jay t.

Hi John,

 

Thanks for your response. Perhaps I should have noted the model I was looking at was

essentially an ink-jet designed probably for soho use. I have a fairly decent digi copier at

the office (Minolta) with optional print/fax/scan modules - thinking about getting those to

save space since my separate regular laser printer takes up room that could otherwise be

used for another untidy pile of papers and bills.

 

Anyway, regarding the photo printing, after looking around a bunch of reviews on-line, it

looks like nowadays it's not that big of a quality difference between brands and between

photo printers vs. multifunction printers, until you get to truly dedicated photo printers

with say six different ink cartridges. Anybody wish to confirm / comment on this?

 

Thanks again John for taking time to answer! Cheers.

Hi there,

 

Has anybody used printers made by Brother for both photos and documents? There's a

new multifunction model coming out (in Hong Kong, at least) - the DCP-110C - which

claims to do photo printing as well as documents plus other multifunction features (scan,

copy, fax, coffee maker, foot massage, etc...).

 

So, any comments? About Brother in particular or multifunction units in general? Do their

inks have decent archival properties? Are their scanners sufficient for home use?

 

Thanks in advance.

Thanks again everybody. Any suggestions for doing a CLA by myself? What sort of oil - if any - should be applied to the various moving parts? I'm assuming I shouldn't just go and squirt the thing with WD40. Cheers

Thanks Mike and Patrick! I'll give it a shot. Doesn't sound too hard Patrick, what did you mean by a new cocking rack can be bought from micro-tools? What exactly is 'micro-tools'?

 

Mike, how exactly do you remove the rewind knob? In the meantime, I need to pop out and get some jewelers screwdrivers (used to have some, not sure where I placed them).

 

So basically everything can be accessed by removing the top plate of the camera? This could get dangerous. If I actually enjoy this process, what's to stop me from collecting more beaten up cameras? A slippery slope it is ...

Hi everybody -

 

I have a slight problem with my Retina 1b. It involves cocking and

releasing the shutter. Basically, the shutter cocking mechanism is

jammed, which I hear is not exactly an uncommon problem with Retinas.

 

In short, I now cannot cock the shutter without first pushing in the

little button on top of the camera intended to be used to reset the

film counter. Once I do that, the shutter is cocked but I can't use

the shutter release! The shutter release works only part way. To

release the shutter, I have to do it on the lens itself.

 

So, any suggestions? Is this something I can fix by myself? If not,

does anybody happen to know where in Hong Kong I can get it fixed? Or

if need be, in the U.S. (and whether it would be worth it considering

postage expense).

 

I like the small size of the Retina and it does take nice photos.

Guessing exposure and distance have turned out to be not that terribly

difficult, and it's not exactly a threatening-looking piece of

equipment so photos of strangers is sometimes a bit easier! So, it'd

be nice if I can get it working again, hopefully without too much of a

hassle.

 

Thanks in advance!

If you really want a Canon, get an AE-1. You don't need autofocus, you don't need various program functions, and you don't need various metering modes. For metering a simple center-weighted system works fine AND teaches you to be aware of light, which at the end is perhaps the most fundamental aspect of photography.

 

Of course you're not limited to Canon. I'm partial to Pentax myself, and getting a hold of a working MX or LX is not too hard. Plenty of lenses available too.

 

As mentioned above, with an older camera you may have to spend some money to fix things, so they don't necessarily present an outstanding financial value, though often they don't require much more than a simple CL&A. However, once they're up and running, they'll stay up and running and will take abuse better (in my opinion) than most newer cameras, especially the cheap Rebel you're considering.

That's it!! Thanks spider!

Hi, and apologies for this very off topic question. I recently switched computers and

forgot to save / transfer my web page bookmarks. Most weren't worth saving anyway,

but one in particular I miss and have been unable to find despite numerous google

searchers.

 

The site is a gallery by a Japanese photographer named Nobuhiro (if I remember

correctly!). He generally updates the gallery every few days and has some very nice,

sometimes eccentric, photos. Mostly Leica shots (M3 I think) but also with various

other classic cameras.

 

Anybody happen to have this link? The reason I'm asking in the Leica forum is it was

someone here I believe who first mentioned this particular photographer.

 

And while we're on the subject, do you have any links to other good (non-

professional) photographers?

 

Cheers,

Let me ask another question. Has anyone tried the Sigma 70-210 4/5.6 UC II? I realize build quality may not be wonderful, but I'm interested in the very company nature of this zoom lens, which matched with a small Pentax body (I have an MX and a MZ-5) would seem to make a very nice compact package. Any thoughts?

And of course the Contax G2 system for a good price/performance mix, with the performance portion extremely high, top of the 35 mm range.

 

But so much depends on your shooting style and objectives. Perhaps it's better if you would describe exactly what it is about that little camera of yours that you appreciate better and why it has made you become intrigued about rangefinder photography. The lens? The portability? The simplicity? Was it in fact simply that it was a fixed lens that forced a different approach?

 

What is it about rangefinders that attracts you? Only then can you move on to whether an interchangable lens system is what you're after, and from then to what system you'd wish to buy into.

Legendary Leica optics?

What's your budget? Voigtlander's - new or used - won't cost you an arm and a leg, and neither will Contax G2, but a lot depends on your price range. For lenses, it shouldn't be that hard to figure out - something wide (if you like wide), something 'normal', and something telephoto (if you like telephoto). After that it's just filling in the holes, and often not the best use of money. What focal length do you like or use the most with your Nikon?

Most of the brand switching suggestions given above will end you up right where you began. The Pentax is a light body, so switching to other bodies will give you no advantage. It's clearly down to your lens choice, and you've already indicated you use the 28-80 the most, but that the real question is about the Tamron 90 that you like so much. But why the Tamron 90? Because of the focal length? It sounds like you're just wanting to cover the whole field, 28-300, in the lightest possible package but without sacrificing anything else. Unfortunately, you're going to have to make a sacrifice somewhere. You seldom use the 28 prime, so don't bring it, and the 100-300 would give you more flexibility than the 90 at a similar weight. Your choice, if you're cutting down on weight and amount of equipment, is between the 90 and 100-300. A system change will not solve your problem!

 

On the other hand, if you find yourself using mainly one focal length in that 28-80, then you could dump that and replace it with a better quality prime.

 

As for your experience with the Nikon that one day, I can't see how the body would make a difference with the flare! Clearly used a better lens attached to the body. Dan Andrews above already presented you with some good Pentax alternatives.

 

Changing to a rangefinder can be fun - I've got a G2 - but the lenses aren't that terribly light even though they are smaller in size than most SLR lens counterparts. And you'd need to give up the thought of a zoom (yes, the G2 does have one zoom, but the lens speed is a bit slow for the price). On the other hand, a G2 with a 28, 45, 90 lens combination would probably cover most of your needs in a reasonably small package and with wonderful lenses. Still, why overcomplicate?

 

Stick with your Pentax, change to a better moderate length zoom, and eliminate the baggage of your other lenses and you'll probably be happy.

Bring back focusing screens even on auto-focus cameras. And put DOF markings back on their lenses.

Or perhaps the photographer is the problem?

I'll second Douglas' suggestions, but perhaps suggest a 135 instead of 90/105. But buy one lens first - the 50 - and then find out if you're longing for more wide angle shots or for more tele shots. You'll probably end up wanting both, but you'll have a better idea of which would be more useful. Your choice of subject matter and shooting style will affect your later lens needs, so find out what kind of style / subject matter is most appealing to you.

 

Forget the zoom except for the 100-300, but put it off for later, and even then a cheapo is probably all you'd want unless you enjoy the idea of lugging around a very large (and expensive) lens.

I'd be interested in knowing why everybody likes the photo. I also like it, but it's hard to define why. Perhaps that's the reason! Is it the way your eyes are forced to view the photo in a slightly unnatural way (focus on the shirt, the diagonal railing making you 'read' from bottom to top)? The soft / out of focus and the colors giving a slightly surreal feel? The interaction or lack thereof of the two people? Definitely breaks rules, or maybe it doesn't! It's an intriguing picture, and maybe that's what it really comes down to. Nice job!

I thought Andrew's initial response was perhaps a little harsh, but I have to join his side as it really is common sense to see if the question / answer has been made available already, regardless of the topic.

 

And Tom, your response to Andrew I'm pretty sure left most who clicked on the Andrew-supplied link uttering a collective 'whaaat?' and questioning your claimed lawyering skills. Not only does the link deal with the Canon line, which would include the Digital Rebel, but it also specifically DOES talk about the Digital Rebel about half way through the article.

 

 

May have thought the tone a little haughty, but Andrew was quite right!

Interpret 'cheap' as 'inexpensive' as opposed to 'low quality'. The various Pentax 50mm lenses are renowned for their quality and sharpness.

Several nice shots, but not all of them work for me. Several seem basically snapshots of strangers - is that really any more interesting than snapshots of family members? Pictures 8 and 9 deal with the 'down and out' type vision of the less fortunate in society, but neither seem to have strong composition, though 8 does work a bit better than 9 with the horizontal lines. Number 7 is a great capture, but unfortunately the distance from subject and the street cone (or whatever that is) distract. No major complaints or comments about most of the others, but there's only one that really seems to stand out - number 6, the violin players. The composition is pleasing, and the expression on the subject's face contrasts nicely with what appears to be a somewhat bleak surrounding. Nice vertical lines broken by the angles of the bow and the clarinet (that's a clarinet to the right, right?). A very nice image.

Trying still to figure out why the G2 body feels like a P&S, according to those that say that. A somewhat heavy beast, very solid feel, no one-handed shots here, though smaller than a typical SLR still much bigger than any P&S, etc etc. Y'all must have mighty fine P&S's to make that comparison!

K Michael - have a look at the various Leica photos posted in this forum and then pop over to contaxg.com to have a look at G1 and G2 produced photos. Then you can better decide whether sharpness is good or bad, whether the contrasty nature of Zeiss lenses are what you want, etc etc, and how those issues combine with your general attitude towards automation (ie, autofocus, auto wind, the aid of ap. priority mode, and if you really want to get fancy, the optional back which imprints exposure information on the film between negatives! That's a nice touch).

 

Pay no attention to the superior Leica build quality claims here, though. G2s are nice and solid and quite able to take plenty of abuse. Like Leicas. Both Leica and Contax lenses will not generally end of well if they bare the brunt of shock treatment rather than the camera bodies!

The gushing over out of focus has to be a joke, right? Totally OOF photos generally don't work, looking mainly more like poor technique than considered effort. OOF portions as a part of shallow DOF does work because it can isolate and enhance a particular element. I think part of the reason for the positive responses is that the sample OOF pictures might remind some of super grainy photos, and it is the grain which causes that gritty feel of realism that some might find intriguing.

 

The New York and Techno pictures don't work for me - they don't seem very dynamic to me. Cigarette and Road work a bit better, the latter because the inclusion of the rear of the car seems to give the road a feeling of loneliness, which we can probably all relate to from our own experiences with road trips. Cigarette I can't quite put a handle on. Again a feeling perhaps of isolation. But would these photos have been stronger with one or another element in focus?

 

The Richard Copeland Miller photos work better but the blur is of a different quality, more akin to impressionist paintings, which I would assume was his objective.

Why do Leica users seems so intent on eventually selling their Leicas? The resale value argument seems a bit silly, unless of course the equipment isn't being used. Just wanted to stoke the flames!

A serious question but a somewhat flippant answer.