runswithsizzers

<p>I also want something like the Olympus Pen EP-1 with a fast prime lens. For me, there are 3 reasons to choose a fast prime over the kit zoom that most people get with these cameras:<br>

1. Better low-light capability<br>

2. Sharper images with better contrast.<br>

3. Smaller and lighter unit for ease of portability.<br>

I would also like my prime lens to have a "normal" field of view - that is, something equivalent to a 50 mm lens on a 35mm film camera, being neither a wide angle lens, nor a telephoto. If it will also auto-focus, that would be great.<br>

The Olympus ZUIKO DIGITAL 17mm 1:2.8 Pancake, which is sometimes sold with the Pen EP-1, is not under consideration for me, because it is too slow, and too short - being more like a wide angle than a normal lens.<br>

Olympus also makes a Zuiko Digital 25mm 1:2.8 - the perfect length - but too slow, and not particularly sharp. Plus, it requires an optional adaptor to work on the Pen EF-1.<br>

The lens that best meets my criteria is the Panasonic/Leica Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH. Unfortunately, the price of that lens plus the required adapter puts it out of my reach (over $1000).<br>

The best compromise, in my opinion, would be the Panasonic Lumix G 20mm f/1.7. It's a tad shorter than I would prefer - equivalent to a 40 mm film lens - but it does get very good performance reviews:</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/panasonic_20_1p7_o20/<br>

The Panasonic Lumix G 20mm f/1.7 sells for around $400. Added to the price of a Pen EP-1 body, the total would be about $1000. But a similar camera, the Panasonic GF-1, if you can find it for sale with the Lumix G 20mm f/1.7 lens, would be about $100 less - and several reviews favor the Panasonic camera over the Olympus.</p>

<p>My film cameras came with a "normal" perspective lens, none slower than f/1.8, that produce very sharp slides; digital cameras come with a heavy zoom, none faster than f/3.5, that produce images of so-so sharpness. Several big-name digital camera manufacturers still don't even make a fast normal prime lens, and those that do want as many dollars for the lens as they do for the body AND the kit zoom. Does that make sense?<br>

My film cameras were manufactured out of metal about 20 years ago, and are still reliable today (true, they have had some maintenance over the years) - how many of the digital cameras sold today will still be working 20 years from now?<br>

I can't justify retiring my perfectly serviceable Japanese metal and glass, and going into debt for Chinese plastic that won't take any better pictures than what I'm getting now - with equipment that was paid for long ago.<br>

So for a non-professional who has limited funds to spend on my hobby, shooting slides is mostly a matter of economics, but also of esthetics. I enjoy the fine materials, craftsmanship and elegance of a classic manual camera, as well as the simplicity of operation. By searching out used equipment, I was able to put together a kit of two bodies, 3 primes, and a zoom (all Pentax) for less than what a good digital body would cost today.<br>

And when I want to see my stuff projected at 50"x50" my old Kodak Carousel still makes pretty - have you seen the prices of digital projectors? I can buy a lot of chrome film and E6 processing for what it would cost me to "upgrade" to digital. With my film scanner and Photoshop I can fool around with digital post-processing, while still enjoying my classic cameras in the field.</p>

My slide holder does not have a part number on it, but after looking at the pictures on this

site:

http://stores.ebay.ie/Photostore-Worldwide

. . . I'd say the part number is *probably* SH-D1 (2882-248).

Based on appearance, I'd guess the following are almost certainly NOT interchangeable: SH-

M20 (7892-241), SH-U1, or SH-M10.

I've been using a Minolta Diamage Scan Elite F-2900 to scan 35mm slides, and negs. I've been pretty

happy with the results I'm getting with this scanner and VueScan software.

Recently I've been experiencing kernel panics (Mac system crashes) which I believe are probably due to

SCSI issues or drivers for my old PCI SCSI card (which is no longer supported by Adaptec). I'm considering

purchasing the Ratoc FR1SX adapter which converts SCSI devices to Firewire so I can pull the SCSI card.

I'm wondering if it makes sense to throw another $100 at this old (but nicely functional) scanner for the

Ratoc adaptor, or if I should be looking at a new scanner instead?

I am not presently making big prints - I usually scan at 1800x1200 pixels, which is plenty of resolution

for my 4x6 prints, iDVD slide shows, or web display - so my requirements are modest.

Is there anything out there worth looking at in the under $500 range that connects by firewire or USB and

works with VueScan?

Thanks,

- gw

Your post didn't mention your objectives; that is - are you taking this trip for the main

purpose of producing images for a wide audience or commercial use, or are you taking a

trip for some other reason and you would like documentation to presserve memories for

yourself, friends and family?

<p>If your main goal is to take some pretty good vacation shots, in my opinion it's too

much work to shoot a slow, fussy slide film like Velvia. I find even ISO 100 film to be

limiting for vacation shots - put a polarizer on your wide angle or macro, and your

maximum aperture decreases to something more like 4 or 4&1/2. You'd have lug a round

a tripod and fuss over bracketing every shot, and when you get back you'll have to set up

the projector and screen to view them. Not too handy if the people at the office want to

see your vacation pictures.

<p>Having said that, the 4x6 prints which are so handy to pass around at the water cooler

are not going to get the oohs and aahs you may hear from your audience when they see

your picts glowing brilliantly on a 50x50 inch screen. Also, for marketing your work, I

believe slides are preffered, but I don't know anything about that. So for 'serious' travel

photography it may be well worth the extra trouble to shoot slides.

<P>I generally take two bodies, one loaded with fast (ISO 400) print film and a moderate

zoom which I use for snapshots, and the other loaded with ISO 100 slide film which I use

for more serious studies with my 3 prime lenses. I am still testing slide films (for about 30

years, now), but I am not going to make any recommendations until I've tried the Kodak

E100G and GX films.

<p>One last tip which I expect everyone who uses this site, myself included, will ignore: If

your travel goal is to experience new places, really see the sights and smell the smells and

know something about where you've been, don't spend all your time with that Nikon stuck

in your face. Sometimes when people ask me what I did on my vacation, I have to tell them

I won't know until I get the pictures back.

See my posts under Community>Recommendations>Camera Repair>

ACR-good.

MCR-bad.

I realize this thread is not current, but for anyone searching the archive for repair info:

Recommended: ACR - Abeline Camera Repair - EXCELLENT! Quality work and they will

treat you right!

http://abilenecamera.com/

Avoid MCR - Midwest Camera Repair - in Wyandotte, MI at all costs. I had an extruciatingly

painful experience with them.

Consider that you are going to have the canmera tied up for for several weeks (or months)

IF EVERYTHING GOES WELL, and possibly much longer if you have problems (after the

initial repair, I had to send my MX back to MCR four times before they got it right - took 6

months). I wouldn't be too budget minded - it's not worth the hassel to save a few bucks if

they botch the repair, and even if they fix it a second time under warranty will you be able

to depend on the results from a second rate shop?

-GW

Go to this websites list of members reviews of many camera repair

places: http://www.photo.net/neighbor/one-subcategory?id=1

I can't give you a good recommendation, but I can tell you one place

NOT to try: Midwest Camera Repair (Wynadotte, MI) - they sent my

Pentax MX back in worse shape than it was in before they 'repaired' it

(CLA). I am in the process of getting them to redo it - or maybe not.

In fact, based on my experience, if the camera is working, don't let

anybody mess with it. Both times I have had CLAs done on working

cameras they were messed up in the process. At 20 years, however your

Spotmatic almost certainly needs new foam light seals.

Here are a few places that went on my list of 'possibles' because they

work on older cameras and my internet research indicated they didn't

suck, at least not too bad. (Note I have had NO personal experience

with these - try at your own risk):

ACR - Abilene Camera Repair - http://www.abilenecamera.com

Great reviews, but they were 3 months behind and not taking any

repairs as of mid October.

Camera Repair Japan co. Duluth, Ga - several good reviews (try Google)

Garry's Cameras http://www.garryscamera.com/

Doesn't work on MX, but does work on Spotmatics

Camera Rehab Center - mi