Your Cameras

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (418 of them)

yeah

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

replacement gf1 to arrive today :D

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

yr leicas show me them

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

Plus a Flip and a Holga for LOLs

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

do you not get them printed?

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

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

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

http://i.imgur.com/Exy2N4D.jpg

I need this camera!

, Sunday, 30 March 2014 00:20 (ten 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 (ten years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.