Re: Quick survey
I shoot them as dng. No difference in quality, but dng seems to be a more common standard On June 23, 2024 8:46:40 AM PDT, Paul Sorenson wrote: >Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you >better results or is a better choice than the other? > >-p >-- >%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow >the directions. > -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
What Larry said. Rick On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 12:33 wrote: > I shoot them as dng. No difference in quality, but dng seems to be a more > common standard > > On June 23, 2024 8:46:40 AM PDT, Paul Sorenson > wrote: > >Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives > you better results or is a better choice than the other? > > > >-p > >-- > >%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net > >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > > > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
What Larry said. On 6/23/24 12:24 PM, l...@red4est.com wrote: I shoot them as dng. No difference in quality, but dng seems to be a more common standard On June 23, 2024 8:46:40 AM PDT, Paul Sorenson wrote: Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? -p -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
what all those other guys said :-) (aside to Paul - I noticed my first response only went to you.. when no one said "what ann said" ) ann On 6/23/2024 11:46 AM, Paul Sorenson wrote: Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? -p -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- ann sanfedele photography https://annsan.smugmug.com https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
What Ann said. Sent from my iPad > On Jun 23, 2024, at 1:35 PM, ann sanfedele wrote: > > what all those other guys said :-) > (aside to Paul - I noticed my first response only went to you.. when no one > said "what ann said" ) > > ann > >> On 6/23/2024 11:46 AM, Paul Sorenson wrote: >> Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you >> better results or is a better choice than the other? >> >> -p >> -- >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > ann sanfedele photography > https://annsan.smugmug.com > https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts > https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan > https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
DNG. The results and the process are identical in my experience. Paul > On Jun 23, 2024, at 1:36 PM, ann sanfedele wrote: > > what all those other guys said :-) > (aside to Paul - I noticed my first response only went to you.. when no one > said "what ann said" ) > > ann > >> On 6/23/2024 11:46 AM, Paul Sorenson wrote: >> Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you >> better results or is a better choice than the other? >> >> -p >> -- >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > ann sanfedele photography > https://annsan.smugmug.com > https://www.cafepress.com/+ann-sanfedele+gifts > https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/annsan > https://www.createphotocalendars.com/Shop/annsanfedelecalendarsandbooks > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
Am 23.06.24 um 17:46 schrieb Paul Sorenson: Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? DNG. No difference in picture quality but I suppose it might be a bit more future-proof. Then again, how much of a future is left for the average PDMLer? ;-) Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012 -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
Always DNG, never tried PEF. No doubt the future for Adobe's DNG is more bright than for PEF. Henk Op 2024-06-23 om 17:46 schreef Paul Sorenson: Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? -p -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
Am 23.06.24 um 21:06 schrieb Henk Terhell: Always DNG, never tried PEF. No doubt the future for Adobe's DNG is more bright than for PEF. The earliest Pentax DSLRs up to the *istDS had no DNG. The K10D was the first to offer DNG. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012 -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
PEF. Because Adobe. > On 23/06/2024 16:46 BST Paul Sorenson wrote: > > > Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives > you better results or is a better choice than the other? > -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
That's true, I recall now that I did use PEF on my *istD, but also a lot of JPEG and TIFF. My next camera was the K10D and I always had it on DNG. Henk Op 2024-06-23 om 21:25 schreef Ralf R Radermacher: Am 23.06.24 um 21:06 schrieb Henk Terhell: Always DNG, never tried PEF. No doubt the future for Adobe's DNG is more bright than for PEF. The earliest Pentax DSLRs up to the *istDS had no DNG. The K10D was the first to offer DNG. Ralf -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
DNG On 6/23/2024 11:46 AM, Paul Sorenson wrote: Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? -p -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Vivere in aeternum aut mori conatur -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.com -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
The *ist-D allowed you to save as PEF, TIF or JPG. Herbert Kepler recommended TIF in his Popular Photography column, so that's what I shot in 2004. IIRC, the TIF was available in small, medium & large, which I didn't understand at the time. After I got home in 2005 & could buy more CF cards fairly easily, I switched to PEF. Continued to shoot PEF when I finally got a K10D. Began shooting DNG files late in 2012 when I got a K20D. Occasionally I would shoot JPEG (when I would somehow gum up the settings) or RAW+JPEG With the K-3 & K-1 I've shot exclusively DNG. With the VueScan software, I can also save files from my scanners as DNG. On 6/23/2024 3:25 PM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: Am 23.06.24 um 21:06 schrieb Henk Terhell: Always DNG, never tried PEF. No doubt the future for Adobe's DNG is more bright than for PEF. The earliest Pentax DSLRs up to the *istDS had no DNG. The K10D was the first to offer DNG. Ralf -- Vivere in aeternum aut mori conatur -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.com -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
I shoot PEF, and convert to DNG on import with Lightroom ("Copy as DNG").
The reason I do this is that when Lightroom does the conversion, it embeds
a checksum that can later be used with "Library > Validate DNG Files" to
verify that no disk corruption has occurred. At least at the time I decided
to do things this way, DNG as shot by my cameras did not embed this
checksum.
Once a month, I select all the photos in my catalog and run the Validate
task. (Knock on wood, it has never found an error so far.)
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 11:46 AM Paul Sorenson
wrote:
> Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives
> you better results or is a better choice than the other?
>
> -p
> --
> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.
--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: Quick survey
Yes. My K110D only offers PEF. When I occasionally use it, I convert to DNG which is the universal standard. Alan C On 23-Jun-24 10:33 PM, Henk Terhell wrote: That's true, I recall now that I did use PEF on my *istD, but also a lot of JPEG and TIFF. My next camera was the K10D and I always had it on DNG. Henk Op 2024-06-23 om 21:25 schreef Ralf R Radermacher: Am 23.06.24 um 21:06 schrieb Henk Terhell: Always DNG, never tried PEF. No doubt the future for Adobe's DNG is more bright than for PEF. The earliest Pentax DSLRs up to the *istDS had no DNG. The K10D was the first to offer DNG. Ralf -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
Thanks everyone, for your responses. The question came up in another forum which has few Pentax users so I thought I'd poll the group of "real" Pentax users. With few exceptions, DNG has been my format of choice since my DS days as well. -p On 6/23/2024 10:46 AM, Paul Sorenson wrote: Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? -p -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 10:33:10PM +0200, Henk Terhell wrote: > That's true, I recall now that I did use PEF on my *istD, but also a lot of > JPEG and TIFF. > My next camera was the K10D and I always had it on DNG. That was exactly the course I took (well, JPEG+DNG). I continued doing this when I moved on to a K5. (And nowadays I'm shooting JPEG+ORF) -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Quick survey
I shoot DNG - never did a comparison so do not know which is better. Just assumed it is the same. Patrick -Original Message- From: Paul Sorenson Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2024 5:47 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Quick survey Do you shoot your RAW files as DNGs or PEFs? Have you found one gives you better results or is a better choice than the other? -p -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
I shoot DNG exclusively (though I usually run the files through DNG Converter when downloading because I can have it do file renaming at the same time and it gets me to the latest spec DNG) for 3 reasons, in increasing order of importance: 1 - Files are smaller than PEF 2 - The open format of DNG (it's based on TIFF) is better for future compatibility than almost anything else (except possibly TIFF itself and JPEG) 3 - The embedded MD-5 hash makes file validation possible en mass, that is to say, without opening files and looking at them. (This final item is largely why the Library of Congress adopted DNG as its archiving format.) -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Quick survey
Thanks Mark, that is good information. > On Jun 24, 2024, at 10:14 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > > I shoot DNG exclusively (though I usually run the files through DNG > Converter when downloading because I can have it do file renaming at > the same time and it gets me to the latest spec DNG) for 3 reasons, in > increasing order of importance: > > 1 - Files are smaller than PEF > > 2 - The open format of DNG (it's based on TIFF) is better for future > compatibility than almost anything else (except possibly TIFF itself > and JPEG) > > 3 - The embedded MD-5 hash makes file validation possible en mass, > that is to say, without opening files and looking at them. (This final > item is largely why the Library of Congress adopted DNG as its > archiving format.) > > -- > Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia > www.robertstech.com > > > > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from ret13est -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
At 11:56 PM 22/12/2004 , Shel wrote: That got me to wondering how >many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no >modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Still have my S1a. I think all (serious) photographers should have to spend time with a view camera to learn how much of photography in not just pointing and pushing a button. Powell
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
On 23 Dec 2004 at 1:18, Powell Hargrave wrote: > I think all (serious) photographers should have to spend time with a view > camera to learn how much of photography in not just pointing and pushing a > button. Serious photographers coat their own glass plates. :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
RE: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Gosh, I nearly fell into the category Fortunately, I used to have a Konica S2 with a broken meter and I still have a Fuji GW670 which is fully mechanical Phew... Andy -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:57 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is still with me. On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) DagT > fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That got me to wondering how > many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > > Shel > > >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
- Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? My first camera was a Fujica rangefinder from the mid 50s. No built in meter, but a very good lens. I have also owned and used rather extensively a Nikon F (the plain Jane one, not the fancy Photomic), and I have shot a lot with both 4x5 monorail and field cameras. How many on the list have used a fixed focus camera where you have to "string" your subject to ensure focus? My hand is raised.. William Robb
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - At 11:56 PM 22/12/2004 , Shel wrote: That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone?
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
LX in not machanical, shutter is electronic. I still have my ME, but that does not qualify either. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:28 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is still with me. On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) DagT fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Just take the batteries out . Alex Sarbu On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:51:23 +0200, Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > LX in not machanical, shutter is electronic. I still have my ME, but that > does not qualify either. > All the best! > Raimo K > Personal photography homepage at: > http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:28 PM > Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > >I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is > >still with me. > > > > On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with > > AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) > > > > DagT > > > >> fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> That got me to wondering how > >> many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > >> modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > >> > >> Shel > >> > >> > >> > > > >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I still use my Speed Graphic from time to time. I've owned it for almost thirty years. My first 35mm camera was a Nikon SP2 rangefinder that I bought for $75 in 1972. I never owned a camera that was even capable of auto exposure until I bought an LX about four years ago. When I joined the list, I was still making do quite nicely with an H3v. My *istD was my first autofocus camera. On Dec 23, 2004, at 7:51 AM, Raimo K wrote: LX in not machanical, shutter is electronic. I still have my ME, but that does not qualify either. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:28 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is still with me. On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) DagT fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Sort of. I bought my first SLR in 1972 (SP500) and built-in meters were pretty standard. The meter broke and I couldn't fix it then (16 and no money) so I used Tri-X and guessed. Of course, it usually worked.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Almost only counts in horseshoes. Shel > [Original Message] > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 12/23/2004 3:34:50 AM > Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is still with me. > > On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) > > DagT
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
These cameras have built-in meters. You don't qualify. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E > All the best! > Raimo K
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
But they are mechanical. And I have never heard of mechanical exposure meters so if you use an external meter you do not qualify ;-) Even worse if you have electricity in your house ;-) All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:47 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage These cameras have built-in meters. You don't qualify. Shel [Original Message] From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E All the best! Raimo K
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
That would make the LX a usable mechanical camera because it has mechanical speeds from 1/75 to 1/2000 but the ME has only 1/100. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:02 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage Just take the batteries out . Alex Sarbu On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:51:23 +0200, Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: LX in not machanical, shutter is electronic. I still have my ME, but that does not qualify either. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:28 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage >I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is >still with me. > > On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR > with > AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) > > DagT > >> fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> That got me to wondering how >> many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, >> no >> modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? >> >> Shel >> >> >> >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
The question was: "... how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter." All of these cameras have built-in meters. There was no mention made about the use of external meters. If your camera didn't have a built-in meter I'd expect you'd be using an external, or hand-held meter at least some of the time. So, you may actually have fit the requirements of never having used a fully manual camera, but these cameras don't fit the requirements of the question being fully mechanical and meterless. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 12/23/2004 7:06:05 AM > Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > But they are mechanical. > And I have never heard of mechanical exposure meters so if you use an > external meter you do not qualify ;-) > Even worse if you have electricity in your house ;-) > All the best! > Raimo K > Personal photography homepage at: > http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho > > > - Original Message - > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:47 PM > Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > > > These cameras have built-in meters. You don't qualify. > > > > Shel > > > > > >> [Original Message] > >> From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E > >> All the best! > >> Raimo K > > > >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Shel wrote: > Almost only counts in horseshoes. And hand grenades. Hmm. After glancing at this thread, I've got an urge to take an H3 with me if I get up to 34th street to shoot the Christmast lights this evening. (That's my current plan, but it's subject to change depending on how I feel and whether I'm busy with something more urgent then.) -- Glenn
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
serious photographers mold their own glass plates from sand. and skin small animals to make the bellows. mishka On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 21:00:45 +1000, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 23 Dec 2004 at 1:18, Powell Hargrave wrote: > > > I think all (serious) photographers should have to spend time with a view > > camera to learn how much of photography in not just pointing and pushing a > > button. > > Serious photographers coat their own glass plates. > > :-) > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Reading comprehension here on the list seems to be pretty bad. I thought you asked how many HAD NOT used fully manual cameras without even a built in meter. And you get all these I HAVE used such a camera answers. Oh well! graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Shel Belinkoff wrote: These cameras have built-in meters. You don't qualify. Shel [Original Message] From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E All the best! Raimo K -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.4 - Release Date: 12/22/2004
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
D. Glenn Arthur Jr. wrote on 12/23/2004, 10:21 AM: > Shel wrote: > > Almost only counts in horseshoes. > > And hand grenades. and nuclear (GWB: "newculer") weapons. -- Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
On Thursday 23 December 2004 02:56, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to > modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. > There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern > cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser > number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of > years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. > That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how > many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > > Shel Being very young, I should by rights fall into this category, but I don't. I could never afford a modern autofocus camera until recently! My first serious camera was a Ricoh KR5 Super II, which I recieved on Christmas when I was 16. That camera gave up the ghost a few years later: the lensmount came apart (only by a bit) from the body, and the pentamirror housing cracked. That's what you get after years of hard use, being thrown in to bookbags, taken on vacations, to parties, etc. My next camera was a Pentax MX, which I got in "bargain" condition at KEH. A gem of a camera; I love it. The rewind knob snapped off in the middle of a hurried rewind as I was trying to get pictures of an antiwar demo in London in February of '02. It was repaired, probably with the rewind knob from a K1000, so it's not pretty, but it works really well. Took a licking & keeps on ticking. I acquired a ZX-M from someone at work at a ridiculously low price (I bought it mainly because he threw in a Vivitar 283 in with the bargain, and it amounted to getting a ZX-M body, a Ricoh 28-80 zoom, and Ricoh 50/1.7 free with the flash unit). Having a winder was weird. I designated this my back up 35mm film body. Then I got my *istDS. It might say something about me that I really haven't used the autofocus on it much, mounting my old Rikenon 50/1.4 XR on it almost all the time. Does anyone want to give me a 35/2 FAL and a 135/2.8 F? In between, I've dabbled in 6x6: a Lubitel (now converted to a pinhole camera), an ancient Rolleiflex (probably one of the last TLRs made by the Nazis, from what I can tell), a Minolta Autocord. -Luigi
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
>>That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? No built in meter? So this rules out the K1000. That's the simplest camera I've used, aside from a two dollar 110 that wasn't really useable. (pics came out horribly blurry) __ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
My guess is that most folks on this list have a higher interest in photography than your average joe. At some point, they've owned/used/picked up a fully manual camera just for the sheer challenge if nothing else. Those that haven't know better than to expose themselves around here! :) Just for the record, I've got a Yashica A TLR - it even has manual film advance! Gotta love that little red window. I run a roll through it about six times a year, mostly sticking with the Sunny 16 rule unless there's a really challenging exposure. Tim On 12/23/04 7:27, Graywolf wrote: > Reading comprehension here on the list seems to be pretty bad. I thought you > asked how many HAD NOT used fully manual cameras without even a built in > meter. > And you get all these I HAVE used such a camera answers. Oh well! > > graywolf > http://www.graywolfphoto.com > "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > --- > > > > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: >> These cameras have built-in meters. You don't qualify. >> >> Shel >> >> >> >>> [Original Message] >>> From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >>> Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E >>> All the best! >>> Raimo K >> >> >> >> >> >
RE: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Hi Shel all of the cameras I have used helped me with a built-in meter (first was the Olympus XA, second the Pentax ME-Super). But I use manual setting of the aperture, speed, focus etc. often. greetings Markus >> That got me to wondering how >>many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no >>modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? >> >>Shel >> >> >>
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Quoting Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Reading comprehension here on the list seems to be pretty bad. I thought > you > asked how many HAD NOT used fully manual cameras without even a built in > meter. > And you get all these I HAVE used such a camera answers. Oh well! You and me both*, Graywolf. I sat here quietly not replying to that thread because I HAD used such cameras. Any excuse, I guess ... ERNR *(both "thought you asked how many HAD NOT ... " that is)
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
First the melt the sand and cast the plates... Rob Studdert wrote: On 23 Dec 2004 at 1:18, Powell Hargrave wrote: I think all (serious) photographers should have to spend time with a view camera to learn how much of photography in not just pointing and pushing a button. Serious photographers coat their own glass plates. :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
The LX is 1/2 Mechanical, they removed the mechanical slow speeds and replaced them with an electronic timer. They kept the clockwork for the fast speeds, which is only used when the camera is in manual mode with a shutter setting from x sync to 2000. Raimo K wrote: LX in not machanical, shutter is electronic. I still have my ME, but that does not qualify either. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:28 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is still with me. On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) DagT fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Well, I've used a Bosley Reflex with non-geometric shutter speeds and a Angenieux Alpar 5.0cm f2.9. I needed a 50mm lens when I was taking a photojournalism course and my Spotty's 55mm 1.8 was being repaired so I really had no choice... I think I paid $15 for it in 1975. The price was right anyway. Sadly I just took it out of it's display case to fire the shutter a couple of times and it's now jammed, probably hopelessly, I can't for the life of me think of anyone who could fix the damned thing. Shel Belinkoff wrote: I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Shel Belinkoff mused: > > I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to > modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. > There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern > cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser > number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of > years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. > That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how > many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? I think that last clause - no built-in meter - will be the biggest hurdle. Even my very first 35mm camera (a fairly cheap badge-engineered 'Hanimex') had a built-in meter, as did my first SLR (A Spotmatic II). Not coupled to the exposure system, admittedly, but still built in to the cameras. I have to go back to my earliest days with my Brownie 127, and learning on my father's Agfa fold-out (and a Weston meter), to exclude myself from your list.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Got my first SLR at age 16 (1966) from Gasser's on Geary Street, San Francisco. Saved up from my job at my father's pharmacy. In those days Gasser's was a real photography shop. It was a used Honeywell Pentax S2 with a 55mm f1.8 Takumar and some third party 200 mm. Telephoto was why I wanted to get an SLR. Built-in meter? Har! I didn't have one of those until I bought a used K1000 in 1996. Subsequent cameras included an Exakta and a Rolleicord. I still have both, but sold the Pentax years ago. Stupid of me, huh? While doing a year at San Francisco City College I used a 4 x 5 view camera. I don't want one today, but it was an experience to learn what it could do. Also did B&W darkroom work in those days. San Francisco Parks & Recreation department operated a public darkroom, with enlargers, that one could use for a small subscription. I wonder if it's still in operation? I remember Kodachrome II, Kodachrome 64, early Ektachrome, Agfachrome 50 (my favorite in those days), Panatomic-X, Plus X, and early Tri-X. I played for a while with Anscochrome 400. Ansco sold a chemical kit that allowed one to develop positives without the need to hold the film strip to a light source. But subsequently I learned to do that too. Despite all this, I love my *ist D, Photoshop, Nikon LS 2000 scanner, and Epson 870 printer. I have some nostalgia for the old days, but I keep it under control. Joe
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
In a message dated 12/23/2004 7:22:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "... how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter." == Hand raised. I started with the K-1000, but, of course, it had a built-in meter. I am not a dinosaur. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Sheesh, gotta take it back. Reading the thread, yeah, I used a "brownie" that my parents had for my first photography class in college. And I am pretty sure it had no built-in meter. As a side note, apros of nothing, I disliked that photography class so much that I didn't take another one for about forty years, and my pictures "sucked" for about forty years too. Doe aka Marnie :-( Drat.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
My turn. I have to confess to never having used a camera that didn't have a meter. Some have been all mechanical except for meter. I started in 1976 when my Dad gave me a Practica (don't remember the model) for my birthday. It was screw mount, center weighted meter. Since then I have used the following: Canon A-1 (only camera I truly hated) Olympus OM-1 Pentax MX Nikon FM Pentax SuperProgram Pentax ZX-10 Pentax PZ-1p Pentax MZ-S Pentax 67II Pentax *ist Pentax *istD with a smattering of MX's scattered througout. I started using an external meter with the 67. Mostly depends on the situation. I still use a handheld meter with the *istD on occasion. However, the instant feedback sort of does the same thing. The meter is the first ballpark attempt. I do find that I mostly use manual focus and manual exposure. I find that I like to get ready for a picture in this order: 1. Meter 2. Compose 3. Focus Manual modes really work best here. What is being metered may not be directly the subject or within AF points. Then I find that getting the composition right before focusing is important because I don't want the focus to affect it - too often AF pushes you toward centering the subject on the AF point. Lastly, after getting the composition where I want it, then focus in and out a bit observing the effect on the image. This helps me to determine exactly where I want the focus to be. Granted, there are cases where speed is of the essence and then AE and AF come into play. Usually those shots are not as nice as the ones that I took the time on. -- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, December 23, 2004, 5:31:42 AM, you wrote: SD> Sort of. I bought my first SLR in 1972 (SP500) and built-in meters were SD> pretty standard. The meter broke and I couldn't fix it then (16 and no SD> money) so I used Tri-X and guessed. Of course, it usually worked.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Pentax H1 [broken shutter :( ...] 2 Speed Graphics. Argus C3. Yashica Mat. Wooden pinhole camera. I think the Pentax 67 without meter prism should count. True, it has an electronic shutter, but everything must be selected manually. No automatic of any sort. Regards, Bob... From: "Jon M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? No built in meter? So this rules out the K1000. That's the simplest camera I've used, aside from a two dollar 110 that wasn't really useable. (pics came out horribly blurry)
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
You and I look to be the only ones. So far I can only remember 17 such cameras that I have actually owned (leaving out the non-adjustable ones). Plus 10 with built in meters. I have never owned a camera with autofocus. Of them all only four 2-MXen, a Minolta 16, and a Coolpix 100 were bought new. Of course I have been playing with cameras for over 50 years now. Nowadays they think a camera with auto-exposure is a manual camera. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Reading comprehension here on the list seems to be pretty bad. I thought you asked how many HAD NOT used fully manual cameras without even a built in meter. And you get all these I HAVE used such a camera answers. Oh well! You and me both*, Graywolf. I sat here quietly not replying to that thread because I HAD used such cameras. Any excuse, I guess ... ERNR *(both "thought you asked how many HAD NOT ... " that is) -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.4 - Release Date: 12/22/2004
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
OK - fully mechanical and meterless they are not. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 5:20 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage The question was: "... how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter." All of these cameras have built-in meters. There was no mention made about the use of external meters. If your camera didn't have a built-in meter I'd expect you'd be using an external, or hand-held meter at least some of the time. So, you may actually have fit the requirements of never having used a fully manual camera, but these cameras don't fit the requirements of the question being fully mechanical and meterless. Shel [Original Message] From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 12/23/2004 7:06:05 AM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage But they are mechanical. And I have never heard of mechanical exposure meters so if you use an external meter you do not qualify ;-) Even worse if you have electricity in your house ;-) All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 3:47 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > These cameras have built-in meters. You don't qualify. > > Shel > > >> [Original Message] >> From: Raimo K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Leica M6, Voigtländer Bessa-R, Rolleiflex 3.5E >> All the best! >> Raimo K > >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I started with a Yashica A TLR - no meter, no nothing - so I´m a dinosaur, too. But I do not have it anymore, I have the Rolleiflex - so I´m not a dinosaur anymore. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 7:51 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage In a message dated 12/23/2004 7:22:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "... how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter." == Hand raised. I started with the K-1000, but, of course, it had a built-in meter. I am not a dinosaur. Marnie aka Doe :-)
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Bolsey - Jacques Bolsey was the designer of these & many other cameras. There must be someone somewhere who repairs Alpas, though - and yours is a very early Alpa. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 7:24 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage Well, I've used a Bosley Reflex with non-geometric shutter speeds and a Angenieux Alpar 5.0cm f2.9. I needed a 50mm lens when I was taking a photojournalism course and my Spotty's 55mm 1.8 was being repaired so I really had no choice... I think I paid $15 for it in 1975. The price was right anyway. Sadly I just took it out of it's display case to fire the shutter a couple of times and it's now jammed, probably hopelessly, I can't for the life of me think of anyone who could fix the damned thing.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Very early, same as the Alpa Reflex of 1944, produced through 1946. The lens is very soft wide open, hell it's soft stopped down. Very pleasing old time look to the results and makes nice flattering portraits. http://www.alpa.ch/alpa/history/reflex.html I haven't put any film through it in years. Damn, now I'm afraid to put film into my Retina. Raimo K wrote: Bolsey - Jacques Bolsey was the designer of these & many other cameras. There must be someone somewhere who repairs Alpas, though - and yours is a very early Alpa. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 7:24 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage Well, I've used a Bosley Reflex with non-geometric shutter speeds and a Angenieux Alpar 5.0cm f2.9. I needed a 50mm lens when I was taking a photojournalism course and my Spotty's 55mm 1.8 was being repaired so I really had no choice... I think I paid $15 for it in 1975. The price was right anyway. Sadly I just took it out of it's display case to fire the shutter a couple of times and it's now jammed, probably hopelessly, I can't for the life of me think of anyone who could fix the damned thing. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Hi, I spent a lot of 1967 dollars at Gasser's on Geary Blvd, and that's where I had my first show. Actually, it was the second hanging of my first show, which first appeared at the Parks and Rec building. They're still "in business," although the last time I was there things seemed a little shoddier than I remember them to have been. Back in 1967 - 1970 it was a great place to learn. The place was always busy, and lots of ideas were flying around as well as some experimenting with different techniques and the sharing of equipment. Until getting my own studio (actually a little co-op a group of us put together) out on Chenery at the end of the J-Church line, I practically lived at Parks and Rec. Fond memories. Gasser's in those days was a real haven for photographers, at least it seemed that way to me. The staff was knowledgeable and helpful. and quite friendly. Many of the people there became friends, or at least good photography buddies. There was one fellow there named Gene (can't recall his last name) who'd sometimes have little photo parties at his apartment in the Tenderloin. A bunch of us would gather there, look at one another's prints, maybe have a slide show, and Gene might talk about some upcoming deals that Gasser was going to offer ... and then we'd have milk and cookies Where was your dad's pharmacy? Shel > [Original Message] > From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Got my first SLR at age 16 (1966) from Gasser's on Geary Street, San > Francisco. Saved up from my job at my father's pharmacy. In those days > Gasser's was a real photography shop. It was a used Honeywell Pentax S2 > with a 55mm f1.8 Takumar and some third party 200 mm. Telephoto was why > I wanted to get an SLR. > > Built-in meter? Har! I didn't have one of those until I bought a used > K1000 in 1996. > > Subsequent cameras included an Exakta and a Rolleicord. I still have > both, but sold the Pentax years ago. Stupid of me, huh? > > While doing a year at San Francisco City College I used a 4 x 5 view > camera. I don't want one today, but it was an experience to learn what > it could do. Also did B&W darkroom work in those days. San Francisco > Parks & Recreation department operated a public darkroom, with > enlargers, that one could use for a small subscription. I wonder if it's > still in operation? > > I remember Kodachrome II, Kodachrome 64, early Ektachrome, Agfachrome 50 > (my favorite in those days), Panatomic-X, Plus X, and early Tri-X. I > played for a while with Anscochrome 400. Ansco sold a chemical kit that > allowed one to develop positives without the need to hold the film strip > to a light source. But subsequently I learned to do that too. > > Despite all this, I love my *ist D, Photoshop, Nikon LS 2000 scanner, > and Epson 870 printer. I have some nostalgia for the old days, but I > keep it under control. > > Joe
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I agree about the Pentax 6x7, which I still use. I also use my father-in-law's old speed graphic and manual Leica rangefinder at least once a year, and occasionally an old kodak folder and argus TLR. Bob Blakely wrote: I think the Pentax 67 without meter prism should count. True, it has an electronic shutter, but everything must be selected manually.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Argus C-3 Pentax H-3 Leicas M2, M3, M4 Yashica YF (Leica M copy). Jim A. > > From: "Jon M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That got me to wondering how >> many people here have never used a fully manual camera >> - no autofocus, no >> modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? >> >> No built in meter? So this rules out the K1000. That's >> the simplest camera I've used, aside from a two dollar >> 110 that wasn't really useable. (pics came out >> horribly blurry) > >
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I own, and use occasionally, the following 1927 Zeiss Cocarette (6x9) 1938 Rolleicord II Type 3 (6x6) 1955 Zeiss Ikonta A (6x4.5) 1959 Ricomatoc 225 (6x6) 1964 Pentax S1A (35mm) Dates are approximate. -- Fred Widall, Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.ist.uwaterloo.ca/~fwwidall --
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
So you asked for the negation - if nobody likes to answer you gather no information ... BTW: I have used an EXA 1a for the first years: no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter, shortest time 1/175 s, cheap 50/2.9 lens, but a bayonett. I don't miss it. Best, Bernd ---original message--- Shel Belinkoff Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:57:27 -0800 I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? Shel
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Graywolf observed: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Quoting Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> Reading comprehension here on the list seems to be pretty bad. I thought >>> you >>> asked how many HAD NOT used fully manual cameras without even a built in >>> meter. >>> And you get all these I HAVE used such a camera answers. Oh well! >> You and me both*, Graywolf. I sat here quietly not replying to that thread >> because I HAD used such cameras. >> Any excuse, I guess ... > You and I look to be the only ones. Oh no, I caught the negation as well, which is why I snuck my mention of using such a camera into a parenthetical aside to a tangential comment instead of just answering directly. That seemed an important disticntion at the time. > Nowadays they think a camera with auto-exposure is a manual camera. Urk. Feh. Ptui. -- Glenn
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
OK, good, you know what it is. I´m sure it can be repaired. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:59 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage Very early, same as the Alpa Reflex of 1944, produced through 1946. The lens is very soft wide open, hell it's soft stopped down. Very pleasing old time look to the results and makes nice flattering portraits. http://www.alpa.ch/alpa/history/reflex.html I haven't put any film through it in years. Damn, now I'm afraid to put film into my Retina. Raimo K wrote: Bolsey - Jacques Bolsey was the designer of these & many other cameras. There must be someone somewhere who repairs Alpas, though - and yours is a very early Alpa. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 7:24 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage Well, I've used a Bosley Reflex with non-geometric shutter speeds and a Angenieux Alpar 5.0cm f2.9. I needed a 50mm lens when I was taking a photojournalism course and my Spotty's 55mm 1.8 was being repaired so I really had no choice... I think I paid $15 for it in 1975. The price was right anyway. Sadly I just took it out of it's display case to fire the shutter a couple of times and it's now jammed, probably hopelessly, I can't for the life of me think of anyone who could fix the damned thing. -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Thanks for the chance to reminisce, Shel. Hope I'm not boring everyone else. (Okay, I probably am, but I don't do this often.) Shel: I spent a lot of 1967 dollars at Gasser's on Geary Blvd, and that's where I had my first show. Actually, it was the second hanging of my first show, which first appeared at the Parks and Rec building. They're still "in business," although the last time I was there things seemed a little shoddier than I remember them to have been. Back in 1967 - 1970 it was a great place to learn. The place was always busy, and lots of ideas were flying around as well as some experimenting with different techniques and the sharing of equipment. - I wonder if we crossed paths? I used it through at least 1970. Then it was a darkroom at UC Santa Barbara, where I was an undergraduate. - Gasser's in those days was a real haven for photographers, at least it seemed that way to me. - Me too. I went by it about 4 years ago and was grossly disappointed. - Where was your dad's pharmacy? - Tainter's Drug Store, southwest corner of 19th Avenue and Irving. He sold it in 1968. Joe
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
i'm on a tripod most of the time and i seldom choose to use manual anything. have to compose first, focus next, and then set exposure last. lots of movable AF points and exposure compensation do everything i need almost all of the time. i have to go manual mode when i am shooting multiple shots in a panorama, but i will meter using evaluative metering from some "representative" direction and quickly pan after setting exposure to see the dynamic range i have to deal with. most of the time i am shooting f11 or smaller, so with the compositions i usually use, exact focus wide open isn't critical. macros are when i use DOF preview a lot. when i am shooting birds and such, i will switch to spot metering mode and dial in a bit of exposure compensation to compensate for a spot that isn't small enough. i'll still be in AF mode with center AF. Herb... - Original Message - From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Steve Desjardins" Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:19 PM Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > I do find that I mostly use manual focus and manual exposure. I find > that I like to get ready for a picture in this order: > 1. Meter > 2. Compose > 3. Focus > > Manual modes really work best here. What is being metered may not be > directly the subject or within AF points. Then I find that getting > the composition right before focusing is important because I don't > want the focus to affect it - too often AF pushes you toward centering > the subject on the AF point. Lastly, after getting the composition > where I want it, then focus in and out a bit observing the effect on > the image. This helps me to determine exactly where I want the focus > to be.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
So, I suppose the answer to Shel's question is "none", with the thread gone into a reminiscing conversation--as it should be. I like having a meter in the camera, although I've shot Tri-x on the shadow side of the street for so long that I don't look at it too much (1/250, f4.5 to f8 depending on how bright it is). I also dislike AF, and my ist D is in manual all the time. I was starting to pack my equipment for London last night, and I picked up the M6. I do miss that thing, and I think I'll try to finish the few rolls of Tri-X I still have while in London. Scanning film is a hassle though... As for cameras, the M6 and the MX have been my main ones for years. Also own a ZX5n, which was on a diet of TMZ but that kind of doesn't make sense now with the istD. I have lots of odd little soviet cameras, like Feds and Zorkis, Lubitels (2 and 166), some Lomos. Also a pristine K1000 that doesn't see much use either (but I can't make myself part with it), and a few 60's Japanese fixed lens rangefinders (there's a like new Minolta 7s, everything working, that's begging to have some film run through it). Oh, and a few Kodak Brownies (the Hawkeye is a beautiful piece of American deco--a nice p&s too) So, it was kind of a vice a few years back. I'm off of it now, no more cameras that I won't use... j On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:56:45 -0800, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to > modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. > There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern > cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser > number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of > years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. > That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how > many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > > Shel > > -- Juan Buhler http://www.jbuhler.com blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog
RE: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
First camera: Kodak 126 First 35mm used: My Mother's Agfa Silette (non meter version) Then came the K1000, MX, Z70, MZ5n, more MXen and an LX and finally the *istD And then the Speed Graphic and a Moskva 5 and the 6x7 (with standard prism). Fully mechanical doesn't bother me with 120 and larger as I am generally working slowly, but for fast use I like the *istD. Ironically at a recent party I took along the *istD and the Speed Graphic. The RTF flash on the *istD was it's usual uncooperative self and a lot of the photos were a couple of stops underexposed. The negs from the graphic using bulb flash were just fine. Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The question was: "... how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
On Dec 23, 2004, at 8:56 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? The only fully manual SLR I've used is an RB67. My Pentax 6x7 has an electronic shutter but no meter (unless I attach the metered prism finder) so that might count as well. There is also my first camera, a fixed-focus 110 point-n-shoot I got for Xmas when I was about 10 (20 years ago, gulp). I still have it somewhere. Also the occasional single-use camera. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
On Dec 23, 2004, at 6:35 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think that last clause - no built-in meter - will be the biggest hurdle. Even my very first 35mm camera (a fairly cheap badge-engineered 'Hanimex') had a built-in meter, as did my first SLR (A Spotmatic II). Not coupled to the exposure system, admittedly, but still built in to the cameras. I would have to say that I also never shot a fully manual camera. My SRT 100 had a meter also. However, I must confess that I often took it out in the woods in the winter, and the poor batteries couldn't handle the cold, plus with the snow, it would underexpose, so I generally shot it without metering. :-) I also was good at standing in a crowd of people (shot for our school's newspaper and year book) and would focus, and set exposure with the camera at my waist, and then raise and shoot before the poor subjects had a chance to respond! I got a lot of photos other school photogs couldn't get, because they would stand there with their camera to their face, trying to focus and set exposure through the VF. Once the other students were "on to them" they would either clam up, or act even stupider (sic). :-) I got a lot of candid shots this way. So, I don't qualify technically, but I do in spirit. ;-) -- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
On Dec 23, 2004, at 7:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sheesh, gotta take it back. Reading the thread, yeah, I used a "brownie" that my parents had for my first photography class in college. And I am pretty sure it had no built-in meter. Do those Kodak 126 cameras count? You know, the ones that shot at something like1/60 of a second, with f11, and fixed focus? Those don't have meters (don't need them) nor electronics. Simple, mechanical cock the shutter while advancing the film sort of things... I used them a bunch while a kid. That's what got me into my first "real" camera. -- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
roleicord is my most used (film) camera. there, you need to wind the film and cock the shutter independently from each other. but that's almost an automatic operation, compared to my moskva-5 (very rarely used). but, as greywolf pointed out, this is a reply to a different thread. best, mishka On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:58:01 -0500, Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You and I look to be the only ones.
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
We may very well have crossed paths, after all, frequenting the same places over a three or four year period would certainly suggest the possibility I recall your dad's pharmacy. I lived at 9th and Irving in late 1967-early 1968. I may have even gotten a prescription filled there. Gasser has a new, bigger store down on 3rd street, below market. It's a huge place, but not anywhere near as friendly as the ol' place on Geary Blvd. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; pdml > Date: 12/23/2004 5:28:56 PM > Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > Thanks for the chance to reminisce, Shel. Hope I'm not boring everyone > else. (Okay, I probably am, but I don't do this often.) > > Shel: > > I spent a lot of 1967 dollars at Gasser's on Geary Blvd, and that's > where I had my first show. Actually, it was the second hanging of my > first show, which first appeared at the Parks and Rec building. They're > still "in business," although the last time I was there things seemed a > little shoddier than I remember them to have been. Back in 1967 - 1970 > it was a great place to learn. The place was always busy, and lots of > ideas were flying around as well as some experimenting with different > techniques and the sharing of equipment. > > - > I wonder if we crossed paths? I used it through at least 1970. Then it > was a darkroom at UC Santa Barbara, where I was an undergraduate. > - > > Gasser's in those days was a real haven for photographers, at least it > seemed that way to me. > > - > Me too. I went by it about 4 years ago and was grossly disappointed. > - > > Where was your dad's pharmacy? > > - > > Tainter's Drug Store, southwest corner of 19th Avenue and Irving. He > sold it in 1968. > > Joe
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:56:45 -0800, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to > modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter. > There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern > cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser > number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of > years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera. > That's probably quite unusual for this list. That got me to wondering how > many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > > Shel I'm like you Shel (at least in this one way ): Don't own an auto-focus camera, and never have. Other than aperture priority on my LX and old Yashica Electro 35, I don't have or use cameras with any auto-exposure functions. I've shot well under 100 frames on any digital cam, and most of those were grabbing little Optio S4's at GFM and shooting quite randomly (that's what they get for putting their cameras down!). cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
RE: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
> That got me to wondering how many people here have never used a fully > manual camera - no autofocus, no modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? I guess I haven't. My K1000 and even my Yashicamat both have meters. I have used my KM with the busted meter and guessed the exposure pretty accurately, although that was on a sunny day so it wasn't exactly difficult... Amita
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
>> Bolsey - Jacques Bolsey was the designer of these & many other >> cameras. There must be someone somewhere who repairs Alpas, though - >> and yours is a very early Alpa. >> All the best! Wow! Bolsky/Bolesey/Bogopolsky (Ukraininan) was actually the man behind Bolex cinema cameras! The probably most famous 16mm in the world :) Thanks for the name - I didn't know he was also behind the design of Alpa cameras. Good light! fra
RE: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
Non automatic cameras are often the best. Because you don't have to try to outsmart the camera if conditions are not average. I use my Pentacon Six TL along with a hand held meter, even though I do have a metered prisma, I can mount on the camera. Hand held metering is often much better (if there's enough time - for instance for aerial photography, landscapes, portraits etc.). When using a hand held meter for incident metering, there's no need for compensating for back lit scenery, very bright or very dark parts of the scenery. Simply because it's not the reflected light, that is measuered. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Frantisek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 29. december 2004 11:10 Til: Peter J. Alling Emne: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage >> Bolsey - Jacques Bolsey was the designer of these & many other >> cameras. There must be someone somewhere who repairs Alpas, though - >> and yours is a very early Alpa. >> All the best! Wow! Bolsky/Bolesey/Bogopolsky (Ukraininan) was actually the man behind Bolex cinema cameras! The probably most famous 16mm in the world :) Thanks for the name - I didn't know he was also behind the design of Alpa cameras. Good light! fra
Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
I'm actually moving TOWARDS mechanical cameras. I started with a K2, and ended up 20+ years later with a KX. For all that I own top-of-the-line gear I have used autoexposure exactly twice in the past 11 years, and have never used any "evaluative" metering, relying on center-weighted and occasionally spot. I have only switched over to autofocus on the job in the last 2 years. The stable of M and A cameras I used to use has been replaced by 2 KXen and more than a dozen spotmatics, all of which are fully mechanical and very few of which even have batteries in them. And I'm currently using m42 lenses on a Canon EOS 20D--cutting edge technology meets manual focus and working-aperture metering! DJE
Re: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
:-) Or run out of batteries, like I've done a couple of times. Anyway, the Bronica SA-Q qualifies. DagT > fra: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > dato: 2004/12/23 to PM 02:02:07 CET > til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > emne: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > Just take the batteries out . > > Alex Sarbu > > > On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:51:23 +0200, Raimo K > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > LX in not machanical, shutter is electronic. I still have my ME, but that > > does not qualify either. > > All the best! > > Raimo K > > Personal photography homepage at: > > http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho > > > > - Original Message - > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 1:28 PM > > Subject: Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > > > > >I used my LX last week, and my Bronica SQ-A, with no built-in meter, is > > >still with me. > > > > > > On the other hand: Before buying the *istD I had never used an SLR with > > > AF, so I think I'm almost in the opposite category :-) > > > > > > DagT > > > > > >> fra: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > >> That got me to wondering how > > >> many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > > >> modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > > >> > > >> Shel > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
Manual Camera Usage - WasRe: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage
An interesting variation on this question is how many users have never shot in the manual exposure mode (assuming your auto camera has that capability. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage > many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no > modes, no built-in meter. Anyone? > > Shel > >
Off the survey and onto memory lane (Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage)
Jon Glass wrote: > Do those Kodak 126 cameras count? You know, the ones that shot at > something like1/60 of a second, with f11, and fixed focus? Those don't > have meters (don't need them) nor electronics. Simple, mechanical cock > the shutter while advancing the film sort of things... I used them a > bunch while a kid. That's what got me into my first "real" camera. I dunno ... on the one hand they fit the stated criteria; on the other hand they leave out the whole "judge and set everything yourself" experience. My first camera was a grey plastic Brownie. One shutter speed, three f-stops, and I don't remember whether it had adjustable focus or not (there certainly wasn't a rangefinder). Then I had a 110 instamatic but lusted after a classmate's Nikon or the Olympus OM-1 that I kept seeing magazine ads for. When I went to college, I borrowed my father's German 35mm rangefinder camera (no meter, rangefinder misaligned, as I recall) ... which got stolen. About twenty years later I picked up a 35mm toy that had come free for signing up for a credit card or subscribing to a magazine or something like that, and had sat idle on a shelf for years because I didn't think of it as a "real camera", but I had something I needed to record and no time to borrow a camera from someone else, so I loaded it and held my breath. It was more or less a 35mm equivalent of my old Brownie or the Holga, but shaped to look like a miniature version of a name-brand SLR so that it would look more inviting in the "This Is What You Get For Free When You Sign Up!" advertisement. There was a major problem with removing the plastic toy camera from its plastic bag and allowing it to come in contact with my skin: the photography itch that I'd been suppressing for twenty odd years flared up in a big way, and I stopped being able to ignore how badly I wanted to make photographs ... but I was stuck with this toy whose rangefinder angle of view did not match the lens, couldn't shoot close-ups, and had the wrong exposure for what I wanted to shoot most of the time. But the itch was too strong, so I kept _trying_ with the toy, until a friend saw me and took pity, offering me a choice of a point-and-shoot that would work much better than what I was using, or a 35mm SLR with the caveat that it was fully manual and didn't have a meter, but he thought he had a lens for it ... I said, "If I have to choose between control and convenience, I'll take control and deal with the learning curve," and the next time he saw me he handed me my first Pentax H3 with a 55/1.8 lens on it, and a Gossen Scout light meter (which was later stolen when my house was burgled). In between the conversation and the camera, I'd stumbled across an Olympus OM-10 with two lenses, a small flash, and an old tripod for, IIRC, $80 (and at the time I had a tiny income, as opposed to the effectively nonexistent income now), so the Pentax wasn't my first SLR, but I still wanted it because the OM-10 did not give me complete control -- I could shoot with full auto-exposure or aperture-priority, as I recall, but to go full-manual required an add-on accessory that I didn't have, and I still wanted *control*, especially since I kept finding subjects I wanted to capture which played mean tricks on the autoexposure system. So I shot both side by side until the OM-10 developed an electrical problem that would cost more than the camera was worth to repair, glad to have the control hanging from one shoulder and the convenience hanging from the other. When the shutter of the H3 jammed (actually I think the tapes attaching it to the spindle broke), I got another screwmount in a pawn shop and then more from eBay, mostly without meters. (I don't remember exactly where in the sequence the Mamiya-Sekor was, but IIRC it had a meter that I had trouble using because it wanted a pin on the aperture ring that my mostly-Pentax lenses lacked, or something, or maybe it was just flaky.) My first Spotmatic was as affordable as it was because its meter was broken. I received a pair of S1a bodies from another PDMLer (uh yeah, I found the list as a result of trying to find out more about that first H3) to use for parts to repair other bodies, but one of them turned out to be in better shape than one of the bodies I was going to try to repair. My return to the world of in-camera meters didn't happen until a KX and a working Spotmatic came my way, and automation when I was lucky enough to wind up with a K2 and a Super Program. FWIW, my preferred answer to "how do you get both convenience _and_ control" so far is the Super Program, because of the various degrees of automation available on it, though I find the K2 more enjoyable to use when I don't need the fancier modes of the Super Program. (At some point I want to replace the stolen Super Program. It's a handy body to have around.) It's likely, from everything I've read, that if I ever own an LX my answer for the best co
Re: Off the survey and onto memory lane (Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage)
Now that the subject's been changed a little, I'll reminisce ... Many Christmases ago -- thirty-two of them, I suppose -- an aunt gave me a plastic box camera. Something along the lines of a Holga, I guess, though it was actually named Pokey. I know this fer sure because I still have the lens cap. Format was 6x45. When my father noticed that the stiffness of the shutter release on said plastic toy was causing all my pictures to suffer motion blur, he lent me one of his cameras. This was a 120 folder, Monte Carlo by name, which he'd bought new in 1947. It had no meter and no focusing aids (it did have a distance scale and adjustable aperture and shutter speeds) and he set the exposure controls to a likely all-purpose combination. When I was about 13, I was also lent a selenium exposure meter and taught to read it. This also was 6x45 format. For Christmas 1979 my father gave me a Voigtlander Vito CLR (vintage early 1960s). Wow! a built-in meter. Oh. It didn't work. Wow! a rangefinder! (Well, at first that didn't work either but my dad fixed it.) I continued to use the borrowed handheld meter. At some point I unfortunately dropped the meter ... but my father was kind enough to lend me his other selenium meter for a few weeks, then gave me one of my own. In 1982 I won a cash prize in a photo competition (picture taken with Voigtlander) and spent the prize on a Pentax K1000. This was my first camera with a working in-camera meter. Part of the reason for choosing Pentax was that my father owns screwmount stuff (I also bought an adapter). Some years later the K1000 was stolen while on loan to my cousin and I replaced it with a Sears KSX Super -- my first camera with both auto- AND manual exposure. A while after that I bought an ME Super as a second camera, and haven't been without a Pentax since. As far as mechanical cameras without meters are concerned, in addition to the Voigtlander with the dead meter I own a Yashica rangefinder, a Minolta rangefinder and a Rolleiflex that never had meters. But I rarely use a meterless camera these days. Last time I did, was a few weeks ago when my father asked me to buy a Rolleiflex for him and I tested it. ERNR
Re: Off the survey and onto memory lane (Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage)
I've related many of my photographic memories here before. But since we're waxing nostalgic on this Christmas Eve, I'd like to say that my first camera was a little plastic box that I bought for $2 at Cash Erler's Cameras on 83rd and Harper in Chicago. It was September of 1958, and those two bucks represented eight weeks of allowance. The camera took 610 film and had no stops, focus or shutter speeds. A few days later I took this picture of my sister on her birthday. I don't think I ever considered shooting color film. BW was what I could afford, and Mr. Erler developed and printed it quite nicely in the back of his store. Before long I took to developing it myself and making contact prints. But this was one of the first frames on the very first roll. (My sister, who is now 58, is still camera shy :-) Paul http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2982686&size=lg
Re: Off the survey and onto memory lane (Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage)
Long ago and far away during the '46 occupation of Japan, my dad got a surplus 2 1/4 by 3 1/4 Speed Graphic in the army. He brought back some picture and the big camera & case all the stuff went in. In the '50's, he bought a Retina IIIc and the Speed Graphic didn't come out anymore. I had a box camera or two from an excentric great aunt. (She was a hippie about 60 years head of her time.) My pictures weren't great, but I talked my dad into showing me how the Speed Graphic worked. It was a marvelous contraption, Camera, bellows, light meter, ground glass, and film holders. I shot some film packets with it. They had 10 or 12 shots of sheet film and a complicated paper system that moved the exposed sheet to the back of the pack when you pulled out the paper tab. But eventually Kodak stopped making the film packets and you had to load you're own sheet film in individual holders. That pretty much ended the camera's useful life. My sister has it now. Regards, Bob S. On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:17:39 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now that the subject's been changed a little, I'll reminisce ... > > Many Christmases ago -- thirty-two of them, I suppose -- an aunt gave me a > plastic box camera. Something along the lines of a Holga, I guess, though it > was actually named Pokey. I know this fer sure because I still have the lens > cap. Format was 6x45. > When my father noticed that the stiffness of the shutter release on said > plastic toy was causing all my pictures to suffer motion blur, he lent me one > of his cameras. This was a 120 folder, Monte Carlo by name, which he'd bought > new in 1947. It had no meter and no focusing aids (it did have a distance > scale and adjustable aperture and shutter speeds) and he set the exposure > controls to a likely all-purpose combination. When I was about 13, I was also > lent a selenium exposure meter and taught to read it. This also was 6x45 > format. > For Christmas 1979 my father gave me a Voigtlander Vito CLR (vintage early > 1960s). Wow! a built-in meter. Oh. It didn't work. Wow! a rangefinder! (Well, > at first that didn't work either but my dad fixed it.) I continued to use the > borrowed handheld meter. At some point I unfortunately dropped the meter ... > but my father was kind enough to lend me his other selenium meter for a few > weeks, then gave me one of my own. > In 1982 I won a cash prize in a photo competition (picture taken with > Voigtlander) and spent the prize on a Pentax K1000. This was my first camera > with a working in-camera meter. Part of the reason for choosing Pentax was > that my father owns screwmount stuff (I also bought an adapter). > Some years later the K1000 was stolen while on loan to my cousin and I > replaced it with a Sears KSX Super -- my first camera with both auto- AND > manual exposure. A while after that I bought an ME Super as a second camera, > and haven't been without a Pentax since. > As far as mechanical cameras without meters are concerned, in addition to the > Voigtlander with the dead meter I own a Yashica rangefinder, a Minolta > rangefinder and a Rolleiflex that never had meters. But I rarely use a > meterless camera these days. Last time I did, was a few weeks ago when my > father asked me to buy a Rolleiflex for him and I tested it. > > ERNR > >
RE: Off the survey and onto memory lane (Re: Quick Survey: Mechanical Camera Usage)
Sometimes it starts all with far less than that Paul. Nice pose and picture. Markus >>contact prints. But this was one of the first frames on the very first >>roll. (My sister, who is now 58, is still camera shy :-) >>Paul >>http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2982686&size=lg >> >>
