jose f.

Buy your $4,000 worth of gear in Oregon. No sales tax, and it's right next to Washington.

That's a very nice little lens, but I don't see many offered at $300; at that price for a clean one I'd be interested. Any leads.

Well, PS will give you a chance to correct your print, but you'll want to be doing the best-balanced negative you can. That's a great scanner; hope you have a good printer to match it.

Fog tends to fool even incident meters because there's so much reflectance from the damp air. Sometimes closing down a half stop from the incident meter reading gives pretty satisfactory results.

 

Given that you're using a negative film, I have to ask how consistently your lab/whatever is printing. You might try taking your favorite negative back and asking the shop to print it just a little darker. Does the Elan 7E offer auto-bracketing?

People praise lenses that allow them to meet their goals. In many instances, that's one lens that 'does everything' or an image that is available instantly. And yes, image quality frequently is a lesser priority. Remember, that in all cases, sweeping generalizations are always wrong.

Looks like R&T's art direction has taken a few steps backward in the past decade or two. If you are buying Grand Prix tickets, try for one of the classic circuits like Spa or Monaco; there is a major difference in the atmosphere and experience.

There are a few reputable tour companies in the UK offering packages at much less than Grand Prix Tours, even factoring in air fare etc. You could inquire on some of the race fan boards.

The writing about Eggleston -- or for that matter, most photographers -- is often inane enough to bore the ears off a gargoyle. Don't know that I'd even read what he's written about himself. But if you study Eggleston's photos and try to get into his point of view, the thought process that led to making that picture, at that angle, in that light, it starts to unfold. Szarkowski, Coleman et al might be the wrong route. I'll have to go look up Vestal's PT column.

There were a half-dozen such magazines at the time. 'Twen' is one title I can remember.

Not so far away from Scranton is the East Broad Top, at Rockhill Furnace, Pa., which is the last surviving original narrow gauge east of the Rockies.

 

http://www.spikesys.com/EBT/visiting.html

Imagine the difficulties of explaining why you're dressed like a surveyor when you ain't. Seems like the plot would thicken pretty quickly.

 

Blending in seems to be the most effective strategy, though wielding a camera on a public street works against it. For most people, cameras are for holidays, birthday parties and papparazzi.

Amateur Photographer (UK) did an unenthusiastic review. The finder is really nice and the lens is good, but... no improvement over a Yashica 124 or a Minolta Autocord, which sell for the same or less. The build quality of mine was not very confidence-inspiring, and I was happy to see it go away while it was still working.

Will they show show you a sample so you can look for the watermark on the back? Has to be someone else's project, repackaged. A couple local stores here have sample books that show you how prints look on different papers. I like an Epson semi-matte or Ilford pearl finish myself. Back when I lived in Idaho, Inkleys carried good stocks, but that's before they got swallowed up.

Hmm. I have this image of a windblown lot in the New Mexico desert, the sun beating down on row upon row of bleached-out Leica SLRs amid the sagebrush, waiting to be cannibalized for parts to keep other Leicas flying.....

Sounds like you're answering your own question... what you haul will depend on your situation. Two wides seem redundant, and if you'd been out along the line instead of the museum, you would have wanted the 180. The tripod is always nice to have when the light starts to drop. For me, anything bigger than a Domke F3X or an F6 holds more gear than I want to carry along. Four lenses is almost more than I can keep track of. The Nikon 75-150E/f3.5 is a very useful lens around trains, and weighs half of the 180/2.8.

Going to an RF isn't going to be a cheap cure for a squinty finder. You would need to go for something like a Leica M2/M4/M4-2 or a Minolta CLE. There are some bright screens for the Nikon F2 and F3, and prices on them have plummeted.

 

Way back when, Honeywell changed my Spot Fs to split-image screens. The eyepiece used to scratch up my glasses like crazy.

If you never use a slide-on accessory shoe or eyecup, you can have a tech improve the eyepiece by grinding it down so it isn't as deep. There's not much hope for the metering unless you use an eyecup or wear a hat all the time.

Sure do. 1972 at Karl's Cameras in Parkersburg, W.Va. I desperately needed a decent camera for my first job out of college -- which I finished with a very used car and $35 in my checkbook. Karl, bless him, took 10% down and monthly installments for a year.

These have been out for several years in various forms, with a new release scheduled for Photokina this fall. Search the archives for 'Bessa R' and 'Bessa R2' and you'll have enough reading material to last a week. Also look at Cameraquest.com.

Sounds like old Pentax syndrome; meter drift and incorrect shutter speeds. The meters can't always be economically revised, but a technician familiar with mechanical cameras can clean it and set the speeds. Any replacement K1000 you find is going to be about the same. If you don't want to put the money into it, a ZX-M might be a good replacement.

The Cabin Loupe is fine. Mine came with opaque and translucent hoods, plus a cap and a lightweight neck strap. It certainly isn't headache-inducing like the 8x acrylic loupes. Think I spent about $60 US on it five or six years ago. I use the Schneiders and Rodenstocks at work, and there isn't all that much difference.

Were I to buy a 35 mm lens specifically for use on a Leica-type thread mount camera, my pick would be the Canon 35/1.8, which unfortunately isn't included in your 3-way comparison. I figure it offers the best balance of quality barrel construction, sharpness, availability and price. Second choice would probably be the standard CV 35/2.5. The Nikon 35/2.5 is a real bugger to set apertures on, and good examples still go for more than $200.

Absolutely nothing going on at work tonight, so I looked at KEH's list for Olympi. The 28 and 75-150 are each available at well under $100; there's also a Vivitar 75-150 listed which has a good reputation. It's your money but there seems to be no reason to mess with the Kalimar etc. The point above about faster lenses (which give you a brighter focusing screen) is a good one. KEH are highly reputable and 'bargain' or better lenses are fine.

 

Nice peppers.

They might be cheap enough to buy and fool around with, but unless collector fever has struck, many used Olympus lenses for the OM series are inexpensive.

 

Look at www.keh.com to get a feeling for prices. I expect you'd see better quality pictures from a 28 + 75-150 combination; a friend uses both lenses and gets excellent results.

After reading for eight hours a day, five days a week at work, I'm lucky to get through the weekly Amateur Photographer and maybe a Carl Hiassen novel. Can't believe our Florida members haven't appeared in them yet. Or have they?

Trying to get through Marc Reisner's "Cadillac Desert" again

"In a recent thread, one of our fellow forum members said that 35mm lenses don't work for portraits."

 

Surely you realize that absolute statements are always wrong. :-)

Focal Press has published both basic and advanced books by Philip Andrews which are very clear and helpful.