wbowman

An SLR of some sort will certainly be worth your effort. Film - especially slides - produce

outstanding results that will last a long, long time. You can also have them printed or

scanned quite easily now. The 28mm/50mm system has worked for millions of tourists

and they should serve you well. An 80-200mm zoom would compliment this system well if

you can afford it (and you don't mind hauling it around).

 

Digital SLRs like the Nikon D50 are also great if you have a little more money to spend. If

you go this route, buy an extra battery and a few 1GB memory cards. My only reservation

about digital is how the captured images last over the years. I am in the process of

scanning Kodachrome slides from my parents honeymoon and my dad's subsequent

Vietnam tour. These were taken nearly 40 years ago (1966-1967) and were subjected to

neglect and damp for many years but still scan well and were immediatly recognized as

valuable images (to my family) when we opened the box. Sadly, many digital images on

unmarked CDs and hard drives will not be so lucky.

 

I personally have thousands of travel shots taken with my Canon Digital Rebel and I'm

trying to keep them archived well. My mom used a camera for a number of years that

saved images to a 3.5" floppy and we have discovered that many of them are now

unreadable. I fear my child will not be able to enjoy these images in the future. But, my

slides I take will probably be around for a long time.

 

Sorry to dive in to a film vs. digital debate. Both are excellent, but I have more faith in film

when it comes to revisiting the your photos in 40 years (when even bad pictures bring

joy!).

The place near the British Museum is Pied Bull Yard where there is a Leica dealer and Jessop's Classic Camera shop (interesting stuff there!). There is at least one other shop in that area too (can't remember where that is at the moment).

 

Also, there is The Photographer's Gallery just off of Charing Cross road.

Ace is right. The first thing to question is the process (or tool) you are using for DNG conversion. Although it is a standard, not all DNGs are identical. Like TIFF, JPG, etc. there are many options that make them incompatible.

DSLRs will have a manual mode where you can set everything yourself, but they generally

make it far more difficult to use it in that mode than in the fully auto mode. If you're used

to an old manual camera, you miss several things from a DSLR - especially in manual

mode. Among them are a bright, large viewfinder with a microprism or split screen

focusing aid; seperate controls for aperture and shutter speed; and dampened focusing

action on your lens. The upside is that modern metering is much better; autofocus can be

more convenient if used well; and you have the option to allow others to use your camera

in point and shoot mode.

 

Sadly all the additional features are really only a software update - so they cost the

manufacturer very little. There is a baseline of features that all of them have (various scene

modes, aperture priority, shutter priority, and program. From there the primary difference

is generally usability for the more manual modes (how ironic!) and build quality. The basic

Nikon (D50?) and Canon Digital Rebel (XTi?) are as basic as you're going to get and they

both work quite well. I think what you're really looking for might be a Leica M8 - you get

the basics like an old camera but the price of a top-of-the-line DSLR.

Ethereal and surreal are two different things. To my eye, this photo and others in your

portfolios seem very much real - the opposite of surreal. As for ethereal, that's a little more

difficult for me to define in a photograph.

I <b><i>might</i></b> see this as useful on E6 and C41 film where a fairly standard

associated speed exists, but who is to say with black and white? Those who develop their

own generally use developers and timings to make their own speeds. If there were a standard

gradient it would have to be for a particular speed/developer/time combination (that

everyone would complain is wrong!). It would be useless for times when film is pushed or

pulled.

Generally and open source project is in reaction to a particular need that is not being

addressed by a particluar commercial vendor. For example, open source software projects

are often sustained by contributions from developers who are addressing a specific need

that someone like Microsoft is unable to meet for a number of reasons. Another is to

distribute R&D costs across a large group of interested people. Yet another is to break a

hold that a specific company has on some piece of intellectual property for a process.

 

Like any good project, the first thing to determine is what problem is in need of a solution.

From the initial post and the subsequent responses I am unclear on what photography

needs are not being met by current market providers.

 

I think this is an interesting idea and deserves discussion. Just let me know what I'm

missing with my current systems so I can contribute my thoughts the design.

 

I guess I want a Canon FTb with f-stop and shutter speed vible in the finder. Everything

else has limited value to me.

Try www.7dayshop.com - they are in the UK (Guernsey) and they describe their Kodachrome

stock as "Plenty". They have KR64 (GBP5.79) and KL200 (GBP6.00). The description indicates

that this includes processing.

I'm sorry, but I don't have the part for you. However, this is a great camera and well worth

spending a few dollars on it.

I keep a 17-40L on my Digital Rebel (300D) and I haven't had any problems. If you want real

balance between a big lens and the lightweight body, consider buying the battery pack. The L

lens and battery pack make a perfectly balanced combo (if a bit heavy for something like

extensive travel).

In short, yes. You can do a Google search and find lots of sites describing alternative hoods

for 1.6 crop factor.

<div></div>

I have used a 12" PB for the last two years and it is great for travel and minor Photoshop/

iPhoto usage. It is not great for critical editing as you just don't have enough pixels to see

everything. Buying one of the outstanding Apple Cinema Displays solves that problem.

 

That being said, buying any Apple laptop with the name PowerBook or iBook is a mistake

right now. Make sure you buy something with the MacBook name instead. You have a

choice of one right now (15" MacBook Pro). Anything you hear about a 12" or 17" MacBook

Pro or a 13" MacBook (not Pro) is currently pure speculation as Apple has not announced

any products with those specs. But, it seems a safe bet that they will appear eventually --

it is just a matter of when. The key is to buy something with the Intel processor (Core Duo

so far) and not a Motorola or IBM PowerPC processor (G4 or G5). The PowerPC-based

Apples are being phased out and any computer you buy today with those processors will

"age" much faster as software support for them dries up.

Although it has been stated above, I think it is worth repeating the Ebay did not fleece you. If

you bought something from a newspaper add that was not as advertised you would probably

not blame the newspaper. Auction sites are not like Walmart - the buyer and seller have full

responsibilities to ask any and all relevant questions about the transaction. Only when the

buyer has blatently told a lie do you have recourse with Paypal and the ability to request Ebay

to punish the seller by suspending their account. That is the risk buyers have to take on any

private sale of merchandise. If you want full service and absolute assurance of what you're

buying, then go spend your money at B&H and pay the full price. That assurance is what

you're buying from those retailers.

I'm with Godfrey on this - there is little use in white balance bracketing when shooting RAW.

If the camera didn't write three files when bracketing then Canon would probably get a ton of

support request asking why there <b>aren't</b> three files!

You didn't mention which country. I've seen two used ones for sale at two different Jessop's in

London. I bought one of them!

You asked about customs in particular. There should be no problem at all in Germany.

Customs deals primarily with merchandise brought in to the country and LEFT THERE to

circumvent import duties. I presume you'll bring all of you equipment back out of the country

with you - so you'll have no problems.

 

German airports, in my experience, have been efficient and easy to deal with (Bonn/Cologne,

Dusseldorf, Munich and Frankfurt at least). You'll find it refreshing compared to major US

airports.

If it is warm, DuPont Circle is a great place for people photography. If you're in to night

street photography, you must go up to Adams Morgan on a Thursday, Friday, or Saturday

night (bring ISO 3200 and a fast lens!).

 

Gravelly Point, along the river in on the Arlington, VA side is at the end of the runway for

Reagan National Airport. If you like airplanes, this is an outstanding perspective to

photograph landing jets on the runway as well as take a picture of their underbelly against

a (hopefully) interesting sky. It almost feels like you can reach up and touch them at this

location.

 

Union Station has spectacular interiors - I'm always surprised it is not on more "must see"

lists. It is a short walk from the Capitol Building and is also on the Metro.

 

All of this is assuming that you'll tire of the attraction on and around The Mall. I could

spend a week down there without running out of things to see. If there is a clear, cool

night (no fog or haze), you MUST go to The Mall between dusk and about 1:00 AM (when

they generally turn off some of th lights). Bring a tripod and you'll be rewarding with some

gorgeous shots of the monuments. The Korean War Memorial is particularly haunting at

night. In the last decade or so it has even become safe to be down there at night with

photo equipment!

Another piece of evidence that this is a 1983 plate...<br><br>

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/1151/SAMPLE-GA.html">http://

www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/1151/SAMPLE-GA.html</a>

Must be '83. From right to left the cars are a Chevy Caprice Classic stationwagon in a body

style from about 1976, an Oldsmobile in a body style from about 1981, and a Cadillac in a

body style from about 1975 (give or take a year on any of them). There is no way this is from

the '60s as none of these cars existed then.

I'd love to see some the Tri-X pictures from that C3 and the giant bare bulb reflector. I

suspect you got some of that classic paparazzi look that we don't see any more!

Certainly using RAW will help a bunch. If you like the way that B&W film looked why not

continue to use it until there is a good digital solution (because I don't think that digital is

going to be able to cope with this for a while).

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3891942-md.jpg">

I regret very few things, but selling my M6 a few years ago is one of them. Now I can't afford

to replace it. Now I shoot with a Minolta 7s II when I want that rangefind feel. Great lens, but

it sure doesn't feel like a Leica!

I think manually focusing the 50mm 1.8 on my Digital Rebel and my EOS 30 film body is

awful. The focus area (confirmation) is difficult to use - you might as well use auto-focus if

you're only going to be able to focus on the auto-focus spots! Also the focus ring is maybe

3/8 of an inch wide and feels loose in your fingers. The short throw makes it difficult to get

any sort of accuracy. I understand the the 1.4 lens and the 1.8 Mark I lens are much, much

better for this.