witold_grabiec

April 13, 2014

I'll only say that you either misread manufacturer recommendation or manufacturer was drunk at the time of posting it.

I have no Foma experience so this may not be of much worth to you, but if you are looking for a decent negative you can't shoot with a 2-stop swing within single roll and expect equal results on all frames (which is what "no time adjustment" implies). If you are only looking to get something on it, then nearly any time/temp combination will give you that, consequently make an adjustment (or not) and see what you get. However, standard 2 stop push requires development adjustment between 30 to 100% (not possible to judge more accurately without testing). But it sounds like you've never tested this film at its native ISO and went out pushing it another 2-stops, hence results are probably not of high importance here.

Chromogenic films (like XP-2) were and are a different matter, but that is not the question here.

April 4, 2014

On Nikon 35Ti below was said

1. arguably the best lens ever in a compact, rivaling their standard slr lenses of that day 2. very good AF functionality (833 step) 3. six segment matrix 3D metering 4. NIC coating 5. many exposure control modes 6. mystique of a titanium body, quartz date, cool analog display on top deck and custom functions ...

all made it a stand out and an eventual cult classic, of sorts.

</blockquote>

Hardly any of above made it a stand out, unless you go through paid-for tests and input from those who overspent (just like Nikkors were never as much of a stand out as many would want others believe). I'd further say that Nikon 35Ti was the beginning of what we've seen for a decade now with most digital: spec, spec, spec, followed by price, price, price (ever higher for each added (and often useless) spec. So show me the evidence that it's "superior" specs translated into better photography. It should never sell for more than a third, but people go blind quick on hype alone.

April 4, 2014

Not sure if anyone said this, but I say look through some well established names in photography that cover your photographic interests and compare your results to theirs from composition stand point (meaning forget technical matters for a moment). This may allow you to give your images a direction you can work with.

I'm a hard core traditionalist when it comes to developing photographic skills and am against a lot of "digital" advice I see everywhere. Not necessarily because it isn't worth anything, but because it distorts due process needed to build a comfortable relationship between you, camera and the subject(s). But as many have already stated, this is about the commitment to a medium that isn't often as rewarding as we would have liked. I am afraid however, that you may have invested in a system (your gear) not in a process, and it may take a little more than just a renewed commitment to continue. Rewards are out there though ... and worth it.

March 31, 2014

To successfully sue someone, at least in the U.S., you generally need to show that you suffered a financial loss or some other form of damage. I don't see where you've suffered a financial loss, so the issue would most likely be whether the painting is defamatory to you in some way.

</blockquote>

Since when is copyright only about loss and/or damage? Is every unauthorized use equal to loss or damage? I don't see how this could possibly be the case.

If I have not given a permission to use my image and/or oppose such later on (if no permission had yet been granted), then he/she has no right to use it in any way shape or form.

I hope you're not implying that I can take somebody's image and do whatever I like with it, so long as I avoid causing loss or damage to the party (which are defined how?). I see no such possibility, or perhaps my principles are just dead wrong and I've been missing out big time.

March 31, 2014

Well, does sound like "the getting closer" advice is the right one. If that's the case, then the whole problem lies in how people are taught photography today, with photo editor or other manipulation software being the major part of it. They are tools that can be used to ones' advantage, can produce stunning results, but the picture ought to be taken right to start with. That said:

Start with getting everything as close as possible to your intended image IN CAMERA, might be the way to go.

March 31, 2014

Check not necessarily your AUTO overall setting, but the ISO setting, If this ISO is also in AUTO, then here is your first problem. Camera will you use an algorithm that most of the time will prioritize ISO over anything else, leading to use of high ISO, often unnecessarily so. Change the ISO to say 400 indoor and compare results (look at what shutter speed your camera is giving you for this. If image stabilization is ON, then you can safely hand hold for down 1/15s (unless your holding technique is lacking). If you can take down ISO to 200, even better. If after this test you see an improvement, you have your first case solved. But there is a lot more to properly exposed image.

March 31, 2014

Understanding light & reflection types are critical to any type of table top photography. Without getting the principles right, your results will continue as a hit & miss exercise.

I know this is not a direct answer, but I don't think such would be most beneficial to you.

I suggest <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Light-Science-Magic-Introduction-Photographic/dp/0240812255/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1396261036&sr=8-3&keywords=lighting+in+photography">this book</a> to get you going in the right direction. It does NOT deal with digital or film, but specifically focuses on lighting alone. It may not have images of ship models, but should be more than helpful in finding your own way around the subject, buy use of lights, screens etc. There are clearly explained principles of everything you need to know.

March 31, 2014

Should tell us more about the intended use. If a wide angle is something you are looking for, then outside of 10-22 (or similar mix) is hardly an option and the Canon EFS 10-22 is indeed quite good, although I'm not sure if worth the money they want for it now.

From Canon end, the pancake 40/2.8 STM is really good for what it costs, in fact I'd say it performs more like at least a double priced one.

March 31, 2014

If you are after developing your photographic skills, then get Lens Work and B+W Photography (UK

magazine). If all you care about is photo editor controls, then I think magazines are a near total waste of

money (given their pricing, repetitious content, limited focus etc.). Get some books books instead, so you

can follow through from one topic to another and back again within same pub.

March 24, 2014

Well, this is a beginner forum. Avoiding bad habits is always important, at least in my book. We can have opinions and that is OK. I still say my comment on the "old way" is being taken out of context.

You guys continue to tell Matt that it is perfectly OK to just keep shooting and then see what was recorded and go from there. In other words, get out in the field, pull out the machine gun and fire away, then see how many chicken you shot (or see on the monitor how many you can make look that way).

I say: it is a really bad advice.

My reference to "old" way meant: SLOW DOWN.

No matter what kind of film is used (35mm or large format) it is a very slow pace by digital standard. And there are countless cases of how mastering of editing software makes absolutely NO difference in the final photograph (Scott Kelby being the front runner in this regard, a man who's all over Amazon, magazines and bookstores, a man who without a doubt knows every screw in Photoshop, a man who sells by millions, and also a man who made it all happen by showing an average output at best).

So here is my advice to Matt:

1. when it comes to software stay low key, keep it simple and deliberately limiting (Picasa does that on several fronts for free, it has a good enough organizer, it allows for some editing, it provides some fun features to give them a try, and most importantly: it has a very low learning curve so you get your photo on screen in little time for evaluation of how you did or what you like)

2. learn from actual master's of photography who are, mostly, not the ones you see on front pages of photo magazines these days (for magazines try the Black + White Photography, not necessarily for its B&W focus, but for good examples of well composed images)

3. if you have not done so, try converting some of your images to B&W and see how they appeal to you, again not necessarily to switch to B&W, but to evaluate your images, while color image is governed by different rules as it is the color composition that often makes or breaks it, B&W view relates to tonal contrast and subject spacial relation that, at least to me, can improve your skill of seeing the subject in a 3-D space, this further engages you in playing with perspective and depth of field (an important aspect any aspiring photographer should have a full control of)

4. try shooting at least 3 kinds of subjects:

<ul>

<li>landscape (for a vast view of space and general difficulty of making it worthy)</li>

<li>street (for necessity to make quick decision, where light, subject spacial relation and depth of field are critical components)</li>

<li>still life/close ups (with sterile environment where you can place your objects wherever you choose, lit them however you please, develop your SLOW pace approach)</li>

</ul>

I deliberately left portraits out of the above. If you have a cooperative model then surely do it as well, but often times portraiture difficulties come from the subject more than photographer and may become a distracting experience in developing your skills.

March 24, 2014

To ask the question Wouter implied: Why? Why can't people do it any way they want? You don't hang your approach on the wall, you don't post your approach on the internet. You post your results. Why can't people get there whatever way they like?

</blockquote>

Don't take my comment out of context. The "old" way forced people to think ahead, the "new" way often does not because it is an advertised crap shoot more often than not, the advertised burst mode performance, the capacity of a single memory card etc. This was simply NOT possible in the film days. Sure you could bracket and shoot a few rolls, but that was not even beginning to approach what today is a norm. Not everyone shoots by a thousand, but looking at what people are talking about with relation to basic editing tells me that few see the shot before it happens. So I think my reference to the "old" way fits the crime.

That was what I said.

March 24, 2014

Thanks Gus for the great input. Looks like I'll need to dig in a bit beyond just dismounting the lever.

March 23, 2014

Money talks everywhere these days, well ... always has. I won't dismiss photos just because they were shot with a phone (1020 is actually quite capable, even 920 is quite good), but this sounds like Nokia sponsored program. Typically you should expect top price gear in use, so they can feel like they got all they could out of the session.

March 23, 2014

Lamberto, You can have the Wein cell for a one-off try but it is way too expensive long term. For relatively low cost alternative you have the guy in Netherlands who sells a ready made adapter that takes readily available SR44 silver oxide batteries. It costs 16 euors shipped. There are cheaper options, but you would have to hunt ebay for a bit. These are actually voltage lowering adapters (just like the C.R.I.S.), but because of how they are built (unlike C.R.I.S.) they are an exact match size/height wise as the actual PX625 cell. His email is: battery.adapter@online.nl, His name is Frans. He will send you a pdf file on how to order it. Payments through PayPal and he mails it as regular mail (adapter is hardly detectable inside a regular envelope). And it will fit any camera that takes PX625, so it could be a future investment too.

March 23, 2014

Jeff,

Given current prices what you have might be worth a self repair attempt, but getting a replacement might be cheaper. However, in Minolta line up of the era you have the SRT, XE and XD that are superior to XG line. But the XG is just as capable for picture taking.

March 23, 2014

Crop factor or not, the relatively new <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-40mm-2-8-STM-Lens/dp/B00894YP00/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1395607283&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+ef+40%2F2.8">Canon pancake 40/2.8 STM</a> is probably the way to go due to relative low price and very good performance. My second choice would be 50/1.8, good performer but I never could swallow its plastic "armored" body. Zooms in the same price range are not going to make things any better. BTW, I disagree the original Canon kit lens was much good, it suffered from inconsistent quality control as there were too many below average examples (plus an overall crappy built quality). My eye sight was getting fuzzy every time I was trying to read the Canon name printed on it.

March 23, 2014

Just wanted to comment on the battery issue. It surely makes it easier to go with the body that takes silver oxide widely available by design. But the PX625 and similar mercury ones can be easily replaced (if one does not want go through meter recalibration and not all cameras are actually voltage dependent). Solutions can be had for far less than the rediculously priced C.R.I.S. adapter you see mentioned everywhere.

March 23, 2014

The Minolta XE is strange case of being relatively unknown, especially given its quality and Leica connection. The typically talked about source of info for all Minolta manual gear is the rokkorfiles.com, where there is no mention of this line (or I cannot find it). Why it's a mistery to me. Once you use your SRT add another 20-30% to the feel of it to imagine the XE. Both lines however have fantastic feel, looks and built quality. The shape of the pentaprism housing alone is a standout.

To be fair to Minolta there was also the XD line (running side by side with XG line), the beginning of superb electronic sophistication that ended with the X line (with the unfortunate discontinuation of the XE/XD shutter). But we're talking leds in the finder now.

March 23, 2014

Lamberto,

You are correct, it is not worth taking a risk when the price itself is already closing in on the set budget. I only mentioned it, because when a price does look like a deal, then the risk may be worth it.

I'm sure you'll enjoy the SRT. I have 2 Prakticas myself (and surely not the end of that road either) and I like and respect them, especially given their contribution to the development of photographic equipment (many don't even talk about it or give them credit for, those who describe them in a down right derogatory language have surely never actually handled them). But the SRT next to it is just another story.

March 23, 2014

Matt, I'm afraid you have become the victim of what photography has recently been pushing with strong support of publishing industry, manufacturers and advise of the many who had already fallen into this trap. It used to be that taking a photo required some skill development and especially building ones' ability to see the scene prior to releasing the shutter. Not too many options of "removing" unwanted stuff existed (and none effective or attractive), so people who cared about outcome paid attention to seeing that shot before it even happened. Now it's the "new" way, keep on shooting then see what can be done with it. The skill of seeing "before" became the norm of seeing well "after", and I'm not even certain it is "seeing" at all. When you ask about a photo editor, I say go with Picasa and here is why: 1. it costs nothing to try and is easy to learn 2. has decent set of auto correction tools with some interesting add ons 3. has actually a very easy and effective on-image texting tool 4. if used correctly it will retain your original file and keep your edits in copies 5. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY due to very limited options (by comparison to PS) it will force you to take the right photo, better exposed (perhaps even better composed), and possibly make you think of the image the way it should have been thought of to begin with. 6. I'll also add that because it is meant for simple editing and mostly in a form of auto or semi-auto tools, it will get you quickly to a point of seeing an image after being corrected, cropped, trimmed, which in turn may show you the difference between the original and how (for example) re-framing changed the way it looks. This means improving on your past performance and mistakes. I keep saying this over and over: if one wants to do photography, the old traditional approach should be the goal. If one wants to get into creative digital post processing, than shoot however you like, get the most powerful photo editor there is, invest in Scott Kelby's (crap) books, and after a length of time see, if you like the results. (This however could potentially be very discouraging due to the learning curve, so it is still better to start with a low key photo editor, then upgrade when need arises). If fantastic images were possible a century ago (with equipment that most of today digital shooters don't even understand how it recorded an image), than there is nothing to stop anyone from doing same with minimal gadgetry of today.

March 23, 2014

Also, how are you getting the images off the film to inspect? Scanning?

</blockquote>

Have I missed it or have you not addressed this question? If you evaluate from scans than there is an extremely good chance this is indeed your problem.

As stated already, Zuiko lenses are in the upper class of vintage glass and unless you have a hazed up lemon, it is not your problem.

Leica will most certainly never fix the issues you are describing. You can bet that so long as your system is based on the well known several brands (Canon, Nikon Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, Konica, Ricoh, Yashica, Chinon, even Praktica and a few others) and working correctly, your dissatisfaction with produced images lies within the technique.

I personally have several systems (and getting more), but that's because I've taken the craze pill and keep on buying the great pieces produced over several decades of meaningfully rewarding manufacturing quality. Good thing is, THAT quality is long gone, so once I swallow up the few more, I'll be done with acquisitions.

Enjoy your Oly.

March 23, 2014

Gus,

You are correct, one should be able to wind on immediately after exposure. There is a problem which a short delay solves, for whatever reason. I'll make sure to report back if and when I get this sorted. It does not prevent picture taking, but it is an annoyance.

March 23, 2014

not cameras which have not been tested with film, or sold by people who say "I am not expert with these things

</blockquote>

Lamberto,

While it is true many of these do try to sell a lemon, don't completely rule it out as you may be passing a deal of a century. Surely you do take a gamble when buying from such, but there are still those who actually have found themselves holding a grandpa's film camera yet never having taken a pic with anything but a supermarket branded digital spatula. My recent deal costing me $100 that included 2 Minolta bodies (SRT 101 & EX-1) + 3 Rokkor lenses with some add ons and all in great cosmetic and fully working condition is a testament to such opportunities still existing.

I understand your desire to take on a bayonet system, in which only Minolta and Pentax K is a cost effective option (Minolta due to it still not having been discovered, by many, as an often superior option to many Nikon and Canon offerings, and Pentax K due to more than one brand adopting the mount). Also the aperture priority comes in handy at times, but doesn't shooting film feel real good when you actually slow down? For fast street film shooting perhaps you could consider one of the many rangefinders from Konica, Fuji, Minolta or Yashica. They cost not too much (most well below $50), lenses are first grade and most offer automation.

Lastly, the cameras we are suggesting here may be old, but their built quality is like none other in at least a couple of decades. Quality of manufacture is no longer about making a long lasting product. Not to mention their look and feel makes you wanna take time enjoying it. Your Praktica is actually a good product capable of quality photography, but your SRT is going to be a refreshing experience in mechanical quality, and there have been reported cases of individuals salivating over the feel of a Minolta EX.

March 22, 2014

1. Minolta SRT 102 has split screen and I'd say brighter finder (but if you want ML, check as they exist only on some bodies of 102), these are great and my recent acquisition of EX models have only surpassed them in overall feel and quality (even if I'm facing some minor fixes to bring them to full speed)

I'm not sure why bayonet is on your priority list as M42 will give a ton of lens choices you'll never get with any bayonet and this sort of negates your other wish for a "system that accepts nice lenses" (not to say there isn't a bayonet system with such lenses). M42 isn't as fast to switch lenses and perhaps does not feel as secure, but boy, do you have a choice in lenses in M42?

2. Back to my No. 1: Minolta system will give you a hoard of top notch lenses you can hardly beat (and the price is still right, even now) and a line up of bodies (especially the SRT and EX line with your preferred match needle meters).

Also, and this applies to ANY brand, if you're looking for a lens to add to your arsenal, it is often cheaper to find a body with that lens attached.

I'll stick to above although there are more choices meeting your list. I really like the Spotmatics too, but again that "bayonet" is an M42.

March 22, 2014

Ah, Steve has it correctly stated that the short jam happens when advance is attempted immediately after shutter release.

Secondly, thanks Gus for your input, it seems to make sense just as well.

I've been busy with other stuff recently, so have had no chance to try a fix yet, and it will take even longer before I can. But thanks for the input which along with the copy of repair manual should take care of the problem. I have another body of EX that suffers from similar problems but less frequently, so it all makes sense even more. These are fantastic cameras and will put them into hard use soon enough.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by witold_grabiec