bleda_han

You should take a look at this review of the Fuji - positive:

 

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/fuji_3800.html

 

Cheers

At USD105, the Vivitar 19mm f/3.8 seems like an incredible deal, and

a great opportunity for introduction to ultra-wide photography.

 

Buying it would be the only possible way for me to own a true-ultra

wide angle lens for quite sometime - I just cannot afford the EF 20mm

f/2.8 for my Canon AF system.

 

Should I go for the Vivitar? Is there a catch?

 

Just recently I was lucky enough to find a used Sigma 24mm f/2.8 for

my manual Minolta at a real bargain price, and I am ecstatic with the

first results (Right exposure, sharp pictures with Provia 400F -

judged by me that is.) I guess I am hoping that with the Vivitar I

will be able to go even wider, and get similar results to the Sigma

24mm.

 

I am aware of the following parallel discussion, but I am not clear

about the messages:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000qAS

 

Thanks for your help

I had (I think) the same problem with the similar x-70 (X-GM): repair plus the necessary light blocking foam replacement: 138 Canadian Dollars at a very small but competent camera shop, and I did not even bargain. You need to shop around. The first two estimates at Toronto's two biggest camera stores were 185 and 200 CAD!

I have a "Pro Quality 58mm YA2" orange filter, and I am not sure I

know all that I should about using it in B&W photography.

 

I would appreciate any info specifically on the uses of orange

filters.

 

And finally, a 1980s National Geographic Field Guide book advises

using an orange filter with color film 'in order to make colors

warmer' - is there smth wrong here? Or do orange filters have uses

with color film as well?

 

Many thanks

Hi Ramta

 

I use my girlfriend's X-70, and yes, it is the same camera as XG-M.

 

The reviews of this camera on the internet are quite positive - almost no negative comments, and a lot of people seem to be using their X-70 cameras since the early 1980s without any need for repair.

 

The one I use (purchased in early 1980s) broke down in 2001, and I have recently taken it a small, but competent repair shop. The cost: 150 Canadian Dollars. I would not have spent that much for the repair of a manual camera if it had not been for 1)the large and good quality viewfinder this camera has 2) Three good lenses I (my girlfriend) have for this camera.

 

You can download the manual for this camera from Henry's Camera website (www.henrys.com) at no cost - go to the manuals page, and locate Minolta XG-M. If you have trouble finding it, e-mail me and I will e-mail you the manual (1.8 Megabytes).

 

Enjoy your camera

For those of you who are familar with the brilliant-historical comment on the media (from a brilliant Canadian), " ...the medium IS THE MESSAGE...", this will make sense: the 'digital vs. analog' dilemma will have a much more profound impact on photograpghy than indicated by the comments above. The dawn of digital photography will change much more than what goes in the analog or digital darkroom for one thing. If digital photography replaces the 'analog', it will change everything from the way human beings think about and perceive photography to the tecniques and methods of photography, and much much more...

 

Are photographers, analog or digital, ready to face these much more fundamental and (almost) ontological questions? Ciao.

Hi and thanks for the responses Here, and elsewhere the Vivitar lens has got positive reviews. It seems to be a better idea to shoot slide film with the manual Minolta - Vivitar 28mm combination, rather than the Rebel G - EF zoom. Ciao.

Hi and thank you very much for the responses - they both are helpful with regard to different aspects of my 'minor' dilemma. A positive confirmation of the third party Vivitar is particularly good to hear.

 

And exposure - yes, I would love to master that. A note of defence with regard to the photos I have posted so far; the majority are from the the first two years of my journey through photography, almost all taken by a kit EF zoom, and scanned by an amateur scanner through using prints from so-so quality labs. I would like to think I am just a little better these days - I am working on it!

Ciao

Thanks for all the responses;

 

I am going to be brave, and try to get better at using my girlfriend's manual minolta in addition to my Rebel G until the day I go digital (a two digit mega pixel Canon @ under $1000!)

hello

I have recently discoverd wide angle photography, and I am quite

taken by it.

 

Although I do not yet have an extreme wide angle lens, I have

the 'luxury' of choosing between a Vivitar 28mm f/2.8 on a manual

Minolta x70, and my Canon EF 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 at the 28mm/f3.5 end on

my Rebel G. Since landscape photography is my target for now, the

extra speed of the Vivitar does not make a difference.

 

So far I have compared them only with Royal Gold 100 and T-Max 100

(tripod shots) - to be honest I cannot decide which is better.

 

I would greatly appreciate some input before I start burning money

using slide film (first time ever) with these lenses.

 

Thank You very much

hello

 

I have recently discoverd wide angle photography, and I am quite

taken by it.

 

Although I do not yet have an extreme wide angle lens, I have

the 'luxury' of choosing between a Vivitar 28mm f/2.8 on a manual

Minolta x70, and my Canon EF 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 at the 28mm/f3.5 end on

my Rebel G. Since landscape photography is my target for now, the

extra speed of the Vivitar does not make a difference.

 

So far I have compared them only with Royal Gold 100 and T-Max 100

(tripod shots) - to be honest I cannot decide which is better.

 

I would greatly appreciate some input before I start burning money

using slide film (first time ever) with these lenses.

 

Thank You very much

 

Bleda Han

I own a Canon Rebel G, and lately I am very unhappy with its tiny

viewfinder. In the US$300-500 range, is there an AF SLR that comes

with a larger/better viewfinder?

 

I started photography in 1999 and bought a Rebel G kit (I did not

know any better), and I am still using that camera with mostly the 28-

105mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom. In the last two years, I have also been using

my girlfriend's manual Minolta SLR with her Minolta lenses, and what

a difference a large and bright viewfinder makes... After the

sensation of using the Minolta's viewfinder for composition, I just

do not want to go back to my Rebel's tiny, limiting viewfinder. I

think that the quality of a camera body's viewfinder makes a crucial

difference in the quality of the photographic output.

 

Thanks for your input

 

BH