john_trent

Martin, do you have any data on equivalent focal length? I'm so tired of wide-angle lenses (the main reason my 35GT doesn't see much use); I'm hoping the 9mm lens on this mini-digi has the same field of view afforded by the 75 or 80mm lenses fitted to most 2 1/4 TLR's.

 

Also, do you know the file sizes of pictures taken at the lower resolution settings?

 

Thanks so much.

Peter,

 

Sorry for the omission of a source. Is it the idea of reformatting itself or the frequency stated that you find so bizarre? The frequency recommended to me is a little more frequent than what I found from my internet search, but it's still in the ballpark. Though I've used computers for a couple of decades, I know very little about them; that's why I've paid others to build them for me. Three different companies all gave me the same advice on reformatting, for the reasons stated above. I did do an internet search before posting to see if such advice was still given and to make sure my terminology was at least vaguely correct, and I looked some more ofter reading your reply (see below). I could take a trip to the library to see if there are any more authoritative references.

 

http://support.gateway.com/s/tutorials/se_24189.asp

Reformatting the Hard Drive

As you use the computer, despite your best efforts, the hard drive slowly turns into a hopeless mess, filled with out-of-date data files. Weighted down by corrupted files. Loaded with no-longer used programs. Beset by a Windows Registry filled with errors. In time the only way to return to computing sanity is to reformat the hard drive.

 

http://support.gateway.com/s/tutorials/ar_5920.shtml

Formatting drives is actually laying down guide marks to establish the locations of the tracks and sectors of the drive. These guide marks are composed of magnetic particles and can become weakened or corrupted over time. Reformatting restores these all-important markers, which guide the accurate reading and writing of data.

 

http://www.computerhelper.us/computer_troubleshooting.htm

Hard Drive Repair

One common source of computer problems is damage to the surface of the hard disk, usually the result of moving or shaking the computer. This causes the recording head to bounce onto the drive surface, physically damaging parts of the recordable area on the disk.

 

http://www.computergoddess.com/011298.htm

A Complete Reformatting - This is not an event that has to occur under adverse conditions. It is a good idea to completely reformat your hard drive every year or so. This will allow your computer to lock out any bad sectors and keep you from saving data that may not be recoverable.

 

http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:kD6yLcQFZpQJ:www.80asg.army.mil/Staff/Damaged%2520Computers.doc

Periodic low-level reformatting of hard-disk drives (after backing up the data) is also good preventive maintenance, particularly with stepper-motor hard disk drives. Periodic reformatting lays down a new set of track and sector identification marks that better correspond to the physical locations where the heads are actually reading and writing the data.

If you haven't done it for a while, you might also consider just re-formatting your hard drive and re-installing your programs and data (provided you have your data backed-up), minus the Digitrex. The advice I've gotten with every computer purchase has been to do this once or twice a year anyway for proper hard drive maintenance (something about isolating damaged sectors caused by accidentally bumping the system unit when the hard drive is operating, and re-establishing the magnetic markers, which can become weakened or corrupted over time, that provide the location of tracks and sectors).

I just went through the process of helping a couple of people weed out the options in that price range, and we were all rather impressed with the Canon A60 and A70 models. Good quality lens, comfortable to hold, focuses well in low light, facilitates manual control when needed, etc. etc. Not needing the extra megapixel of resolution the A70 offers, one friend went with the $50.00 cheaper A60 and bought a higher capacity memory card with the savings to extend his shooting day.

 

A couple of unexpected bonuses revealed in the short time he's had it: greatly exended battery life compared with his previous digital camera (both using AA's) and surprisingly good, given the modest lens speed, available-light indoor pictures.

Thanks for the replies and for setting me straight on the means to lock in that 1/125 shutter speed. Strange how being able to disable the automatic exposure control and having just a single shutter speed makes the camera seem so much more versatile and user-friendly! With my favorite ASA 64 slide film and the sunny f/16 rule, that one shutter speed makes me ready for anything from heavy overcast to bright-sun-on-snow.

I'm 65 inches tall, but really appreciate the extra height of the 3021 legs. I use the 3047 3-way pan/tilt head. (Different people like different things, but I prefer pan/tilt over ball heads for still photography, and even more so for videography.) This combination would run just under $200.00. The Tiltall at about half that price is another good option.

Like Mr. Kaplan, I've bought a lot of filters, but haven't used one for many years. Of course, the only way to find out if you will enjoy using filters or if they will help you get the images you want is to try them for yourself. Given the rather unusual circumstances under which you must buy, I would suggest getting a full range of filters for just one lens, maybe your current 28-105 or the anticipated 50mm. Either of these will be the most generally useful and have filter sizes that keep the prices moderate. Experiment to your heart's content, figure out which filters would be useful for the types of pictures you're likely to take with your other lenses, and thus make more informed choices on a future spending spree.

 

By the way, if I were still using black and white film for landscapes (rather than for street photography, documentary work, available-light portraiture, etc.), it would not have been several years since having a filter on my lenses. I found a medium yellow to render gray values fairly naturally, and I also liked a yellow-green for outdoor portraiture and helping to differentiate tonal values in foliage. Orange had too strong an effect for my taste, but tastes differ.

Most of the authors I've read on the subject define landscape photography as being place-oriented, as opposed to being oriented to plants, wildlife, people, or things (buildings, trains, etc.). Cities, villages, farms, harbors, and other artifacts are as much a part of the experience of "place" as mountains, deserts, canyons, lakes, and trees.

 

As to the question of why we make photographs of it, one reason is that I enjoy having a pictorial record of places I've been; a means of evoking memories of a pleasant trip. Another purpose is reflected in Samuel Grierson's description of a good landscape:

 

"A successful picture in this class should appeal to the observer in such a way as to cause him to say, 'Gee, I wish I were at that spot,' because the spot looks restful to him and he pictures himself away from his cares, taking it easy under the trees." [or strolling around that interesting harbor, or visiting a pub in that quaint village, or enjoying the architecture in the old part of town, etc., etc.]

If the T4 is too bulky, the Epic is the camera of choice. I have the original Stylus and a Minox 35 GT, and it's amazing how much smaller the Epic feels, both in the hands and in a shirt-pocket (that 1 or 2 ounces less weight really does make a difference).

Like Mr. Crowe, I don't use ball heads, but I do find the levels on the 3047 head to be useful. I don't know if your camera has this available, but changing to a focusing screen with vertical and horizontal grid lines is another good aid to keeping things level.

I would at least consider the 3021N legs. Almost a pound heavier and 2" longer folded length, but it goes 5" lower in minimum height and over a foot taller. It's amazing how often that extra reach comes in handy (and I'm only 5'5"). Also, if you ever move to, or add, medium format, the 3021 legs will be fully up to the task.

1. I was given a Minox GT, but got just a couple rolls of film

exposed before the mercury battery gave out. I bought the battery

conversion set from Minox, but now find the camera underexposes by

almost 2 stops. Not a problem with manually-adjustable ASA, but

wondered if this was a typical experience.

 

2. Absence of exposure lock seems to be the biggest hindrance to

getting quality results with this camera. With its AE lock, I get

much better results with slide film using an Olympus Stylus (f/3.5

triplet) than I do with the GT. Because of the exposure problems,

the GT has been relegated to snapshots on print film, which seems a

waste of its supposedly fine lens.

 

3. I have read Peter van de Haar's suggestion in these forums for

locking in a 1/125 second shutter speed on the GTE by inserting a

square piece of plastic in the hot shoe. On the GT, a square piece

of plastic is always in the hot shoe, I assume to protect the flash

connection, and has no effect on the automatic operation of the

shutter. I could keep the flash unit in place and turned off, but

that kind of ruins the pocketability feature. Is there a trick to

locking in the GT at 1/125, too? The manual states that you cannot

disengage the automatic exposure control of the Minox GT.

 

4. Depth of field scale seems very conservative. For example, at

f/8.0, hyperfocal distance on the GT is about 20 feet, giving depth

of field from about 15 ft. to infinity; on a 35mm Zeiss Distagon,

hyperfocal distance at the same aperture is about 10 feet, showing

depth of field from about 6 ft. to infinity. In practice, I've been

very satisfied using the depth of field range for one f/stop smaller

than is set (i.e., the f/11 range when using f/8).

Being new to these forums, I don't remember you from before, and I couldn't find posts about your earlier problems by using the search function, so I'm probably missing something you've discussed before, but I'm curious about the phrase "It looks as though it's brand new." Is there something so bad about the new, warrantied X-370S bodies that makes taking a chance on buying used, and then spending more money on repairs, the better route?

It's not as simple as citing a brand, since most brands that at one time marketed M42 mount cameras also marketed bayonet bodies. Here's a website that lists some brands of cameras using the M42:

 

http://anusf.anu.edu.au/~aab900/photography/cameras/cameras.htm

 

Probably the later Pentax thread-mount bodies (SP500, SP1000, Spotmatic) would be your best bet in terms of availability, repairability, and overall quality (though I may be biased, seeing as how an SP1000 and Takumar lenses that I bought in 1976 are still being put to good use). Even the meters in a Pentax work well with current non-mercury cells because of some extra voltage-regulating circuitry.

Whatever other camera(s) your dad may or may not end up getting, a pocketable point-and-shoot like the Stylus Epic is a valuable photographic tool. The older Stylus (F3.5 triplet lens) has given me great memory-jerker photos of family, friends, and co-workers at those impromptu gatherings where I wouldn't have thought to bring (and wouldn't even have wanted to bring) a larger camera. I've given several Stylus Epics to friends and family members who were disappointed in the results obtained from zoom point-and-shoots or disposable cameras--universal praise and amazement at the improved image quality from the little Epic.

Is it worth it for what? What's your intended use? What do you consider "quite cheap?"

 

1. Extra lenses and accessories will also be more difficult to come by than the more popular makes, but perhaps there's nothing else you really need. If you like the way if looks and feels, and the prospect of finding and shooting images with it appeals to you, then it's probably worth it.

 

2. If you're looking for something to complement and expand your current Nikon system, it's probably not.

Here are a couple of sites that may be of interest, one being an owner's manual for your camera, the other detailing the battery replacement issue:

 

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/praktica_mtl3/praktica_mtl3.htm

 

http://www.kjsl.com/canon-fd/cameras/batteries.html

 

My experience with trying to use alternative batteries in a device designed for mercury cells has been variable (mostly poor). Since the battery only powers your meter, I would be inclined to use an exposure chart or look for a separate meter (which might be useful for other thrift store camera finds). Adorama has a handheld selenium meter (no batteries required!) new for about $30.00, or you might find one at a thrift store/swap meet/yard-sale for less than the cost of a battery.