jay t.

Mike, I think one of the reasons I chose the Ib over others (could only choose one - the wife was standing close by at the time) was the film advance being on the bottom! Also happened to look to be in the best condition of the various choices. And yes, a lovely camera.

Looking back at previous threads, it seems like the most popular

Retina to own is the 2c. Just wondering why.

 

I picked up a 1b a while back at a camera show in Japan. The 1b has

no meter and no rangefinder - it's a 'guess everything' camera! Have

found it good for photo technique, making me more aware of light as

well as distance. It also produces wonderful pictures, and I must

say I was a bit surprised at that, despite what I'd heard about

Retinas.

 

So, anybody else have one? Any experiences they'd like to share?

Yes, an incredibly bizarre method of focusing on the G2! Autofocus with the focus subject in the little box in the middle of the viewfinder...

I have an MX, which is similar to the ME but fully manual. Fantastic little camera. Not sure how much you really need the manual since these are very simple cameras. And if you have many lenses already, I would assume that most of them are primes rather than zooms, in which case you could have a dream setup and all for free! Do not bother with getting 'some type of new one' as the build quality is probably better with these older bodies and lenses. Just get out there and have fun with what sounds like a gift from camera heaven.

Stick with your Pentax and, as has already been suggested, add good prime lenses. Actually have to question what you mean by upgrading to a 'higher end' SLR. Do you mean one with more bells and whistles? More automatic functions? That's not necessarily higher end! Your fully manual MZ-M should provide you better photos anyway, assuming good primes, with the only major weakness being, I believe, its lack of regular spot or center-weighted metering. Solve that by buying a cheap incident meter if you don't trust its matrix metering system. And you certainly don't need the 'creative' functions on other cameras - landscape, portrait, sports etc - as those functions merely repeat the basic choice between apeture or shutter priority.

 

Absolutely no reason to change. Instead, spend your money on lenses and your time on technique.

Actually, the Pentax pro level camera is the PZ-1P. So yes, there is the 'upgrade to pro' option with Pentax too. I enjoy Pentax, starting off with an MX years back and now also with the MZ-5. Also have non-Pentax kit but that's besides the point. Pentax lenses are very nice but tend to be more expensive due presumably to lower production.

 

The bottom line is find a body (camera) that you feel comfortable handling and where the control layout fits your style - preferably on the simple, traditional side. The body, however, as said above, isn't the critical element in your photos. The lenses (and your vision) are more important. The importance in the body is whether you feel comfortable with it.

 

But the 'better' or 'worse' debate is generally a false one.

It also depends on your usage. Big, heavy lenses? Or perhaps a smaller, more compact rangefinder outfit? Just a P&S? For nature photography, wildlife photography, or family snapshots? Your Wal-Mart rig could be plenty enough for you in terms of stability if your performance demands are on the light side.

I'll have to second the comments on choosing according to focal length. I have the GR1, and the photos it produces can be outstanding. However, if you're mainly into people shots, that means you have to be much closer, which can get on the nerves of your subjects (as in the case of my 4 yr old nephew - started running away whenever I pulled the camera out). As with any camera / lens, before buying it's best to first determine how you intend to use it.

Thanks everybody for the comments! I currently do stick to one ASA, 100 for general use since I figure for the most part I don't need a faster film for outdoors (oversimplifying, of course). And I'm not ready to try this on slide film clearly due to lattitude issues. The one thing I haven't done yet is to keep good notes of exposures used for various shots. I figure implementing a simple note-taking system would help tremendously over the long run, but that applies to whether you're guessing exposure or using a meter anyway!

 

Several suggested getting a meter and combining it with Sunny 16 (or just forgetting Sunny 16 altogether). I have been in fact thinking about getting a simple handheld light meter (have looked into Gossen Digisix, Pilot, Sekonic Twin), but with or without a hand meter, I think there are valid reasons for at least first trying to guess exposure.

 

I find that when I'm using an in-camera meter (not an option on the Retina, obviously), I tend to get distracted from the shot itself. Using the Sunny 16 guide has helped me pay a bit more attention to light than before, which in itself has become rather interesting. I believe it also helps me avoid obvious poor light shots while being more aware of other opportunities that I might have otherwise missed.

 

It also helps me understand a bit better what the light meters in my various cameras actually see.

 

Perhaps there's a bit of contrariness in the reason why I would desire to use guesstimation, but I believe there are practical reasons too why one would want to learn the technique.

 

Thanks again for all your answers and comments!

I have the G2 and I don't believe it differs much from the G1 in terms of its exterior. The ''little window'' should be flush. Good luck!

There have been a few posts recently regarding light meters. I am

interested in finding out how many of you don't use light meters but

simply abide by the Sunny 16 rule in most daylight conditions. The

reason I ask is because I fairly recently started playing around with

a camera (non-Leica) that is about as manual as you can get - a Kodak

Retina 1b. No meter, so one of course has to guess exposure. No

rangefinder or other focusing mechanism, so one has to guess

distance.

 

I've found that distance guessing is not that difficult if you

practice recognizing several distances - say 3 feet, 5 feet, 10 feet,

and 20 feet. Then one hopes that the guess and the DOF for the given

apeture coincide!

 

For exposure, I've found it a bit more difficult. I tend to

overestimate the amount of light, so in cloudy or overcast conditions

my photos tend to be underexposed. It's a matter of trial and error,

of course, but even after memorizing the several possible conditions

and their respective exposure values (yes, I've seen the

excellent ''Ultimate Exposure Computer'' site -

www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm for those who are interested - as well

as the basic exposure guides that come on the film box), but I still

get confused, wondering such things as what the heck is the

difference between 'subjects in heavy overcast' and 'subjects in open

shade' and why would the latter need more exposure?

 

As a side note, I did make what I think is a very nice shot in what

should have been a difficult lighting condition for an on-camera

meter, involving lots of shadows, bright streams of sunlight coming

through girders, and a construction worker half in half out of the

light with very nice lighting across the subject (in Hong Kong).

Need to get a scanner so I can upload the thing. I believe I simply

figured exposure at EV 13 or 14.

 

So, do you use guess exposure? How do you go about it? How much

success with it have you had? Any tips or hints on tricky

conditions? Would you ever consider leaving your meter at home and

instead just rely on your judgment of light conditions?

 

(finally - if you're wondering why I'm posting this in the Leica

forum as opposed to elsewhere, it's because the answers here tend to

be of better quality and thus more useful for Leica and non-Leica

users alike. Cheers!)

Check out the full reviews on www.dcresource.com. I just bought the G5 - can't really comment on it since I haven't had time to play around with it much, but the major reasons for my choice of the G5 over the 5050 were 1) longer lens (though both the 5050 and G5 have threaded lenses, so some adaptations can be made) and 2) better flip-out LCD screen. The 5050's lens is faster than the G5, but just barely, and picture quality on the 5050 and G5 appear similar though the 5050 apparently has a slightly larger problem with noise and purple fringing. That's according to the DC Resouces review.

I shall provide a Leica heretic's answer. Have you considered a Contax G2? Your $2000 budget will get you the camera (wonderful), the very nice 45 mm lens, and the very nice 90 mm lens (or the 28 mm, skip the 35 mm as it's supposedly the weakest lens in the Contax line-up) too, with change to spare for filters or whatever accessories would please you.

 

Assuming you're wanting this for street shooting, as you stated, rather than for shooting in silent, dark cathedrals where a Leica would shine, this outfit will serve your needs very nicely.

 

Let the flames begin!

If you're not afraid of chain outfits, Fotomax seems quite good. As a chain it probably would not count as "the best" color lab in HK but that would be a subjective judgment at best. Besides, are you talking print or slide? If print, assuming correct processing of the negatives you shouldn't of course have any problem getting reprints if you aren't satisfied with the color rendition.

Thanks everybody! And Ralph, that's a beautiful photo of your grandfolks - a real treasure for you I would figure. Actually, I'm glad to hear that most of you also hang on to the shots that in general would probably not make the cover of Nat. Geo. Of course, emotional content in a photo need not always come from the image quality itself, unless you happen to be a commercial photographer. On the other hand, it's also nice to have well-made family/friends shots.

Assuming that most of you shoot tons of film and end up with

boatloads of images (either slide or print), I'm just wondering what

you do with them afterwards? The reason I ask is because I tend to

take various shots, ranging from poor attempts at street photography

(and I emphasize poor) to your general run of the mill friends and

family type snapshots, yet afterwards I have no idea what to do with

them. Most are not worth keeping, yet I don't want to throw them

away, not for display but simply for the sake of memory. I figure

that what you plan to do afterwards with your photos probably

influences your philosophy towards photography and how you approach

your various subject matter.

 

Any comments or thoughts?