Jump to content

Am I mad


graham_thompson1

Recommended Posts

I left photography some 30 odd years ago. My last camera was an F with photomic head.

I had 3 primes a 24 a 50 and I think a 135 probably the 3.5 because it was cheaper.

I did my own processing and I was happy. I came back into it a few months ago with a D300

a 12-24, a 16-85 and a 105 2.8 macro. Aquired a 10.5 2.8 cheap.

All this did was make me a grumpy old man. Photoshop this,megapixels that and endless is this better than that.

So I have part exchanged it all (BIG LOSS!) and am going to London on Monday to collect ... wait for it an F6 with a 50 1.4.

I will choose another lens or two in the shop (Please feel free to offer comments on this)

Already I am a happy little teddy. I will shoot only B&W.I care not about megapixels,leica glow,photoshop plug ins etc.

I am film! Don't even want a MD40. One frame a minute suits me. I am free and where I belong.

Most of all the thought of it makes me feel content. It is a hobby which I enjoy and as Frank sang. "I did it my way".

F6 owners - we are the chosen people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feh!<p>

 

You prefer film? Fine. But all of the endless testing and comparing is hardly new with digital. <i>Modern Photography</i> used to get endless letters questioning their lens test procedures. "My Planar can resolve 200 l/mm..." "Oh yeah? Well my Summilux..." Photoshop is a tool, like an enlarger. <p>

 

If you only like b/w and shoot at one frame/minute why not get a Hasselblad or a Mamiya 6x7? You would get much better results than 35mm, and lose nothing in portability or workflow.<p>

 

Les

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham, you should do what gives you the most pleasure in photography.

 

The rest of it - the expensive toys, the software, learning new tricks, online forum debates, worrying what other folks we don't even know think about what we think and about our photos - it's all just stuff. If it doesn't add to your enjoyment of photography, then it's a burden and best discarded.

 

A few years ago after having tried watercolors for several years I decided to "get serious" about painting and tried oils. Tried for a couple of years and dozens of paintings. I didn't like it, wasn't any good at it, wasn't enjoying painting anymore. I ditched the oils and kept my watercolors. I'm still not a good painter, but at least I'm enjoying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The problem isn't digital photography, it is the nonsense on these types of forums."

 

Very well put, Ellis.

 

I find my bit of contentment in being happy with what I have. While I don't detest technology, I often find it

disheartening, reading of those who have expectations of gear that isn't worthy unless it produces impeccable

images at iso 3200, 5 fps and the bragging rights of $2K. glass.

 

I used to be like a kid on Christmas eve waiting for that box of slides to be processed, and thrilled that 2 or

3 made it all worthwhile.

 

Look at where we have come. What were we complaining about ten years ago?

 

That coolpix 950?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still shoot film as well. Even though I invested in a Nikon digital kit (D200), I kept my Canon T90 and my L glass because I

like it. When I go out with the film kit, I feel light and unencumbered and picture taking is reduced to its most basic

elements. When I shoot digital (which admittedly is the big majority of my work), it turns into just another job that has to be

done (with a mental check list a mile long to make sure the myriad of settings are where they need to be).

 

Do what you like to do for as long as you can afford to do it. Life's too short for it all to be work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will your anger accomplish? Purchase the gear you are comfortable with for photography.

 

I shot film from 1977 to 2001 and made the changeover. It was frustrating at first to learn, but now at 50 years old, I like it.

 

Complaining will not solve your dilemma. However, what works for you and following a plan will.

 

Nice comments Ellis and Elliot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand your frustration, Graham. I still shoot film, a lot. But I have got my D200 and love everything about it. If

anything, it does help me learn photography faster. In addition, so much one can do with digital that one could not

do easily with film. Also I think my digital helps to improve my film work. That alone is well worth the effort. Lots to

learn, for sure. But I am a happy little teddy everytime I learn something. BTW, the folks on Photo.net are very

helpful. I just learned how to partially decolour a picture from the Digital Forum. And tonight, I am working on

moving the Rocky Mountains to my backyard, digitally of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham, did someone forget to tell you (maybe you didn't read the manual) that you can:

 

- shoot only B&W

 

- shoot one frame a minute

 

- And do it your way with the D300 (I have one)

 

I guess the D300 was too much of a camera for you. Instead of an F6 you could have gotten an F50 (value today $50).<div>00RUQe-88433584.jpg.c0fa1ee237dbd44a33c7afaebaacb465.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was shooting film before the Nikon F was born. Two years ago bought a used D100. Within a year had sold my F4 and F3HP and my Mamiya C220. Now have a D300 and one FM body just in case. Have3n shot a roll of film in over a year and have absolutely no inclinition to go back to the "Good old Days." But, different strokes for different folks. That's what makes the world interesting. Hope you enjoy the F6.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

who's fault is it that the OP laid out a wad of cash for a lot of gear he didn't know anything about, and then, since a miracle didn't occur when he pressed the shutter button, he sold it all at a big loss? one really should be a little more circumspect, a bit less impetuous, when making a large capital outlay. ah, but he has learned something: he's a grumpy old man. the self-discovery thing is vastly underrated, don't you think?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bruce - sorry did not make it clear I have kept the 105 2.8.

Ian - thanks point noted.

Andy - yes the D300 was just to much camera for me! So why buy an F6 and not an F50 - because it's there and I have enough money to do so and it is better quality and I like quality.

Nice shot by the way Andy.

Songstem - as Leica people think the are the chosen ones - I think Nikon! Let's find the nikon superglow!

Now I don't care about the new D700x or whatever!

Aaron - spot on.

Lex (p c) Right as always and my hero. Always talks sense.

Steven. Your first line - agree.

Now where I do need some advice is on lens numbers 3 and 4.

I have the 50 1.4 which was part of the deal.

I have kept the 105 2.8 macro

The wide end. 14-24 0r 17-35?

Do landscapes and macro.

As for which is best film or digital - dont care - I am happy.

I shall shoot B&W and process my own and may need some help and advice on that - film and chemicals no doubt have changed over 30 years.

Finally any advice and I mean advice not film v digital v whatever patricularly on the lens choice, the F6 (from owners) and B&W processing in general would be most welcome and appreciated. Thanks all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham, notwithstanding that you have already made a huge loss, the 50mm f/1.4 is a bit of a sucker's lens. The

f/1.8 is almost universally agreed to be better except at f/1.4 and possibly f/1.8.

 

They sold you this puppy because there is a new f/1.4 with 9 rounded blades which I believe is going to be the

greatest of all - at least in terms of resolution power, and also with killer bokeh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...