dayton_p._strickland1

I've used Fuji Press 800 for years, but liked the original three-layer emulsion

better than the newer four-layer, although it is still pretty fantastic, although

with a gain in grain, especially when taking pictures of the plains in Spain. It

also is one of the easiest films to scan I have ever used.

It seems like a lot of us on this forum that shoot professionally with big honking heavy digital SLRs would love the opportunity to shoot with our Leica's instead. I've even given thought to purchasing the recently upgraded Epson R-D1s, but can't quite seem to cough up the $3,000 U.S. for a digital version of a $550 camera, sort of puts a crawl in my throat if you know what I mean .... maybe at two grand? Anyway, a great film camera and a great scanner for those that have the time still seems like a great way to go or there is always that thing they used to call wet darkroom printing .... Please excuse my trip back into never, never land.

Roger, thanks for the info. That is one good-looking strap and probably isn't mass produced, hence the high price.

Roger,

In a Shutterbug review you and Frances did of the new Zeiss and Voigtlaender R-3a cameras, I remember one of them with an absolutely beautiful A&A strap, but I couldn't find that strap on their site, or did I not recognize it. Do you remember which model it is? Thanks.

I appreciate the input from everyone. I must say after looking at some of the work offered that I am quite stunned by the natural saturation of color in these photos. I guess I just now need to confirm the price lowering rumor and dump one of my 20D's and my 16-35. I hope Epson keeps pushing the envelope on this camera because I really love shooting with a rangefinder and am forced to shoot digital for work, so this would be the best of both worlds. Again, thanks for the input from everyone.

James,

Thanks so much for your input. The pictures are beautiful. Actually much better than what I've seen posted before from this camera, although it's truly hard to judge quality off internet posts. If I purchase one I will probably use it mostly with the VC 28/1.9 and 40/1.4 (already own) and the 15/4.5 as my wide-angle to normal set-up along with my Canon 20D with 70-200/2.8 IS for telephoto and sports photography for my daily newspaper work. I really miss not using a rangefinder (I have a Leica M6ttl and Voigtlaender R-3a) to use on a daily basis. This might sound stupid, but I need something to slow me down and think before I pick up a camera and start pointing and shooting.

Parvez,

What have your experiences been like with the Epson? I understand there is an upgrade, the "S" model, I believe. Rumor is the price is dropping to US $2,000, but right now no one seems to have it in stock. I'm sort of anxious to purchase one but need to really know the quality is first-rate. Knowing it uses the same sensor as the Nikon D70s, which I found to be very good up to just short of 1,600 ISO, I believe it should be pretty good. What are your impressions? Other owners chime in to.

I've had this similar problem and many, many more with both of my 20d's. You

have to remove the battery to get it to "boot" back up and work again. I

contribute it taking a "computer with a lens stuck on the front of it" out into the

elements and subjecting it to an environment you never would dream of with

a personal computer. My biggest problems have been with lenses freezing up

(all Canon L lens in my case) and having to shut the camera down, remove

the camera and reattach to get back to working again. If cars were this

unreliable as digital cameras have been most manufacturers would have

gone out of business by now.

I loved my two T90's and my 28-85/4 until I dropped the lens and was never able to get a satisfactory repair and had to dispose of it. I have switched back and forth between Nikon and Canon autofocus cameras, both film and digital ever since and have yet to be satisfied with reliability. My two 20D's and my 70-200/2.8 IS are giving me fits (three repairs on the lens and still getting error messages, and all kinds of problems with high ISO banding, WB, and even exposure problems -- when using manual exposure, no less with both cameras). Guess you can figure I'm not a big fan of autofocus and digial.

Mike, if you have a love of photography, people, and like to be exposed to something unique at least once or twice a week, being a photojournalist at a small daily newspaper (less than 15,000 circulation) can be a very rewarding second or third career. There are jobs out there in these size newspapers which generally pay less than $30K a year in the midwest and southeast. Here, in Georgia, there always seems to be openings and that seems to be the case throughout the southeast. If you have a retirement income from your first career I say jump in feet first and give it a try. Big newspapers are struggling while smaller ones seem to be holding their own and in some cases, growing. If you like being around interesting people, think you might like to shoot a lot of high school sports (spring sports is killing me and its only March!) and get the occasional chance to meet and photograph famous people sometimes (I met and took pictures of legendary Green Bay Packers quarterback Bart Starr Friday evening, one of many famous people I have met and photographed in the last 15 years) this can be a very rewarding career field. Now the downside: editors can and will misuse your photographs. You will work a lot of overtime unless you are lucky. You will probably spend a lot of your own money upgrading your equipment in this digital age. And you will run your personal motor vehicle in the ground and spend a lot of money on maintenance and gas that your gas allowance will never come close to covering. having said all that, you will have a lot of freedom, hardly ever have someone looking over your shoulder, and will be adored by people in the community you cover, honest.

Duchan,

Isn't the European Stars and Stripes headquarters still in Darmstadt? I hear that the American forces are strapped for personnel to cover everything with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, so I suggest you contact a visual editor there and see if they can use any help.

Dayton

Having recently helped judge four newspaper photography contests in the past several months I wondered if we are drawn to black and white photography over color because the content seems to draw one into the photo more than being wowed by color. To see an example of really great photojournalism in a total black and white newspaper check out this website:

 

www.dcherald.com

 

Their photographers consistently win these annual photo contests as does the paper for design. Like I said, it's all in black and white.

The reason I bring up this sample is because as judges we were asking each other whether we were giving extra emphasis to the photos because they were black and white and it was somehow unusual these days or because of the content. In the end, we agreed it was the content and quality of the photograph . By the way, the judges were from both large and small newspapers, young and old, and the images were projected onto a large screen so the reproduction quality of the newspaper did not come into play.

I noticed that B&H was about the only dealer discounting this camera at $2,795

and now they have it listed as "out of stock." I'm hoping this is true about the

price break, and for present owners I hope the firmware upgrade is

downloadable from their website like Nikon and Canon do with their cameras. I

have to admit I am a little confused about some of the big magazine's reviews

of this camera. Although it has the same sensor as the Nikon D100 and D70 (I

believe, this ain't gospel), the magazines are saying the image quality isn't as

good. So, Josh, what's the real story? I really, really would like to be able to use

a high-quality digital rangefinder at work where film, unfortunately, is not an

option anymore (time, money, etc., etc.)

I use two 20Ds on the job and at any given moment either one will start acting stupid for no apparent reason. I've had continuing problems with my 580EX flash even after repairs. I don't blame Canon and I don't blame digital, I blame all the freaking little computers inside these cameras. I wish someone would make a completely manual digital camera. I want as few automated features as possible. If my job didn't require it, I swear I would go back to film and manual cameras, i.e. my Leica M6 and maybe a rebuilt Canon F-1 or Nikon F-3 for longer lenses.

Kim,

There's a dirty little problem with almost all digital SLRs that I did not see

addressed above and that is BACK FOCUSING. When I first got my 20D I

thought I was going to go nuts with problems with autofocus. I tried everything

in the book. On my 50/1.4 there is only about 1/2 turn lock-to-lock so manual

focusing is totally out of the question (this is true for almost all autofocus

lenses). After having my camera and lens calibrated to eliminate the back

focusing problems I have resorted to pre-focusing in autofocus on the subject

and then switching the autofocus off to take the picture to make sure the

autofocus doesn't change the focus. Try that and see if it helps. While

autofocus and digital can sometimes save the day and have made deadline

photography (my field is photojournalism) easier, both have created a whole

new bag of worms. By the way, 1/80th is plenty fast and so is 2.8 to capture

sharp still subjects. And don't forget to use Unsharp Mask in Photoshop. The

settings I use are 300 ﾗ 1.5 ﾗ7. Good luck.

Regina,

If you are using a digital EOS camera there might be a

compatability problem. When I first got mine I was very, very

disappointed, but over time it seemed to actually get better and

now is very sharp. The dealer suggested I send in the lens and

the camera to have them "matched" to each other. Oh, the

wonders of digital photography!

Nice photos Harry. My only two film cameras are an XA and M6ttl.

I just wish I could use them in my work because all the

automation in my so-called professional digital cameras is

about to send me over the edge (digital and flash, reliability of all

the little freaking computers chips and contacts, autofocus that's

unreliable, but impossible to manually focus, etc., etc.) Oh well,

guess I'll go make some lemonade and be happy I'm getting

paid to take pictures for a living!

The German biergarten scenes bring back many wonderful

memories. I especially remember the Jazz biergarten on the Isar

in Munich on a hot summer day.

Thanks Andrew for the information. My "quiet" digital camera is

the Olympus C-5050 and I use in situations where noise is a

factor or when I need lots of depth of field. My quiet film cameras

are an M-6ttl and an Olympus XA.

Eric, thanks for the thoughtful and thought-provoking input. That's

why I love the internet, every moron can make his statement

without consequences.

OK, after hearing the loud whirling and clacking sound of digital

SLRs at the Reagan funeral yesterday evening I think it is high

time someone get on with the digital M camera. It's too bad the

better point and shoots don't have better shutter response and

better high ISO noise levels as these cameras work great in

situations (court rooms, funerals, etc.) where noise is frowned

upon. Thoughts?

Mani, Shun,

The D100's shutter lag is suppose to be longer than the D70

and in my opinion the shutter lag on the D100 is quite

noticeable. I hope to buy a D70 when they become available but

to my eyes they look kind of cheap compared to the D100 which

has turned out to be a pretty rugged camera. I would spend the

three grand for a D2H if they can resolve the "perceived" noise

problems (and would also like to see at least a 6mp sensor,

too).

Has anyone heard of any possibilities of a D100 firmware

upgrade to improve the shutter lag and buffer frame rate to come

in line with the new D70? Those are my only two beefs with my

D100, otherwise I am a happy camper. It sure would be nice if

those two problems could be addressed with a firmware

upgrade. Also, a higher flash sync speed would be nice, but hey,

I'm a realist.

If they follow current digital camera pricing standards they will

triple the price of the film-equivalent camera. If you shoot tons of

film or have a need to change ISO in the middle of a shoot, prefer

being able to white-balance in camera instead of post

processing or have a need for speed then it will be worth $1,500.

Alex,

I purchased this lens when I bought my D100 back in November

2002. I kept the lens for about a month and traded it in on the

Nikon 20/2.8 and have never looked back. The lens was way too

big for me and the results mediocre. Digital requires the best

glass possible. If you are picky you will want to look at the Nikon

glass first.