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 9 March 2012 17:16 (eight years ago) link

I realized maybe day before yesterday, in the middle of a conversation, that at worst i always have at least one camera on my person, on my phone. There's also one on my iPod. And another one on my iPad. And there's my pocket Powershot. And then there's my DSLR Nikon. So when I show up to work most days, with my overstuffed backpack, I actually have six cameras on me, or eight if you count the two cameras on the iPad and iPod. So there are two good cameras, one middling one (on my Android phone), and four completely shit ones. And sitting at my desk here at home, I realize I have two MORE cameras -- the webcams on my iMac and my PC. I have a LOT of cameras. They have different functions, and only two of them take actually acceptable photos.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:42 (eight years ago) link

all of those take acceptable photos imo

flagp∞st (dayo), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:48 (eight years ago) link

The iCrap, even? Really? Maybe in special, perfect, mid-day circumstances.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:49 (eight years ago) link

best camera is the one you have etc etc

catbus otm (gbx), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:51 (eight years ago) link

love the one you're with

catbus otm (gbx), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:52 (eight years ago) link

Right, assuming you're taking a picture of something that you could never take another picture of. The iPod camera doesn't have any white balance control, though, for one example of how it's shit. On a cloudy day, with none of the yellow sun that gives Superman his powers, everything is washed out and aqua. It sucks. Hipstamatic helps a little tiny bit, but not enough that it makes it a great camera all of a sudden.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:56 (eight years ago) link

And I'm not going to spend more than two bucks to try to make a bad lens look like a good one. And ffs, the fray "old photo" effect is over, dead, buried, and stop using it plz.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:58 (eight years ago) link

kenan the funny thing is that you despite having 8 diff cameras always take the same photo of your face over and over

⚓ (gr8080), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:01 (eight years ago) link

jk lol

⚓ (gr8080), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:01 (eight years ago) link

you should check out some of the photojournalism done with iphones kenan

flagp∞st (dayo), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:01 (eight years ago) link

xp It's the same face! What am I supposed to do?

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:02 (eight years ago) link

xp Ah see the iPHONE has a much different, much better camera in it. The iPod and the iPad2 both have low-rent garbage. Seriously.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:03 (eight years ago) link

But of course the other cliche is that it's a poor craftsman who blames his tools. You can take a great photo with anything that captures light and records it somehow. But I'll stand my my point -- these Apple prodocts that are expected to be used for videochat as best have terrible, awful, no good, very bad cameras in them. The very least they could get away with and still call it a camera.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:07 (eight years ago) link

In the case of the iPod especially, this camera was a waste of the Chinese people's time and effort.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:08 (eight years ago) link

. . .

flagp∞st (dayo), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:09 (eight years ago) link

That was a dark joke. Do you see?

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:10 (eight years ago) link

I'm very amused

flagp∞st (dayo), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:11 (eight years ago) link

I'm not. People are jumping out the windows at Foxconn, and I still have a shitty camera. Someone died for THIS?

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:13 (eight years ago) link

That was an even darker joke. I'll quit while I'm behind.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:20 (eight years ago) link

note to self: excellent thread revive

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Saturday, 10 March 2012 01:23 (eight years ago) link

all of those take acceptable photos imo

― flagp∞st (dayo), Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:48 (12 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

^^
photos are weird, i think their value in having captured their subject far outstrips their proficiency in whatever other respects, exponentially, over time. i am here to tell the your cameras thread that you are too concerned about your cameras.

john-claude van donne (schlump), Saturday, 10 March 2012 13:37 (eight years ago) link

not me

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Saturday, 10 March 2012 14:22 (eight years ago) link

for web display just about anything made now is acceptable, but if you want to print larger than 4x6, some cameras are better than others

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Sunday, 11 March 2012 00:22 (eight years ago) link

oh I should prob link to one of my favorite flickr photographers: http://www.flickr.com/photos/47477258@N04/page1/
a lot of pictures that seem to be taken with digital point and shoots, cell phones (maybe?), as well as whatever else (all digital) and I think it looks fantastic. a totally different aesthetic from what I'm used to dealing with, but I think it looks fantastic. there's something I like about the really rough digital image, even though I'm too into film/my old cameras to go there myself.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 01:24 (eight years ago) link

shit I really didn't think I said fantastic twice. small vocabulary

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 01:24 (eight years ago) link

man, they're great. http://www.flickr.com/photos/47477258@N04/6801902428/in/photostream.
i don't have examples up my sleeve but it reminds me of something that came up when i was asking for lens advice; the maybe skewed priority of sharpness, and rendering, when there are photos in which those features aren't an advantage or an asset, when clarity isn't crucial or helpful.

john-claude van donne (schlump), Sunday, 11 March 2012 13:59 (eight years ago) link

yeah, it's sort of like how people trade exposing tips and talk about how to massage raw files to avoid ever blowing out highlights etc. and then one day you think, wait, why does this matter?? I've seen many good pictures in my day with blown highlights and it's never bothered me, digital or otherwise.
here's someone else on flickr who has a lot of digital blown highlights, iso artifacts, etc., and I think her pictures are glorious: http://www.flickr.com/photos/elena_vidor/

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:05 (eight years ago) link

matters bc it pisses off dayo iirc
we should post some of our best bad photos!, i am gonna think, i really have quite a library.

john-claude van donne (schlump), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:09 (eight years ago) link

yeah there's something very appealing about 'straight' photography - I think it requires a lot of confidence! I like this one:

http://i.imgur.com/iIqAZ.png

the flatness of which reminds me of

http://i.imgur.com/jyfcB.jpg

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:09 (eight years ago) link

lol I am going through her flickr now and I don't see anything that's explicitly about blown highlights?

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:10 (eight years ago) link

these are the kinds of blown highlights that piss me off:

http://i.imgur.com/3QxKg.jpg

the upper left part

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:13 (eight years ago) link

or something like this: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sd850-review/IMG_0017.JPG

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:14 (eight years ago) link

ILP man shakes fist at cloud

john-claude van donne (schlump), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:16 (eight years ago) link

lol. there's def a difference between blown highlights and blown highlights used aesthetically. like this pic from that photographer def works

http://www.flickr.com/photos/elena_vidor/5101410623/in/photostream

I don't begrudge high-keyed photos as a matter of principle - but I think when a photographer is aiming for an otherwise quotidian scene like a forest or a hallway like above and lets the highlights get blown it's very distracting. I guess maybe the Q is, are there other parts of the photograph that can distract the gaze.

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:22 (eight years ago) link

like the abrupt transition from dark branches to white sky is bad, it's not so bad here and there's plenty else to look at and it's even part of the image itself, the transition from midtones to highlights as the gaze moves upwards

http://www.flickr.com/photos/elena_vidor/6467002099/in/photostream

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 15:23 (eight years ago) link

I almost posted that one earlier as an example of a picture that I love. I had a hard time at first determining if the very bright values were technically blown or not, but whatever else I think it's a beautiful image.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 16:06 (eight years ago) link

got distracted by making & consuming oatmeal in the meantime

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 16:07 (eight years ago) link

yeah there's a difference between an image being high-keyed and the highlights being blown. robert adams is an example of a photographer (who shoots in B&W no less) who prints to emphasize the bright values. shooting into the sun is probably going to result in blown highlights no matter what. but the effect is certainly striking! here's another from her stream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/elena_vidor/3998105339/in/photostream

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 16:11 (eight years ago) link

Yeah that one's great.
I could have sworn I had become accustomed to seeing a number of pictures on that stream that had clipped highlights but I'll have to go back and look again.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 16:27 (eight years ago) link

actually I think a lot of them do, just in ways that don't really jump out per se

http://www.flickr.com/photos/elena_vidor/5404290027/in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/elena_vidor/5735950919/in/photostream

flagp∞st (dayo), Sunday, 11 March 2012 16:30 (eight years ago) link

ah yes, and the green to white transition on the trashcan is definitely a digital 'thing' that you probably either love or hate. I kind of love it just since it's so brazen and casual.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Sunday, 11 March 2012 16:36 (eight years ago) link

random q: any of u dudes use a soft release on yr leicas?

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:12 (eight years ago) link

nope. kinda wondering about their magic effect.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:17 (eight years ago) link

I've used a couple on various cameras, I didn't see a big difference. I did like it on my Canonet that has a heavy release, though.

I've read that Sherry Krauter (Leica repair expert) sees more damaged shutter assemblies from using SoftReleases than any other reason.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:34 (eight years ago) link

but it's just like a lil screw dealie

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:37 (eight years ago) link

thinking is that if you drop/bang your leica, the softrelease will damage the shutter since it's screwed in?

I used to use one - led to more blank frames than anything else since it would go off in my bag

flagp∞st (dayo), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:38 (eight years ago) link

o I c

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:39 (eight years ago) link

eh ok forget the magic effect then, I'm doing fine

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:41 (eight years ago) link

personally I think yr photos could be softer, china, yr aggro tude towards shutters in general really comes across, every traffic cone I see conjures visions of a man jamming the button down just ~angrily~

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:55 (eight years ago) link

:(

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 14:58 (eight years ago) link

I kid

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 15:03 (eight years ago) link

me too!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 15:11 (eight years ago) link

so after dicking around with this thing for the better part of the afternoon (including the application of some black electrical tape for ~stealth~) i think i have a much better handle on uh handling

also read about the finer points of how an m6 meters and lo the scales were lifted from my eyes. i didn't realize that a single up-down push would keep the meter on for 9s or whatever---i thought i had to keep it depressed the whole time. AND that (at least if mine is any indication) if there isn't enough light, the meter won't do anything

so w/r/t handling (and i don't know how nerdy you guys get about this) it seems like, for me, who likes things particular, some sorta baseline setting would be a good idea. get into the habit of resetting the camera to say f2.8 (as fast my lens gets) and the shutter spd to the flash speed (1/50) since there's a lil hiccup in the action of the dial that lets you know you're there without looking

and apparently its not that hard to just remember what you're supposed to do with the focus ring when the ghosted rf image is one side of the 'real' or the other

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 21:39 (eight years ago) link

who knew

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 21:39 (eight years ago) link

haha I've never managed to remember the righty-lefty RF focusing thing

flagp∞st (dayo), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 21:41 (eight years ago) link

some people claim that they can achieve really fast focus by always keeping the lens focus all the way at macro or all the way at infinity and then to just swing the focus until it lines up and stops

I get around all this by being continually in ~zone focus~

flagp∞st (dayo), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 21:42 (eight years ago) link

I feel like the best accessory I've bought is the upstrap

http://www.upstrap-pro.com/

never falls off my shoulder unless I kneel to tie my shoes

flagp∞st (dayo), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 21:46 (eight years ago) link

oh that looks nice

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 13 March 2012 23:06 (eight years ago) link

I've got a Artisan & Artist silk strap that I like. Way too short to use as a neck strap, but perfect for wrapping around my wrist a couple of times. Stupid expensive normally, though, for a strap. You could do pretty much the same thing with paracord but I haven't seen anyone do a good paracord camera strap yet.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 14 March 2012 01:25 (eight years ago) link

my boutique strap days are behind me I think. Had a Gordy's camera strap for awhile (one of these) but never ended up liking it. I wear the camera around my neck now. I'm increasingly convinced that if I don't I will certainly drop it.
I mostly either guess/zone focus or set to hyperfocal (out at least out to some set distance, like 20 meters or something). Only use the rangefinder occasionally.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 14 March 2012 01:44 (eight years ago) link

with guess focussing, btw, for me it's much less about quickly seeing something, quickly guessing how far it is, and then adjusting the lens than it is about setting the lens ahead of anything else (to maybe 6ft, 8ft, 10ft, etc.) and then waiting until things are in that range. so if I'm walking I'm mostly seeing what things are falling within the prefocussed range I've set. I think it's not a bad way to work, since you've already thought about how close you'd like to be to a subject and have some idea of how much of the frame you'd like to fill. then you can do the quick little run when something is just out of range before snapping.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 14 March 2012 01:51 (eight years ago) link

I did the prefocusing thing for candids in Uganda, only blew it on a few pics (DOF was way too narrow)

catbus otm (gbx), Wednesday, 14 March 2012 02:32 (eight years ago) link

yeah I'm usually using a 35mm at f5.6-f11, only occasionally f4, so that provides some leeway.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 14 March 2012 02:42 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/vivitaruws.jpg

dylannn, Monday, 19 March 2012 03:31 (eight years ago) link

Confirmed my spot for a Fuji XPro-1 and 35/1.4 lens. Looking forward to being able to go longer and wider than 35mm.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, 19 March 2012 03:40 (eight years ago) link

nice, dylannn!

keep your fingers far away from the lens!

⚓ (gr8080), Monday, 19 March 2012 04:38 (eight years ago) link

dope, I would like to pick up a vivitar ultra slim for $10 like gr80

young drometheus (dayo), Monday, 19 March 2012 12:32 (eight years ago) link

I get around all this by being continually in ~zone focus~

dayo playing the zone. It's true, man-to-man focus takes more precision. But it can also be more effective. It's a matter of taste, almost.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Tuesday, 20 March 2012 05:22 (eight years ago) link

I got a Contax ST because I've never really had a manual-focus SLR. It's awesome. Big, bright viewfinder, A+ ergonomics.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 21 March 2012 00:04 (eight years ago) link

On the train home the other day, there was a guy with a camera phone taped to one end of a 5 or 6' long 1x3 board. He would stand between the train cars, hit the button to record video, and then hold the camera over the top of the train as it zipped along. I gave him my card and told him to write me with the link if he got any good video and put it online. I just thought it was such a cool bored-college-student-type-activity.

cue "White Rabbit" (kenan), Friday, 23 March 2012 16:54 (eight years ago) link

good idea bad idea: ~carefully~ using sugru to affix a lil nubbin to the shutter release as a poor man's soft release

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 17:26 (eight years ago) link

the danger is it might get stick in the screw-in hole I would guess?

dayo, Friday, 23 March 2012 17:27 (eight years ago) link

yeah that's my concern.

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 17:29 (eight years ago) link

well the threads at least

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 17:29 (eight years ago) link

http://www.rapidwinder.com/

might be worth it to buy one just to scratch the itch - about $22 after shipping iirc

dayo, Friday, 23 March 2012 17:31 (eight years ago) link

I'm impatient.

also you guys talking about the screwy bit possibly causing damage made leery

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 17:32 (eight years ago) link

ABORT

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 18:08 (eight years ago) link

I'll mail you one of my extra soft-releases if you want to try one. I never check the e-mail attached to ILX - not sure what google-proofing requires these days but my email is mlpowell@<thesameasbeforethe@>.net

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 18:34 (eight years ago) link

It can only cause damage if you put it in a bag with the SR on (or drop it/catch it on something), and lots of people get away with using one no problems. To be safe, you could just screw in the soft-release when you've got it around your neck or however you carry it when not in a bag.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 18:36 (eight years ago) link

SR makes most sense when you have low shutter speeds - like 1/15, 1/8, maybe 1/30 - so you could keep it in the bag for those situations

dayo, Friday, 23 March 2012 18:37 (eight years ago) link

i don't have a camera bag :(

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 18:45 (eight years ago) link

always wondered if a camera bag would serve to make me more or less inconspicuous, esp for street photography

(and ty milo!)

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 18:47 (eight years ago) link

mostly its handy for putting things in!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 23 March 2012 19:06 (eight years ago) link

do you have recommendations

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 19:08 (eight years ago) link

Soft Release is the name of my new softcore porn zine, guys

♆ (gr8080), Friday, 23 March 2012 19:14 (eight years ago) link

i would like that very much to be true

catbus otm (gbx), Friday, 23 March 2012 19:15 (eight years ago) link

yikes, forgot how expensive it is

dayo, Friday, 23 March 2012 19:23 (eight years ago) link

there's a chinese company called safrotto that makes domke knockoffs. used to be you could buy a safrotto knockoff for 1/2 or 1/3 of the domke price. maybe now it's 3/4 of the domke. domke's are made in the USA though so there's that.

however among a certain savvy group of thieves in foreign countries, "DOMKE" screams "HIGH END CAMERA EQUIPMENT." that's no less true of LOWEPRO though.

dayo, Friday, 23 March 2012 19:31 (eight years ago) link

I'd check secondhand. I've seen cheap stuff on craigslist and in thrift stores. I like the low key-ness of a 'regular' soft bag from say the late 70s (I use my dad's old bag).

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 23 March 2012 19:45 (eight years ago) link

i'm kind of in to this http://www.etsy.com/listing/85065708/medium-dslr-camera-bag-with-leather

♆ (gr8080), Friday, 23 March 2012 19:56 (eight years ago) link

the high-end, boutique, only-bag-fit-to-carry-a-leica brands are artisan & artist and herringbone

http://www.artisanandartist.com/bags/index.htm

http://www.billingham.co.uk/pages/index.php

dayo, Friday, 23 March 2012 20:04 (eight years ago) link

wow those billingham ones are gorgeous

♆ (gr8080), Friday, 23 March 2012 20:13 (eight years ago) link

Cheap camera bag - army surplus or messenger bag of your choosing plus a Domke insert.

I think I'm going to spring for a Courierware Incognito - all the legit camera bags I've tried are too bulky and structured (incl. Billingham), they feel weird to carry. The Courierware is along the lines of that Domke, but with a few niceties (zippered front pockets, zippered iPad pocket, etc., for ~$40 more.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 20:56 (eight years ago) link

http://courierbags.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=39&Itemid=162

if you don't care about iPad room, the Mini will hold a Leica plus film and come in at around the same $$$ as a Domke with zippers and stuff.

http://www.indianhillimageworks.com/catalog/camera-bags/the-bare-bones-bag-evolution-bbb-e
also nice - made by Courierware but a guy had them design a model to his specs

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 20:59 (eight years ago) link

anyone ever played with a finepix x100? i'm still interesting in buying one, mainly because i've always had a dream of "shooting what i see" and because i very very rarely take any sort of zoom or autofocus shots with my camera.

the late great, Friday, 23 March 2012 21:18 (eight years ago) link

I have/had (selling it so I can buy a XPro-1 whenever they arrive) one. It's a great little camera, as long as you don't need fast AF. It is AF-only, though, the manual focus is pretty useless. But it works a lot like a rangefinder or Hexar AF - center point focus and recompose, and even though the AF is slowish, it's accurate and faster than I'm able to focus with a RF.

The lens is fantastic - tack-sharp in the center from f/2.8 on, very usable at f/2.

Files are great from 200-800 and good beyond that - not as much range in the high ISOs compared to my old D700, but the camera is half the size of a D700+50mm.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 21:36 (eight years ago) link

I'm selling it because I miss being able to go wider or longer and I'm hoping the new sensor has a bit more dynamic range at 1600 and 3200. Sometimes starting to reconsider, though, as the XP1 is quite a bit larger and new Fuji models tend to have quirks that get ironed out in the first months.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 21:38 (eight years ago) link

also has an auto-panorama mode which I have not found a use for yet.

here's 180 degrees from my driveway

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/7009637847_7373d286c6_b.jpg
X100 Auto Panorama by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 23 March 2012 23:29 (eight years ago) link

huh you selling a rolleiflex too then?

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 23 March 2012 23:52 (eight years ago) link

I think so. It overlaps with my Bronica too much.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Saturday, 24 March 2012 01:16 (eight years ago) link

what's the digital equivalent to the yashica T4/ricoh GR1/contax T2 etc – ie simple, robust, small cameras with superb lenses capable of very high image quality

hard in da hummus (cozen), Sunday, 25 March 2012 10:28 (eight years ago) link

ricoh cameras, the class of cameras that includes the panasonic lx5, canon s90/s95/s100, etc.

dayo, Sunday, 25 March 2012 12:38 (eight years ago) link

kinda tempting to sell my gf1 and trade it for a small digital like those and a neg scanner

catbus otm (gbx), Sunday, 25 March 2012 16:33 (eight years ago) link

the Ricoh GRD line is probably the closest in lineage - fast, wide prime vs. the Canon lines relatively slow zoom lenses.

I had a IV for a while and it was awesome, but I couldn't get on with just having a LCD screen for framing and it wasn't that much smaller than my X100. If you don't mind a bit more size, the Ricoh has enough DOF that you could use a simple 28mm hotshoe finder, though.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Sunday, 25 March 2012 21:33 (eight years ago) link

maybe I'll go for a GRD 3 or 4... I had the GRD 1 way back when but sold it for funds when unemployed

had a GR1 I had to sell too : /

hard in da hummus (cozen), Sunday, 25 March 2012 21:35 (eight years ago) link

The IV's improvements are probably worth the premium, the image stabilization worked really well

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Sunday, 25 March 2012 21:53 (eight years ago) link

there are times I still miss my old LX3 (its fast, optically-stabilized lens, specifically) over my current GF1.

browsing through my photo library, I notice shots taken at very low shutter speeds that I wonder how I pulled off.

Millsner, Monday, 26 March 2012 07:16 (eight years ago) link

I've decided that I want one of the twelve Hasselblads that remain on the lunar surface. The ultimate collector's items imo.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 13:21 (eight years ago) link

Fujifilm X-Pro 1 16MP Digital Camera with APS-C X-Trans CMOS Sensor (Body Only)
by Fuji

List Price: $1,699.95
Price: $1,699.00 & this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping. Details
You Save: $0.95

dayo, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 16:58 (eight years ago) link

oooo

stet, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 17:05 (eight years ago) link

http://i.imgur.com/UMD9H.jpg

xxp

dayo, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 17:36 (eight years ago) link

Fujifilm X-Pro 1 16MP Digital Camera with APS-C X-Trans CMOS Sensor (Body Only)
by Fuji

List Price: $1,699.95
Price: $1,699.00 & this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping. Details
You Save: $0.95

u got one?

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 18:17 (eight years ago) link

milo for how much and where are you selling your x100?

the late great, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 19:32 (eight years ago) link

no I was just commenting on the savings xp

dayo, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 20:03 (eight years ago) link

I wound up selling it for $900.

Got my XPro-1 late yesterday, I haven't really done anything with it (except for WDYLL ghost story pic) and now we're getting tornados and shit. Never fails: new camera = STORM OF THE CENTURY around here

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 20:11 (eight years ago) link

It's about the same weight as the X100 even though it's noticeably bigger. Viewfinder is odd coming from the X100 - not bad but with the 35mm mounted it's kind of like like looking through glasses (because of the magnifer that activates to give you 35mm framelines)

Kinda noisy, the lenses' AF motors appear to be sourced from a 1985 parts bin, but unless you're a wedding photographer I doubt anyone would notice.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 3 April 2012 20:14 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/kont.jpg

dylannn, Tuesday, 3 April 2012 21:00 (eight years ago) link

that's a beautiful looking camera. what is it?

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 4 April 2012 00:39 (eight years ago) link

front plate is ripped off but it's a kodak instamatic... bought in changchun....

dylannn, Wednesday, 4 April 2012 01:56 (eight years ago) link

ah I see it now. the missing front cover looks pretty rad honestly. it's a sleek design.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 4 April 2012 02:07 (eight years ago) link

wow $900 is a lot, i guess its still a hot item

the late great, Wednesday, 4 April 2012 03:53 (eight years ago) link

http://www.ellenrooneydesign.com/gsproduction/sites/default/files/images/645n-1.jpg

Got one of these cheap. It's kind of amazing, autofocus medium-format that handles like a 35mm camera.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, 5 April 2012 04:31 (eight years ago) link

how much is "cheap"?

looks dope

♆ (gr8080), Thursday, 5 April 2012 04:37 (eight years ago) link

$450 for body and lens

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, 5 April 2012 04:53 (eight years ago) link

I am toying with the idea of getting a medium format folder and/or rangefinder

dayo, Thursday, 5 April 2012 12:13 (eight years ago) link

aw man I'm jealous of that Pentax! I've kinda wanted a medium format for a long time, but I simply tell myself NO since I've streamlined my 35mm process to the point of being pretty cheap. switching formats would put me right back in the expensive zone.
I love love love the low grain and beautiful tones of a lot of medium format photography. Especially stuff like the better Martin Parr, Philip Lorca di Corcia, Larry Sultan, that kinda stuff. And of course Frieldander's medium format stuff is DIVINE.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Thursday, 5 April 2012 12:52 (eight years ago) link

i was reskimming this thread a couple of days ago, i'm thinking about getting an xa2 as my always-in-my-bag flash camera (i kinda liked some of the alternative suggestions, but i can justify buying the xa2 in a way i can't a rollei, &c). is there anything i should keep in mind buying one, or is what you're getting pretty straightforward?

john-claude van donne (schlump), Friday, 6 April 2012 10:54 (eight years ago) link

pretty straightforward I think. Just be sure to get one with a flash unit included! many XA cameras and flashes have been orphaned from one another.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 6 April 2012 11:06 (eight years ago) link

in other words, there's not a lot to test on one aside from clicking the shutter button and making sure it's responsive & operating at fast and slow speeds depending on the lighting.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 6 April 2012 11:10 (eight years ago) link

also it's hard to do exposure compensation - you have to adjust the ISO setting which is a lil counterintuitive

finally, light seals may need replacing, but it's something you can do with a it from ebay and some elbow grease

dayo, Friday, 6 April 2012 11:16 (eight years ago) link

yeah, also in my experience the xa2 defaults to being a bit underexposed. so I'd probably just generally set the iso to a speed or two slower than the box speed of the film.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 6 April 2012 13:01 (eight years ago) link

If you want cheaper/newer than a XA2, there's the Olympus Stylus Epic DLX (or mju II). AF instead of rangefinder, but small and quality. I've been hoping to run across one at a thrift shop but no dice so far.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 6 April 2012 14:37 (eight years ago) link

yeah I picked one up at a flea market and I agree, the stylus epic is great. and the flash is built in. it goes with me everywhere, often alongside the leica for quick auto-exposed or strobe lit shots. the one thing is that there's like a 1/8th or maybe 1/16th second delay between when the button is pressed and the shutter is fired. and the autofocus can be a little finicky.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 6 April 2012 15:10 (eight years ago) link

oh and you can't rate the film faster or slower, but you *can* spot meter.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 6 April 2012 15:11 (eight years ago) link

i have bought two xa2's and neither has had a responsive shutter button :(

♆ (gr8080), Friday, 6 April 2012 18:16 (eight years ago) link

hey thank you y'all

john-claude van donne (schlump), Saturday, 7 April 2012 17:20 (eight years ago) link

milo let's see that xpro

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 17:08 (eight years ago) link

XP1 via iPhone and Facebook's newest acquisition:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7133/6919273920_3a8432c9f2_z.jpg
Untitled by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr

when I went to get the grip for it, my camera shoppe had a Nikon 35Ti on consignment for $125. I figure I could flip it on Ebay for more if I don't like it, but it's pretty awesome so far:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7198/7065355201_550e222046_z.jpg
Untitled by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5350/6919276930_787133ac70.jpg
Untitled by celluloidpropaganda, on Flickr

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 19:24 (eight years ago) link

I love my 35Ti (see post upthread), despite a few glaring flaws (those tiny flash buttons, shutter or aperture displayed in viewfinder but not both), but the lens is astoundingly sharp and the whole thing just feels like it was crafted from an anvil. And that gauge cluster <3 <3 <3 especially since it lights up at night (press middle top button, or halfway on shutter release).

everything else is secondary (Lee626), Wednesday, 11 April 2012 12:15 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/argusc4m.jpg

dylannn, Thursday, 12 April 2012 01:42 (eight years ago) link

not mine, but the Fuji Klasse W looks pretty dope - 28mm f/2.8 P&S
too bad they're almost $600 new from Japan

http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/corporate/news/article/img/ffnr0052.jpg

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 21:01 (eight years ago) link

it looks pretty generic and everything but i picked up a
konica big mini a few days ago and thought it was one of the uglier things in my collection of point & shoots but it makes really crispy pictures (and i heard robert frank uses one)

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/robertfrank222222.jpg

source = http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48595

so it must be good right?

dylannn, Wednesday, 18 April 2012 03:18 (eight years ago) link

the konica big mini is p legendary

dayo, Wednesday, 18 April 2012 11:06 (eight years ago) link

soft release: received

thx milo! i just played around with it a little bit (need to buy film), but i really like it already. now just need to figure out how to take it off for stowage w/o losing the thing

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 17:46 (eight years ago) link

http://i.imgur.com/RLyrM.jpg

dayo, Tuesday, 1 May 2012 19:42 (eight years ago) link

ha!

catbus otm (gbx), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 19:53 (eight years ago) link

I bought a new camera* last week and I am contemplating buying another one soon

*now it's at the repair shop

dayo, Tuesday, 1 May 2012 20:03 (eight years ago) link

I got a used Fuji Klasse W from KEH, but I'm returning it. More dinged-up than expected and too heavy to pocket. Stick with my Olympus Stylus Epic/mju ii unless I run across a Ricoh GR1S or 1V on the cheap.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 20:08 (eight years ago) link

I am lusting after this

http://i.imgur.com/lEzEt.jpg

dayo, Tuesday, 1 May 2012 20:11 (eight years ago) link

you can't say you bought a new camera without elaborating!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 20:53 (eight years ago) link

I've always hoped to run across a sweet deal on a Mamiya 7
http://urbanindiana.com/cameras/mamiya_7.jpg

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 20:59 (eight years ago) link

or in the event of lotto win, since they're $3k: Bessa IIIW
http://www.cameraquest.com/jpg2/voigt_IIIw_box.jpg

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 21:00 (eight years ago) link

are those all medium format?

♆ (gr8080), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 21:08 (eight years ago) link

yeah

dayo, Tuesday, 1 May 2012 21:10 (eight years ago) link

I placed an order for film yesterday and was kinda shocked at the limited range of color negative films out there now. basically, fuji and kodak both have one pro, one consumer version and that's it.

dayo, Tuesday, 1 May 2012 21:10 (eight years ago) link

I've just started buying all the Superia 400 at Wal-Mart. The latest price increases put Portra 400 out of range for me when you include shipping.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 23:13 (eight years ago) link

yeah portra is just too expensive to use that often. kodak and fuji consumer stuff is the way to go, and can look really nice if you work with it. I know for b&w, at adorama they sell 3-packs of Ilford HP5 for just under $10. probably pretty cost effective to order that stuff online.
DAYO WHAT CAMERA DID YOU BUY???

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 12:49 (eight years ago) link

all will be revealed

dayo, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 14:03 (eight years ago) link

good cuz some of us are freaking out here

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 14:29 (eight years ago) link

srsly mang c'mon already

catbus otm (gbx), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 14:33 (eight years ago) link

GF went for G3 w/20mm f1.7

off to USVI tomorrow, hopef should get some dece pics

༼◍ྀ ౪ ◍ི ༽ (cozen), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 14:35 (eight years ago) link

Oh yes. Would love that combo myself.

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 15:31 (eight years ago) link

dayo: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php?product=33956

$450 for a first-gen GW690

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 23:48 (eight years ago) link

hmm, guess that's not as good a deal as I thought, KEH BGN GW690 for $429

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 23:48 (eight years ago) link

thanks for the heads up!

dayo, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 23:55 (eight years ago) link

lol at $7k new Leica 50/2

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:07 (eight years ago) link

all will be revealed

HEY YOU

catbus otm (gbx), Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:09 (eight years ago) link

patience

I did go to a yard sale today, bought a nimslo 3d and an olympus stylus (the original 35/3.5 one, not the newer epic)

dayo, Thursday, 10 May 2012 18:47 (eight years ago) link

is that the mju-i? i have that, now, having bought an mju-ii on ebay & got burned by the seller. i googled around, i think it's pretty similar just with occasionally less reliable AF.

blossom smulch (schlump), Friday, 11 May 2012 10:05 (eight years ago) link

I am in temporary possession of a summicron 50 (old).

catbus otm (gbx), Saturday, 12 May 2012 02:01 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/minoltaaffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff.jpg

really really like shooting with this. just for the weight and feel of it.

dylannn, Sunday, 13 May 2012 02:34 (eight years ago) link

three weeks pass...

"Hey, kids, I'm just going to take a photo of this old camera a friend gave me - I'll come and play with you in a minute, ok?" They won.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7229/7326616480_7edc59cf0b_z.jpg

Michael Jones, Sunday, 3 June 2012 11:34 (eight years ago) link

aw.

♆ (gr8080), Sunday, 3 June 2012 17:41 (eight years ago) link

two weeks pass...

oh X100 why are you such a flake. had mine 3/4 weeks and now it suddenly won't turn on. haven't been out in rain, dropped it, or anything. have tried different batteries.

welp, back to the store with you. ~sigh~

༼◍ྀ ౪ ◍ི ༽ (cozen), Wednesday, 20 June 2012 20:52 (eight years ago) link

...

it was a corrupt mem card in the end. phewwwww

༼◍ྀ ౪ ◍ི ༽ (cozen), Wednesday, 20 June 2012 21:24 (eight years ago) link

be careful of the sticky aperture

un® (dayo), Wednesday, 20 June 2012 23:13 (eight years ago) link

ya 4 real

picked up a big mini cheap off ebay

༼◍ྀ ౪ ◍ི ༽ (cozen), Thursday, 21 June 2012 07:50 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/yashirker.jpg

ay
i had a seagull tlr for a while and i loved it but never really properly used it and i had trouble getting interesting film in northeastern china
and i could find plenty of places to develop what i shot but never anywhere to make good scans
it had a pretty soft hazy lens too
it was fun to carry around though
i sold it
i just bought a yashica a
yep

dylannn, Wednesday, 4 July 2012 04:08 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/seagull.jpg

Electric Light Orchestra Telephone Line Lyrics
Send "Telephone Line" Ringtone to your Cell
Songwriters: LYNNE, JEFF
Hello--how are you
Have you been alright, through all those lonely nights,
That's what I'd say, I'd tell you everything,
If you'd pick up that telephone.

Hey--how you feelin
Are you still the same
Don't you realize the things we did were all for real not a dream,
I just can't believe
They've all faded out of view.

I look into the sky
(the love you need aint gonna see you through.)
And I wonder why
(the little things are finally coming true.)

Chorus
Telephone line, give me some time, Im living in twilight
Telephone line, give me some time, Im living in twilight

O.k. so no--ones answering,
Well can't you just let it ring a little longer
Ill just sit tight, through the shadows of the night
Let it ring for evermore.

Chorus -- repeat
[ Lyrics from: http://www.lyricsfreak.com/e/electric+light+orchestra/telephone+line_20045339.html ]

Send "Telephone Line" Ringtone to your Cell
Telephone Line lyrics © EMI Music Publishing

dylannn, Thursday, 5 July 2012 09:47 (eight years ago) link

four weeks pass...

not sure why i was posting elo lyrics

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/01830035.jpg
http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/01830028.jpg

dylannn, Saturday, 4 August 2012 05:07 (eight years ago) link

On a plane to California and I've got a blacked out viewfinder on my M2!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 16:20 (eight years ago) link

i have no experience of leicas but can you just remove the lens & check the mirror hasn't snapped up/down, that the lil shelves aren't just sticky? (i don't even know if leicas use mirrored lenses but this works for my om-1).

, Blogger (schlump), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 16:47 (eight years ago) link

No mirrors in a rangefinder. Probably the old glue in the rangefinder mechanism has finally given way. Already sent an email to Youxin Ye inquiring about a repair.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 17:03 (eight years ago) link

so my ("my") cron 50 has never been able to open all the way to f2, the aperture ring just stops at f2.8. having that extra stop sure would be useful, but I'm not sure how much it would cost to repair. anyone done this before? how much is a body CLA anyway?

catbus otm (gbx), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 17:11 (eight years ago) link

Already got my estimate back. $150 for CLA, $160 for fix, and $20 to finally shave my 35mm lens to bring up the right framelines. Going for it as soon as I'm able.
Paid $8 for airplane wifi for all this! Can't get it fixed soon enough!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 17:21 (eight years ago) link

Regarding the 50mm summicron, maybe just see what Youxin Ye quotes? He responded super fast to my email.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 17:22 (eight years ago) link

what a bummer -- did you take any other cameras on your trip??

and more importantly - did you get a window seat so you could take a window photo before it broke???>???

○ (gr8080), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 19:25 (eight years ago) link

shooting blind is not so bad imo

kanye shiwen (dayo), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 19:39 (eight years ago) link

gbx, youxin is probably good - I also know a dude out in michigan who does great work

kanye shiwen (dayo), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 19:40 (eight years ago) link

youxin is nothing if not prompt, yikes

while we're talking mail order, who is good for bulk development?

catbus otm (gbx), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 19:43 (eight years ago) link

dunno about bulk development

google 'dave's camera repair' to get the number of the dude in michigan if you're interested - calling him is the quickest I think

kanye shiwen (dayo), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 19:45 (eight years ago) link

only place ive done bulk is Dwayne's and we've discussed ppl's likes/dislikes abt them before

○ (gr8080), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 21:39 (eight years ago) link

North Coast Photo is good. Expensive, tho, IIRC.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 8 August 2012 23:48 (eight years ago) link

Brought the rollei 35 out here too, thank god. Gonna shoot at least one roll blind in the m2 to clear out the camera tho.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Thursday, 9 August 2012 06:56 (eight years ago) link

two weeks pass...

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/0006_9.jpg

dylannn, Monday, 27 August 2012 07:41 (eight years ago) link

Office Depot near me is closing, I got a Fuji Instax 210 and 100 shots of film for $25!

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, 27 August 2012 22:44 (eight years ago) link

woah

○ (gr8080), Monday, 27 August 2012 23:02 (eight years ago) link

where's my camera
who the hell signed for its delivery today
argh

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Thursday, 30 August 2012 23:43 (eight years ago) link

sweet relief, got my hunk of metal back.
should prob insure this thing I guess

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Friday, 31 August 2012 15:31 (eight years ago) link

if i wanted to start fucking w/ an 35mm SLR/Telephoto setup, what would be my cheapest option? Ideally i'd like to be taking pictures of surfers half a mile away i guess?

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Tuesday, 11 September 2012 19:25 (eight years ago) link

do you have any good thrift stores? at the better ones I always see some old SLR or other, usually with some lens options. like a canon ae-1 or olympus om-1 or something similar. just run it through all shutter speeds, check the mirror, open and close the back, etc. and grab it!
these things seem to be priced in the $50 range usually (at least back in CA, I haven't priced any out in NYC, where I see them less at thrift stores and more often at flea markets).
otherwise... craigslist?

you're thinking 35mm SLR + something in the 100-200mm range?

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 12 September 2012 13:43 (eight years ago) link

I don't know where in Hawaii you are (or even which island...) but this would be interesting to check out maybe: http://honolulu.craigslist.org/oah/pho/3225770333.html

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Wednesday, 12 September 2012 13:46 (eight years ago) link

woah good lookin out

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Wednesday, 12 September 2012 19:01 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/yashicamg1_zps0e4850a2.jpg

bought for 1 usd. had a working battery in it.

dylannn, Thursday, 20 September 2012 04:35 (eight years ago) link

i love chinese tlrs :(( fingers because i hated the way the bare bulbs in the room reflected in the lenses digital point and shoot fukc

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/1pearlriverand3fingers_zps66d17617.jpg

dylannn, Sunday, 23 September 2012 04:17 (eight years ago) link

pretty name for a camera

let's get the banned back together (schlump), Sunday, 23 September 2012 04:26 (eight years ago) link

u need a manicure, bro

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Monday, 24 September 2012 03:04 (eight years ago) link

i am simultaneously intrigued and insulted. could they be worked on as they are or would i need to grow them out?

dylannn, Monday, 24 September 2012 06:11 (eight years ago) link

ha don't be insulted I'm just fucking around. but since you ask yes they could be worked on as they are now.

is that a lot smaller than most medium format cameras?

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Monday, 24 September 2012 17:40 (eight years ago) link

TLRs are smaller than you'd expect (aside from the Mamiya Cs) - whether Rollei/Minolta Autocord or the various Chinese TLRs. About half the weight of any given medium format SLR, I'd say.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, 24 September 2012 20:06 (eight years ago) link

yeah, it's the same size as its rollei and yashica cousins. quite carry aroundable.

dylannn, Monday, 24 September 2012 20:12 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/03790006.jpg
http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/03790005.jpg

overexposed from the pearl river. i think portra 800.

dylannn, Tuesday, 2 October 2012 04:27 (eight years ago) link

how were those scanned? I'm sure you could get a lot more out of an exposed negative (are they from negatives?).

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 04:46 (eight years ago) link

I mean "over-exposed negative"

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 04:47 (eight years ago) link

epson v750? or v500. from negatives. you mean that i could get a better scan out of the negative?

dylannn, Tuesday, 2 October 2012 04:53 (eight years ago) link

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad215/jiaoqu/comparison222.jpg

first, need to learn how to make proper exposures and focus this camera.

dylannn, Tuesday, 2 October 2012 05:05 (eight years ago) link

yeah, I'm sure you could. it looks like you're scanning the entire range of the *negative* (like white and black points determined by the unexposed sections, or pure black sections covered by the negative holder) but not the image itself.
it looks like you're scanning a lot of the "blank area" outside of the normal range of the histogram of a negative and are picking up a lot of gray as a result.

here's where I cut off the RGB channels when I scan fuji superia 400:
http://www.altairnouveau.com/various-curves.jpg

...which is already pretty low contrast, but your images look as if the highlights especially could be cut off a little closer

xpost

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 05:13 (eight years ago) link

so your images look as if the lines on the right (determining where to cut off highlights) are much further to the right, which would create that gray tone. on my histogram you can see that there is *information* to the right to scan, but it's just the pure black of the negative holder. so if the scanner were to calibrate its white point based on the *purest white* it would come out somewhat gray since the purest white is much brighter than anything that actually appears in the image (since it's that negative holder shadow, essentially).

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 05:16 (eight years ago) link

ah, alright. that explanation + diagram is excellent.

dylannn, Tuesday, 2 October 2012 05:31 (eight years ago) link

cool. I don't know the Epson scanning software or I'd be able to get more specific.
camera looks like it's making good pictures in any case!

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 05:38 (eight years ago) link

disclaimer- i do not know much about photography, sorry for dumb questions.

i've got a superzoom p&s that allows for a fair degree of manual and programmed controls. it is often very sunny here. this is making dynamic range a bit of a problem when i shoot outdoors, i seem to get a lot of clipping. so, i tried to counter that by adjusting EV -1/3. this gave me a histogram shape without clipping, but i then have to go back in shop and adjust the curve both to the right and left. if i go full auto, i don't get as much clipping, but i can't force flash unless i'm in P or M.

is this a normal way to handle this problem? i mean, it seems to work, but i'm not very good at photoshop.

you all a buncha takers (say the sad bells of romney) (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 17:11 (eight years ago) link

you're shooting digital? if so, that's kinda normal. you underexpose a bit to avoid clipping, and then later you go in and adjust levels or curves etc. to bring up the overall brightness.
it's one of the things I don't like about digital, since I can never seem to get the same sort of vibrance by bringing up an underexposed picture as I can by just exposing for a bight image at the outset. Recently I just decided to screw the highlights on a job I was doing in very mixed light, just to get the actual subjects right and it seemed to work pretty well.

an example:
http://www.altairnouveau.com/IMG_1781.jpg

not even worth worrying about the highlights here, imo
subjects are in deep shadow with backlighting. nobody really cares about lost detail in the trees, which are out of focus anyway.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 17:54 (eight years ago) link

looks good.

yeah, it's a canon sx40 i got pretty cheap, i wanted something that was versatile and easy to carry. at 35x i can take pics of my kids games and good video, and images are acceptable. i wanted a panasonic fz150 but i couldn't find one in time for a trip i was taking.

my pocket p&s is mostly ok, but really, for the kind of use i put it to, i might as well just use my iphone.

you all a buncha takers (say the sad bells of romney) (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 18:03 (eight years ago) link

oh yeah the other thing is that it's hard to make *anything* look good in direct midday light.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 18:17 (eight years ago) link

yeah, i'm trying to learn the basics of like, just shooting good pictures using the basics. i need first to understand basic rules of lighting and composition. i want minimal fiddling around after the fact.

you all a buncha takers (say the sad bells of romney) (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 18:22 (eight years ago) link

i am gonna descend on this thread like a plague of locusts next week. i need to start negative scanning, because i am shooting too much to afford to be able to process it all, & processing-only is feasibly cheap. i have some time off to play around with a negative scanner, but the seeming complexity of it scares me! it is amusing to me to hear hunter disclaiming a query w/"i don't know a lot about photography" & then going on to talk dynamic ranges, everything seems to get way complicated when you're into that side of things.

unprotectable tweetz (schlump), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 19:39 (eight years ago) link

ha well i googled "highlight overexposure" or something and was thrown into forum hell, but it seemed like they kept talking about dynamic range and histograms.

you all a buncha takers (say the sad bells of romney) (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 19:49 (eight years ago) link

THE ANSWER IS ... HDR

barthes simpson, Tuesday, 2 October 2012 19:51 (eight years ago) link

"okay so open up your negative scan, then choose 'edit', then select 'curves'"
"mm-hmm, done that, i'm looking at a straight diagonal line?"
"yeah you're going to want to make that into a right angle in the top right hand corner"

unprotectable tweetz (schlump), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 20:12 (eight years ago) link

I can't really believe I was ever paying for developing + scanning before. there's no way I could afford that at the rate I shoot these days.
maybe when I've got a little time + energy, I'll outline how I scan, since I do a few things differently to get better results than the silverfast defaults would give. some stuff is going to be specific to the advanced version of silverfast 6 though. I shelled out for a used plustek w the advanced software and it's been worth it considering I would have otherwise spent over $5,000 developing and scanning the same quantity of film at a lab.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 21:30 (eight years ago) link

considering I would have otherwise spent over $5,000 developing and scanning the same quantity of film at a lab

i mean yeah this is a pretty compelling argument.
i would really be into reading about your process. it maybe just exists in my own head but i always think there's maybe a politics to analogue becoming digital, and being subject or not subject to whatever kind of techniques make this possible - all of my photo scanning is super quick & ready - ie untouched up, preserves selvages of photographs, &c - just because it has the vague integrity of 'i put an object in a scanner & this is it', without me necessarily having intervened in what the object was like, which i think kinda gets into some of the instagram-issues of 'what does it mean that i enhanced the colours'. (& i know that's pretty arbitrary!, & collapses when we consider the various interventions that have happened to a photograph before i scan it). but part of the slight nervousness i have re: negative scanning is having to accept a slightly more active role, which is just more stuff to think about. it's gonna happen, anyway, maybe starting next week. maybe i'll post some examples. i'm gonna be using a pretty basic setup, because i prefer scanning at the library to at home.

unprotectable tweetz (schlump), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 22:26 (eight years ago) link

yeah there are so many technical decisions and changes made to an image at every stage from before pressing the shutter up to the final output (camera settings, developing settings, scan/print settings, color adjustments etc.) that I don't see how you could ID a point at which those adjustments are supposed to stop. I mean the real object is a negative with an orange cast, so there isn't going to be anything *but* massive adjustments from that point on. and the film itself might add a color cast, and the scan might add a slightly different color cast (it's not as precise as I'd like) and so finally I will once again change the color cast in post. I couldn't tell you whether each of those adjustments was a "correction" that got closer to what the colors were supposed to be, or just additional stages of my own transformation. none of those stages were the authentic, real deal object. because there *is* no authentic object. it's a photograph.
and man, if it were me, I'd suggest scanning at home because it can end up taking FOREVER and then you've got beer and music.
also I'd suggest getting archival sleeves that you can store in a binder, a sharpie, and a pair of scissors.

lou reed scott walker monks niagra (chinavision!), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 22:52 (eight years ago) link

first graf of that super otm & worth remembering.

and man, if it were me, I'd suggest scanning at home because it can end up taking FOREVER and then you've got beer and music.

:/

see this is the thing that is bumming me out. my setup at the moment is an 11x17 only-slightly-scratched-up library scanner w/adobe elements* where i can do 36 photos in an hour. which is awesome. i am keeping a log & being able to process a couple of days shots in an hour is almost the maximum time i can afford it for it to be able to feasible. i'm not gonna ply you w/all my neg-scanning questions right now, but: this isn't realistic wrt scanning from negatives, right?

the sharpie/sleeve combo is one of the more appealing parts of this, the aesthetics of flagged up contact sheets are mega appealing to me.

http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2009/feb/robertfrankatwork.jpg

*which is dope!, btw. just in case anyone does none of this & is looking for a solution to their problems, this is a kinda perfectly refined & light & straightforward image processing tool.

unprotectable tweetz (schlump), Tuesday, 2 October 2012 23:04 (eight years ago) link

i am dreading some scanning i gotta do this week-- some local rag wants to run ten of my photos which is awesome but none of my drugstore scans are high enough res for print :(

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Wednesday, 3 October 2012 00:15 (eight years ago) link

four months pass...
one month passes...

this looks cool
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/wanderlust/travelwide-45-camera

chinavision!, Sunday, 14 April 2013 23:53 (seven years ago) link

I'm trying to remember the darkroom mechanics of loading a 4x5 film holder from my one photography class decades ago. I'm not so sure I'd like doing it in a changing bag every half-dozen exposures.

Real shame Fuji discontinued its FP100B45 film - I always loved the look of Polaroid B/W from 4x5s (IIRC Mapplethorpe used this for most of his B/W work).

Me So Hormetic (Sanpaku), Monday, 15 April 2013 02:45 (seven years ago) link

one month passes...

Recent promotion + company bonus = maybe time to step up to full frame, but actually, when I do the sums, I can't afford it (also 6D isn't quite the do-everything camera it could've been, so I wavered over it for a long time). However, a certain UK chain is currently doing the Panasonic GF3 (which I've long fancied) plus 14-42 kit lens for £149 (about third the price it was launched at, two years ago). Now, the pancake primes (which are the reason to own this camera) are at least as much again (the 20/1.7 is still around £230, I think), but it is tempting. Obviously not superceding the 40D with this, but rather as a coat pocket/overnight bag kind of lightweight thing.

At least two or three micro 4/3rds users in here, right?

Michael Jones, Sunday, 26 May 2013 21:59 (seven years ago) link

That's a good deal, so long as you're comfortable with the GF3's limitations. If you don't need a hotshoe and can deal with a practical ISO limit of 800, then go for it.

I noticed that Amazon US is running a promotion on the GX1 that would be much better, if it doesn't pose any shipping issues for you. Slightly less compact, but more modern innards and tactile controls.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-GX1-Compact-System-Camera/dp/B00604YTFM/

Millsner, Sunday, 26 May 2013 23:30 (seven years ago) link

Awesome deal on E-PM1, rough GF3 equivalent. You gain in-body IS and many people prefer its image output over Panasonic's. UK, too: http://www.amazon.co.uk/OlympusPen-E-PM1-Compact-System-Camera/dp/B0058GI8F0/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1369611256&sr=8-2&keywords=e-pm1

Sorry if I'm only confusing matters further!

Millsner, Sunday, 26 May 2013 23:43 (seven years ago) link

Ah, the high ISO isn't so good on the GF3? That's an amazing deal on the GX1 - £131! I wouldn't fancy tripling the price with the power zoom kit, so it would force me to get one of the pancake primes.

Oh, I dunno. It really was just the appealing thought of going to Wells Street in the West End tomorrow and just picking up that camera, I hadn't done much research. (Meanwhile, I've spent more than the cost of any of these cameras on getting my 40D refurbed - still in the shop, waiting for the new shutter - so perhaps I'm just getting jitters from not being able to shoot at the moment).

Thanks for the tips!

Michael Jones, Monday, 27 May 2013 00:17 (seven years ago) link

The GF3's is essentially the same as the GF1's (which I had and loved), but colour noise starts creeping in even at ISO 800.

If you're really intrigued by the concept, wait for the inevitable price drops on any of the newer 16 MP bodies -- operation/AF speed and image quality in M43 land have advanced so much in the past year or so that they're much more pleasurable to use than the older stuff.

Millsner, Monday, 27 May 2013 01:41 (seven years ago) link

Just bought a Pany GX1 for $200 (these debuted at around $800 a couple years ago). It'll cost more to have the hot mirror replaced with a Wratten 89B, as this will be my dedicated IR camera.

Me So Hormetic (Sanpaku), Monday, 27 May 2013 04:08 (seven years ago) link

BTW, as much as I love my EM-5, the Olympus m43 cameras with in body image stabilization are not a wise choice for IR conversions - the fixed sensors on the Pany bodies are much better (and a good deal cheaper) for this.

Me So Hormetic (Sanpaku), Monday, 27 May 2013 04:11 (seven years ago) link

Saw a red GF1 in the window of a Brighton shop today for £169; they were doing a secondhand GX1 for £269. They also had a Bronica SQ-A + 80/2.8 for £500, which gave me the measure of their pricing (take eBay and double it). Wonderful little shop though.

Michael Jones, Monday, 27 May 2013 22:23 (seven years ago) link

two months pass...

Annoying n00b q:

A friend who's a photojourno came to visit recently and let me muck around with his camera for a couple of days, which really gave me the bug. So I'm thinking about taking the plunge and buying my first 'proper' camera. I have use of a Canon 550D (I think?) at work which i can take a passable shot with, but I don't think the kit lens is much cop (or maybe more likely I'm just shite). Either way I don't love using it. My mate's camera was a nikon, and I gather it's more personal preference than one being necessarily better/cheaper than the other(?), so I'm inclined to go with that (but a low end one, obv!)

I've been looking at the D3100 and D3200 - is there much to recommend the added expense of the latter? I don't see myself using it for video much (if at all) and I don't intend to print a lot (and when I do, it won't be poster sized). I've read that a D5100 might be worth going for instead if I can find it cheapish second hand?

I'm thinking about buying the body on its own and buying a thrifty fifty lens. I'm perfectly happy (happier) to go second hand - but are there any pitfalls I should look out for in doing so? Any recommendations for good uk-based (or london-based offline) places to go...? I'm guessing ebay and gumtree are probably not the smartest move given I don't know a lot about all this..

Thanks ilx!!

sktsh, Wednesday, 7 August 2013 15:32 (seven years ago) link

I shoot Nikon purely because I happened to find a D40x within my budget when I was looking to buy my first DSLR. I don't know much about the D3100/3200 other than that I assume they are the current equivalent of the D40x, which I really liked.

Given that those cameras are cropped sensor, you may actually want a 35mm lens rather than a 50mm to get the equivalent angle of view to a 50mm on full-frame/film. I have, and swore by, the 35mm 1.8 nikon lens, which is great apart from barrel distortion, but that can be fixed and is maybe more of an issue if you look for it. The basic 50mm is even better, great portrait lens on a cropped sensor, though may be manual focus only on the bodies you are looking at as I don't think they have built in focus motors.

I don't know what your budget is, but I've recently gone full frame so may be selling a D7000 body and the 35mm lens in the near future.

michaellambert, Wednesday, 7 August 2013 17:48 (seven years ago) link

The D3200 has a lower readout noise sensor which according to DxOmark, is worth about 2 stops of dynamic range over the D3100. Pretty huge if you need to pull out shadow detail in processing.

In the U.S. there's not much difference in new price, B&H is selling the 3200 for $546 vs. the 3100 for $522 (each with the kit lens, after instant rebates), which would make it a no brainer. All of the camera companies are terrified by the current slump in sales, which means a lot of deals.

Sanpaku, Wednesday, 7 August 2013 17:49 (seven years ago) link

Cheers guys, dead helpful. Difference in sensor does make the 3200 more compelling for the small diff in cost - that's exactly what I was hoping to find out, as increased megapixels and 1080p video wouldn't have swayed me otherwise I don't think.

Also thanks for lens advice Michael - as I'm sure is dead clear, it's all v new to me so I didn't realise having a cropped sensor would have an impact on the view (though makes sense when you explain!) Given that I'm looking at just buying a body and a single prime to use as an all rounder to start, it sounds like the 35mm would suit me better.

(As amazing as that sounds, I think my limit is probably a fair old way off what you'd get for your D7000. The bulk of my budget is a £350 cash windfall I didn't expect to have, so if I go miles over that I might get myself in a bit of trouble!)

sktsh, Thursday, 8 August 2013 10:14 (seven years ago) link

I found the D5100 for a fair bit cheaper second hand than I could get the 3200, so I've gone with that and bought a 35mm F1.8. The advice was much appreciated!

I've also found out that my old man bought an Olympus OM-2 for when I was born, so next time I'm up north I'm going to dig it out and see if it still works..

sktsh, Monday, 12 August 2013 13:45 (seven years ago) link

(ie if the horror of baby sktsh didn't crack the lens)

sktsh, Monday, 12 August 2013 13:46 (seven years ago) link

I also have an OM-2n, I like it but I'm starting to think it over-exposes a touch. Enjoy your new camera, will be expecting quite a few contributions to WDYLL2013.

michaellambert, Monday, 12 August 2013 20:53 (seven years ago) link

Will do!

sktsh, Monday, 12 August 2013 22:03 (seven years ago) link

OMs and most camears from that era were designed to be used with 1.35V mercury batteries - nowadays you can only find 1.5V batteries, mostly, which work, but cause the meters to overexpose a tad. you can adjust the iso setting appropriately, or get the light meter set for 1.5V batteries by a tech xp

乒乓, Tuesday, 13 August 2013 00:52 (seven years ago) link

Great, thanks for that. Oddly i've never felt it was an issue, or at least noticable, with my OM-10.

michaellambert, Tuesday, 13 August 2013 14:28 (seven years ago) link

yeah it shouldn't be *that* noticeable, maybe half a stop at most? could be you have a sticky shutter or your shutter speeds are off

乒乓, Tuesday, 13 August 2013 16:13 (seven years ago) link

two months pass...

Ok, I went a bit mad with some 0% credit and finally went full-frame...

Canon EOS 6D + 24-105L lens. The shop threw in a 430 EX II, spare battery, flash diffuser and a cleaning kit for nothing. Oh, and the camera is bundled with Lightroom 5 and Premier Elements 11 too (not that I have a computer I can run them on).

It is a bit of a marvel. I've installed a trial of LR 4.3 on my Vista laptop just so I can edit 6D RAWs (LR 5 only works on Win 7/8) but I've barely had a chance to do any real work with it yet. Worrying about ISO is a thing of the past - I set the auto range to 100-6400 and forget about it. 12800 isn't bad either. It goes to 102400, but that's just silly. Focuses in low light like you wouldn't believe.

BUT, wifi is pain in the arse. I've only got it to work twice successfully, and both times I was on a train/Tube away from 3G/wifi signals, so my iPhone paired with it immediately. So either my iPhone (4S, 7.0.3) is having a problem finding the thing or I've got a duff chipset in the 6D which is especially weak. It's almost a deal-breaker, as I might have gone for a secondhand 5D2 without the temptation of the 6D's added extras (not had any luck with GPS yet either!). But the 6D sensor is extraordinary.

Michael Jones, Thursday, 31 October 2013 11:07 (seven years ago) link

not 100% sure the above post describes a camera

schlump, Thursday, 31 October 2013 11:40 (seven years ago) link

Ha!

Michael Jones, Thursday, 31 October 2013 12:12 (seven years ago) link

Went FF too a couple of months back (Nikon D600), wasn't sure of the difference at first but happy with it now. Took a while to get used to the difference in my 50mm prime, have since added 85mm and 28mm primes.

michaellambert, Thursday, 31 October 2013 15:51 (seven years ago) link

I did end up upgrading my RAM from 4GB to 12GB to help out Lightroom 5, which helped a good bit. The Raw files are a fair size.

michaellambert, Thursday, 31 October 2013 15:52 (seven years ago) link

two months pass...

Anyone on here using medium format? I'm tempted to try and pick up a Mamiya 645 or a Bronica ETRS but struggling to pick one and was wondering if anyone had any experience with either?

michaellambert, Wednesday, 1 January 2014 20:56 (six years ago) link

I've had a Bronica SQ-A for ~10 years, though it hasn't shot a roll in 3-4. Always worked perfectly and the images looked amazing when printed.

Stopped shooting with it when I no longer had darkroom access, tried again several times over the years but paying to develop the film and then scanning it on a flatbed took all the fun out for me.
Maybe if dedicated MF film scanners hadn't gone the way of the dodo but I really hated the process of scanning film with an Epson flatbed. The results were never what I wanted, exactly, and when printed didn't justify the expense of MF over good digital.

Part of me would still love the Fuji/Voigtlander 6x6/6x7 rangefinder, I love the square.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Wednesday, 1 January 2014 23:25 (six years ago) link

I pulled the trigger on the Mamiya. I'm expecting to mostly shoot B+W as I can develop it at home, don't think there's anywhere local that can do colour 120.

michaellambert, Thursday, 2 January 2014 00:24 (six years ago) link

Our Bronica is similarly underused - haven't developed a roll in a couple of years.

Michael Jones, Thursday, 2 January 2014 12:46 (six years ago) link

just realized I've had the Bronica for 12 years. lol old

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, 2 January 2014 17:26 (six years ago) link

two months pass...

I bought an Olympus RC on ebay for a tenner. Just took it out for the first time today, having never used a rangefinder in my life. The shutter is so quiet!

sktsh, Saturday, 29 March 2014 17:47 (six years ago) link

that was always a selling point for rangefinders - no mirrors to move around as part of the shutter-release sequence

Lee626, Saturday, 29 March 2014 22:46 (six years ago) link

http://i.imgur.com/Exy2N4D.jpg

I need this camera!

, Sunday, 30 March 2014 00:20 (six years ago) link

Olympus RC has a leaf shutter, so it can flash sync all the way to 1/500. Only a stop slower than the Fuji X100s.

Very, very cool for flash fill in daylight portraiture.

Congratulations! And my condolences. (Sanpaku), Sunday, 30 March 2014 03:39 (six years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.