david choo

Cokin X-PRO are built different from Cokin P or A. From what I've seen, they are neutral. Cokin P and A are not.

Jason, slik carbon fibers are expertly made. Yes, it's true Gitzo's are the cream of the crop and come with a lifetime warranty... but ask yourself how long you'll be doing this for. If its for life, or as long as you can imagine, go with the best. Afterall the #1 key to a sharp picture is, a tripod. =)

 

I personally would go with the Gitzo. And have on many occasions. But Bogen is nice as well.

They exist. They're rather expensive however. I know Fuji makes them for their Fuji 617 cameras. Not sure who else makes them. But you could go to Lee. They custome make filters I believe.

I once owned that lens. I would depress shutter halfway, let it autofocus, then I'd manually turn the ring while STILL holding down shutter release half way. Then finally depress it completely to take the shot.

 

If your lens is "clicking" at you, it may be a lens problem. I had a problem with my lens clicking as well and took it into Canon to be repaired and there really was a problem. They fixed it, and never had the problem since. Oh how i regret selling this lens. It's such a great lens. :P

For filtration, I used solely Hoya Multi Coated filters and the Lee

system. A while ago I purchased quite a few B+W MRC filters and

found my exposures were off. I later checked and found that the

filter factors for the SAME type of filters were different. I found

that strange. I did some more research and found out that most

filter manufacturers have different filter factors. So it seems that

B+W filters are not only the best made in terms of the ring but also

allow more light through while giving you the desired effect.

 

Question 1: Has anyone else found this to be true?

Question 2: Does B+W use the same system as Hoya which is to melt

the chemicals to create the color in the glass INTO the glass

itself?

Question 3: Anyone have experience with filtration made by Zeiss? Is

it multicoated well?

I'm curious as to who made the best(sharpest, best color rendition)

35mm lenses outside of Canon, Nikon, Leica, Zeiss during the 70s

Multi Coating era. Does anyone know of a site with information on a

camera system such as Olympus, or Pentax during that era? I'm

curious. =)

Thanx for the responses everyone. I'm a young photographer, heavily invested in Canon L glass and in Large format I shoot Rodenstock or Schneider. I just recently purchased my first Hasselblad and am anxious to test it. More then anything, i suppose im curious as to whether Zeiss really would give me an edge on my current Canon L glass. I meet old time photographers who have been at this for many many years, and they say, "If i had to do it all over again, I'd buy nothing but Zeiss glass." Makes me curious ya know? =)

 

BTW my main focus in photography are landscapes and Commercial still lifes. I just don't see any reason to have autofocus and sometimes wonder why I've spent so much buying into the worlds most advanced auto focus system. LOL

 

Can older Zeiss glass really compare to the glass of newer Japanese lenses?

I've been wondering, Did Zeiss make lenses for 35mm SLRs... i don't

mean the new autofocus systems, but the older manual SLRs, with

manual focusing Zeiss 35mm lenses. Does anyone know the names of the

lenses or a website that could show me a history. Would be much

appreciated. I'm thinking about collecting them if they existed.

 

Thanx. =)

Ok, so it'll either be Pentax or Minolta. Any suggestions on bodies and lenses?

 

In terms of a body, I'm looking for something with metering but no bells and whistles. Being that it's just a light tight box, as long as it manually winds well, shutter is excellent, has mirror lock up, I am happy.

 

As for lenses, the sharper the better. Primes only. Coatings a big plus! The glass is everything to me. =)

 

THANX SO MUCH EVERYONE FOR YOUR GENEROUS comments and contributions to my questions. =)

Thanx for the great responses! I'm actually wanting to build a system on a budget. It doesn't have to be Canon or Nikon. It can be any camera system that allows for great quality glass. So Pentax and Minolta made decent prosumer quality gear back in the days? And since they aren't so popular... I'm assuming theyd be cheaper and more readily available?

Hi everyone! I'm looking to build an old style either Canon or Nikon

camera system. Manual focus, prime lenses, and vintage yuminess. I

was hoping to get suggestions from people with experience in the old

systems as to what camera body to look for... lenses to look for...

how to check if they're in good shape.

 

I currently am heavily invested in Canon L glass, and Canon Pro

Bodies... Hasselblad and Toyo/Roddenstock Large Format. So this new

system will just be for fun. Sometimes, carrying around my huge

cameras makes people uneasy. But people often laugh and smile when

they see an old vintage camera.

 

Any suggestions or help will be greatly appreciated. =) Thanx. (BTW,

I know NOTHING of old SLRs.)

Wow so many quick answers! Thanx guys! I'm heavily invested in Canon glass... was hoping a Canon SLR did infrared. But more then anything, I'm lookin for a cheap small camera that has aperature and shutter control and built in lens. Either one are good.

I've always been interested in shooting infrared, but I've heard now

that many digital cameras allow you to do so digitally with an

opaque infrared filter.

 

Does anyone know WHICH digital, consumer or pro, allow for infrared

photography? I'm planning to purchase one and need some advice.

Aveek, depending on what kind of photography you do... if it isn't fast paced, needing to change focal lengths quickly type of photography, get Prime lenses. Zoom lenses simply can't be sharper or more contrasty then primes simply because of how they're built and the glass is cut.

 

I personally would purchase something with f/2.8 or wider simply because it makes life 100 times easier to focus.

 

I would stick with Canon lenses, but from what I've seen from 3rd party manufacturers, Tokina has the highest grade glass construction. Sure they're lenses aren't exactly beautiful to look at, but they have a higher quality build then Tamrons and Sigmas, and use excellent glass.

I have a similar problem with a few of my Canon lenses on both my Canon EOS 3 and Canon EOS 1V bodies, so i figure its quite normal, the movement is very slight.

Presses still can't handle the amount of information in a negative. Have to keep that in mind when deciding to switch to negs. Sure you could do that, but there would be much post production, preparing the negs for CMYK press.

 

Digital CMOS or CCD is very similar in terms of range comapred to slide film so its a beauty, but in its current form wont beat negs.

 

I have to agree with a previous poster, the best type Rs are a joke compared to the crappiest type Cs. My inkjet outdoes Type Rs in many ways.

I own a lot of L lenses, as well as non L primes. All canon of course. My primes shoot sharper then my L series lenses but they have one massive disadvantadge, they don't zoom. It gets to be a pain in the rear to move my tripod over and over to get my composition right. If you're looking for ultimate sharpness and quality, no L series "zooms" aren't worth it compared to even simple canon mid primes, but you'd have to pry my L glass off my cold dead hands before I gave up their convenience.