Untitled

Just curiosity. What makes you switch between film and digital. Is it the FD lens?

300 dollars for an FD lens, 1200 or 7k for an EF. Pluss, i feel like i should put some of my dues in. I grew up on digital and never really shot film until now.

i am not familiar with that lens, but it for sure is worth the money. Scan looks ok, but I would rather use slide film except when I want prints only.

Yee, an A1; can remember when these came out. Wanted to buy one but the price was out of reach then (1979). Guess the prices on the 400mm dropped when Canon changed the bayonet and then again when the DSLRs came out. Regards, Dieter

since the first set of film that i used with this, i have bought 3 rolls of slide. Pluss, this roll of film was only a test to see if the lens was going to live up to my expectations and to make sure nothing was screwed. The scan is ok, but only after a bit of tweaking (guess that is the norm...) since the film was handled by walgreens. Blues were way over the top, and nearly still are. I have a few more pics that were devolopted by Dwanyes that my brother is scanning. One of which is a couple of K64 slides (not birds).

 

Dieter, yeah, i always here about how amazing the A1 was... but that numerical exposure setting instead of a bug is driving me crazy... Im sure the price dropped as soon as the EF mount came out. The biggest problem though is that the converters are suppsidly useless with the FD-EF adapters. Guess i just wont shoot as much as i want to...

comments and critique are welcome and appreciated.