alfonsomartinez

My first camera was the T-50 (all black), then Canon A-1s (also all black)...then I discovered another great camera--the Canon FTb. The first FTb that I owned was a chrome/black or bi-color finish; later, I bought another FTb (all black). I do have to admit that the all-black finish tarnishes/shows brassing faster than the bi-color from the same amount of usage while the bi-color does not show the same effects over the years. "Chrome bodies were cheaper and regarded as less desirable." Interesting thought...I never considered a difference in value or perception due to its finish--always assumed every Canon FTb (despite it finish) performed as any other. Personally, I like the all-black finish. One day...I would love to 500mm f4.5L lns for birding....one day!

I bought my first digital camera last year--Canon 5D, which I replaced it with a Canon 6D. I still prefer to shoot 35mm film and use the digital as backup--though I sometimes use the digital first then film. It depends on what I am doing or intend to do. Digital cameras have come a very long way from their "fuzzy" beginnings--I am amazed how well they capture the scene today--for me, I still prefer the quality of film. I found this discourse to be very interesting to read--it contained a few main threads running along side or entwined throughout it. I was sadden the day that Canon announced they were ending the EOS 1V production and decided to divest themselves from their 35mm film technology to further their aims into their digital technologies, which from a business perspective I fully respect. As a 35mm film consumer and camera buyer--I'm glad that the Canon 35mm products are very plentiful in the "Used" camera environments. The discussion portions of this discourse regarding Kodak reminded me when they announced they were stopping the production of Kodak Gold 100 ISO 35mm film, whereas it forced me to start buying their Kodak Ektar 100 film and using more Gold 200. After I ran out Gold 100--I thought at that time, it was a business decision to reduce their production costs to stay in business since it was reported the Gold 100 had the lowest market share in the US. I used Gold 100 a lot where it was great for day-time shooting recreationally. Kodak Ektar 100 is great film IMO and better than Gold but I am more judicious in its use now. So it will be interesting to see what Kodak does in regards to it film production and their market expectations--wonder what is their next move after re-introducing Gold 200 for 120 format? Kodak and Fujifilm are still adapting to the ever-changing photographic markets--just like Pentax and Ricoh. I know that Canon continues to stay ahead of Sony (#2) and Nikon (#3) in market shares where Ricoh and Pentax are not in the top five or top ten. So, it makes sense what others have stated and expect from Ricoh & Pentax to do in the next few years. Will 35mm film usage ever end?...probably not any time soon since it is the core and the heart of photography, which the digital technology always has to compare itself to. I have never been much to following fads since I am one who walks to my own "drum beat"--so reading about the "resurgence" of 35mm film is interesting (alongside with the resurgence in LPs in the audiophile realm, which I still enjoy using my Dual players and albums). From my point of view since I never left the 35mm film arena, to attribute the fascination and resurgence of 35mm & MF 120 film to some celebrities' using film cameras and their fandom's adoption for it (as I previously read in some articles) is like believing social media represents our national opinion--it does not; hence, they ignore the merits of 35mm film and the quality and essence of it. I tend to believe these new adherents are discovering what we already do and know (and they love it). As far as I can see (from my personal perspective), no digital MF camera has duplicated what Ansel Adams did in his timeless B&W photographs of Yosemite, Oak tree, the dunes, or trees in winter (amazing works of art). I really enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts in this thread...thanks guys for sharing!!

Not really...just more comfortable and change of season with new growth and awakenings with fresh colors! I usually shoot with my Canon 6D with one of my Canon A-1's or Kodak Retina IIIc's on my side most of the time. I also often take one of my Canon A-1s with one of my Canon FTb's for B&W. [Depending on what I want to do...] I also own the Canon T-90's and two Canon EOS 1's that I take out to play with from time to time. I prefer to use the smaller well-constructed cameras like the A-1 or Retina IIIc. For example, I sold my Canon 5D to get the 6D--I have been happier with the 6D since it does everything I need to do. As awesome the EOS-1D X Mark III is, I would not enjoy using it--too bulky and hefty. I prefer the A-1 over the T-90 for the same reasons--though the T-90s are great cameras (IMO--the one of the best 35mm film cameras around! ...understand that I do enjoy using them too). My favorite T-90 is with the Canon Data Memory Back 90, since it records the exposure settings per shot.No more writing down exposure notes while shooting when using this combo where I can later go through the memory and write down the info for each frame taken when I get home instead of in situ. [Wish that Canon had created one for the A-1!!!] I plan to use the T-90s more this year. [i have a third one that I recently replaced to have two functioning T-90s due to it suffering from the dreaded EEE error--not sure if these are repairable these days.]

Here are my t-90s that I am shooting to play with them again... With the onset of spring, time to take some great photos... More to come...

I asked the same question myself--but learning to master the Kodak Retina IIIc cameras, which EV is a dial for setting the camera. This chart was helpful for me in understanding about EV. Here’s a table showing the EV of different shutter speeds and apertures combinations:

Lens: 50mm/f:2 AV: f/5.6 TV: 500 EV: 14 Lens: 80mm/f:4 AV: f/8 TV: 250 EV: 14

Finally, I have some time to update this posting. I took my Kodak Retina out (and from on it is now my tag-along camera!) for testing using E100 film last summer. Here are four photos from that roll. I went to the President Bush National Library nd Museum (College Station, TX) and shot a test roll to gauge if the selenium meter is working. Good news--in daytime it is spot on. Early morning and late evening--it is off by an 1/2EV. (Guess that's expected.) Lens: 50mm/f:2 AV: f/8 TV: 250 EV: 14 Lens: 50mm/f:2 AV: f/4 TV: 500 EV: 13

I am in College Station, TX

Howdy! Has anyone used the ARS-IMAGO LAB-BOX 2 Module Kit where you do not need a darkroom or a changing bag to load the film into it? I use the Paterson System 4, which you have to remove unexposed negative film from the cartridge and load the reels and then into the developing tank. This new type of kit sounds great but has anyone used this type of kit and what do you think of it? The good and the bad...

I have two Canon FTb cameras, which I solely use Wein Cell PX625 PX13 Mercury Free 1.35V batteries. The user's manual clearly states 1.35V battery should be used for it's constant level of voltage. These are a perfect fit and you should avoid using the alkaline batteries unless your camera has been modded for 1.5V batteries. Actually you do not need a battery to use the camera unless you want use the camera's exposure meter to function. You can use a light meter to help you instead of installing a battery. My FTb camera's exposure meters are spot on for as old as they are--so I do not need a hand-held light meter.

From Chris Sherlock web site, "The final change in exposure meters was the move to a single range meter in July 1957. This meter had film speed settings from ASA 5 to ASA 1300 and is identical in style with that fitted to the later IIIC, Retina IB, Retina Reflex and the Retinette IIB. The alloy casting and chrome flap were replaced with a plastic moulded meter housing. Cameras with the new single range meter are found from serial number 722045. With this change the IIIc was now known as a type 021 Ausf. II." In addition, the user's manual had an extra page of instructions added between the cover and the first page...see the photos: The front side of the added page: The back side of the added page: Otherwise, the rest of the manual is the same any other Retina IIIc guide. The exposure meter so far is just -0.5 EV in all initial tested reflected lighting scenes. I think this pretty darn good for a 65 year camera! Cannot wait for the harsh winter weather that is bogging down Texas to clear out...I cleaned up both Kodak Retina cameras and ready to go shooting with newly arrived film!

Well...I could not resist this one... Cannot wait to take this one out for some picture taking too! The initial function/feature tests did well as well as the exposure meter. So I will confirm this when I test both cameras after this winter weather clears up.

I grew up in a small town in South Texas, so we had to to go to Corpus Christi, TX for the camera stores [circa the 70s-80s]. I seem to remember that they were three stores but since I was going to the beach most times anyway, I would do a quick stop at Ritz Camera in the mall to get film (if I ran out or forgot). Not sure what is there now these days. Where I live now there are none.

As I wait for my new film to arrive, the Schneider Kreuznach Retina-Longar-Xenon C f:4/80mm lens had a lot of internal dust and "spots". It was quickly disassembled (in the front two-thirds) and the lenses cleaned up quite nicely. However, I need to gain access past the spring-loaded section of the lens mount. Does anyone have the specs on doing that? Do I just remove the three screws that attach the small lens to the spring-loaded black section of the lens? Just curious if any one has cleaned up these type of lenses before...they are pretty easy to work on versus the more modern types.

The intention is to determine if the use of the camera's exposure meter is viable for use by matching it to the light meter. If the camera's meter is functional but it is consistently off by the same close range...then I can use the camera's meter with some measure of confidence by always offsetting by the same discovered settings. Then monitor the meter's performance by seeing the scans later. I am amazed that the photoelectric meter is functioning after 67 years--awesome engineering for sure! I have seen many listings for Retina IIIc's where they state the meter is inoperative. So thank you all for your comments--you guys are a great source of information and ideas!