Ha... dusting off my "back in the day" file...
Worked in a photography shop just as the first Canon Sure-Shots came out -
we sold everything from Leica through off-brand stuff. Even had a full
darkroom department. (Kids, ask your parents...)
True manual = mechanical shutter.
The Canon AE (whi
Thanks, all; I am entirely camera-ignorant, since I gave up
photography about age 11 1/2 after starting to experiment with my
mother's Brownie at about age 11 1/4. (You can verify this by the
quality of my photos onlist.)
The Olympus OM-1, Canon AE-1, and Pentax K1000 seem to be favorites.
All the
While the Pentax K1000 is the go-to beginner's manual film SLR, I had one
for many years and was never really jazzed with the results. I have my
father's Olympus OM-10 now, and it seems to produce much sharper images
than the K1000 ever did. Maybe my K was bad? Anyway, I'd recommend the
OM-10,
On Friday, May 21, 2021 at 7:34:40 AM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:
> Thanks, all; I am entirely camera-ignorant, since I gave up
> photography about age 11 1/2 after starting to experiment with my
> mother's Brownie at about age 11 1/4. (You can verify this by the
> quality of my photos onlist.)
This article may be helpful. From Blue Moon Camera’s blog in Portland, OR.
https://bluemooncameracodex.com/technical-reviews/2018/5/17/beginner-35mm-slrs
On Friday, May 21, 2021 at 1:30:46 PM UTC-7 Benz Ouyang, Sunnyvale, CA
wrote:
> On Friday, May 21, 2021 at 7:34:40 AM UTC-7 Patrick Moo
I agree, that's a good article. Will mostly parrot the others here. Started
with a Pentax K1000 and ended up with a Nikon FM before going down the
Leica hole.
FWIW, my suggestion would be look for a Nikon FM10 with a 50mm 1.8 series E
lens. Inexpensive (the body is mostly plastic) but gives qu
Benz: Thanks, good point. But I gather from superficial web browsing that
50 mm lenses for the K1000 are readily and cheaply available; and if Catie
should end up wanting others, then she can get a (real) job. Or prove to
her doting father that she is very serious about film photography (so that
sh
My advice is to get her involved in the choice to see what feels best to
her in her hands. Find a local camera store that handles used equipment and
let her try a few on for size. Some cameras will fit her hands better, or
feel lighter or heavier. Some have awkward ergonomics, quirky controls, o
Thanks, all. I've got a couple of possibilities in process; thanks again to
the offerers and to all who gave advice.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an em
A friend of mine had a K1000. I had a Canon F-1 with one of their
aftermarket super bright focusing screens. When I looked through her
viewfinder I could barely see a thing. But her photos were still much
better than mine. ;-(
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:25 PM Christopher Cote <
christopherjamesc...
I'm surprised Grant hasn't weighed in.
On Friday, May 21, 2021 at 10:45:14 AM UTC-7 peter...@gmail.com wrote:
> A friend of mine had a K1000. I had a Canon F-1 with one of their
> aftermarket super bright focusing screens. When I looked through her
> viewfinder I could barely see a thing. But
Hey all-
There have been some good suggestions on this thread. Let me throw in one
more and veer off from this (mostly) SLR discussion:
I'd recommend a nice fixed-lens rangefinder, most likely one from Japan
made in the 60s and 70s. You don't get the through-the-lens viewing of an
SLR nor the
Shawn: Would a Kodak Model 1A Autographic be a good example of a
fixed-lense range finder? I ask because someone elsewhere has tentatively
made noises about offering me one. He did not state the age (apparently it
was made for ~11 years between 1916 and 1927, and had a number of changes
to the desi
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 5:51 PM Patrick Moore wrote:
> Shawn: Would a Kodak Model 1A Autographic be a good example of a
> fixed-lense range finder?
>
> No. That looks to be a folding camera with viewfinder, not rangefinder. It
looks cool, but even if that camera works (and we're talking a century
120 mm film, and the OP says he used it, albeit long ago, to dip his feet
into photography. He has no reason to believe it no longer works.
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 6:58 PM Shawn Granton <
urbanadventurelea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 5:51 PM Patrick Moore wrote:
>
>> Shawn
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 6:05 PM Patrick Moore wrote:
> 120 mm film, and the OP says he used it, albeit long ago, to dip his feet
> into photography. He has no reason to believe it no longer works.
>
> Patrick-
Everything online about this camera says it uses 116 film, not 120. They
are similar,
Owner says 120 and so does:
https://www.mikeeckman.com/2015/08/kodak-no-1-autographic-special-model-a-1916/
Apparently they made other "special" models that took 116 mm film.
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 7:16 PM Shawn Granton <
urbanadventurelea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 6
And thanks for the links and information!
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 7:18 PM Patrick Moore wrote:
> Owner says 120 and so does:
>
>
> https://www.mikeeckman.com/2015/08/kodak-no-1-autographic-special-model-a-1916/
>
> Apparently they made other "special" models that took 116 mm film.
>
>
>
> On Sat
To mirror some comments about a range finder, I think this may also be a
good route for a beginner. There is a nice discipline in framing up with a
range finder. It feels more "real" than using an SLR. Not to say one is
better than the other, but I firmly believe think that using a rangefinder
19 matches
Mail list logo
