jeffrey_winn

Greetings,

Recently I've picked up a a used Nikon N-70 camera with a 70-300mm zoom lens.

I've used this camera a few times, and would like to add another lens and a

shoe mount flash. I don't want to spend a lot on this lens or flash, as this

is not my primary camera. But I want to get the best bang for the buck.

For the lenses, I'm considering the following:

Nikon 24-120 3.5-5.6D

Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5D

Nikon 28-80 3.5-5.6D

Nikon 28-85 3.5-4.5 macro

Nikon 35-105 3.5-4.5D

From what I've read, I'm leaning towards the 28-105, 24-120, or the 35-105. I

just don't know enough about either lens. If there is something else I should

consider, please add it to the list.

For a flash, I'm looking at either the SB-28 or the SB-80DX. I'm also

considering a third party flash such as the Vivitar 730AF or the Sunpak

PZ4000AF. I'm sure that the Nikon flashes will work well, but for a very low

price will one of these other flashes get the job done? I want the flash to be

able to take advantage of all of the cameras capabilities.

Let me know what you think.

Jeff

I'm Back!!

I'd like to add a note to this discussion. I looked up everything I could on the Vivitar 2800 Flash, and couldn't find a trigger voltage in any paperwork. I suddenly remembered that I have a new and accurate voltmeter that I used only once about two years ago. So, I decided to test the flash myself before I tried it on the camera.

My 2800 has a voltage of about 35 volts when powered up and fully charged. With the N-70 having a max trigger voltage of 250 volts, according to the manual, I feel I'm pretty safe using this old flash with the old camera. I haven't run any flim through the camera yet using this flash, but I did a few test shots without film in the camera. I will no longer have a lot of the gee-wizz aspects of the N-70 and flash. But, since this is my backup camera, this setup should work for a time until I get around to buying a proper Nikon flash.

Jeff

Thsnks for all of the quick responses. I think long term I'll look into a Nikon flash, as it will work better with this camera and possible future cameras.

The 2800 that I have was picked up back in the mid 80's and has worked well for years. I've been busy at work, but I need to do a bit more research on my own before I try this flash out.

On a side note, my wife used this camera successfully last night at my daughters dance recital. The pop up flash seemed to do OK, as she wasn't too far from the stage. But, we all know a real flash will do much better in this enviroment. I haven't seen the results yet, but I'm sure that they are sperior to her normal point and shoot camera photos.

Thanks again for the help!

Jeff

Greetings!

I've been a dedicated Canon FD manual focus shooter since the mid 1980's.

Recently, I've picked up a Nikon N-70 camera with a 70-300 zoom. I'm currently

enjoying the camera, but I would like to know if I can use a Vivitar 2800 Auto

Thristor flash without damaging the N-70. I've used this flash with my Canon T-

70 without any problems for years. My question is, can I used this flash

without any problems, and is there a certain way I should set the camera up?

I've read the manual, and it only mentions Nikon Flashes.

Thank you for any help!

Jeff

John,

Thanks for your help. I need to find that book, as it seems to be the answer for all of my questions.

The vacation is off to a poor start. Two hour into the vacation my 8 year old daughter broke her left arm in a fall at the beach. Needless to say, this has put a damper on the photography. She is now on a cast, and doing well.

Thanks again for the information on using the flash for fill, and the book. I need to pick this up, as I'm sure it is full of a lot of useful information.

Jeff

Joe and Bill,

Good advice. I think I can handle the usual stuff, but the fill flash advice is really confusing me.

In the lighting section I've read many times that you need to balance the ambient light with flash for top quality photos at the beach. In most cases, it seems that these photographer are just using a digital camera, and keep chimping until they get it right. Obviously, I can't do this with film. But, I'm not sure of the results that I'll get using the 299T flash and ambient light. I've used the 299T and the T-70 together outdoors during the day, but the background seems to always come out dark. In other words, the photos appear to have been shot at dusk or even night.

Is there something special that I need to do to achieve the bright colorful sky of the beach, yet have the proper fill so that the people will be proper exposed?

Thanks again,

Jeff

Greetings!

I'm going to spend a week at the beach with family and friends, and I plan to

take along my trusty Canon T-70 and lenses. I've spent some time reading posts

about taking photos at the beach, and I hope to finish this week with a few

good photos. I usually just take photos at the beach without the flash, but

after reading the many post that suggest using fill flash, I think I'll try a

few shots with the flash as well. Is there any tricks to pass along using the

Canon T-70 and 299T together, where I can have the beautiful sky and sunsets,

yet use the flash for fill? Should I just leave the flash and camera in

program, and let it handle everything?

I plan to use a Canon 100mm f2.8 lens for some shots, and a 50mm f1.8, and

28mm f2.8 for group shots depending on what's going on. I'll also be playing

around with a few other lens, but these are the main ones that I think I'll be

using.

I also would like to take the flash off the camera if possible for a few

photos, to see what the effect will be. I have the Radio remotes, and a

Minolta IIIF flashmeter. I've played around with using the flashes remotely,

but only for a few indoor photos. I'm really not sure how to meter for both

the bright sky, and also the flash for fill if they are set up remotely. Help

here is needed!

These are going to be just family photos, as I'm not a pro. But, I would like

to have a few nice photos to enlarged to 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 at the end of the

week. Any advice would be appreciated.

Jeff

Hello,

The discussion provided me with a lot of useful information!!!!! You guys have forgotten more about cameras and photography then I've ever learned. Thanks again.

For my 300 mm f 4.0, I see a 1.4 x teleconverter in the future. Right now I'm just playing around, and I wanted to test out the functionality of these devices, and see how the loss of light would effect the photos, and how I liked using the teleconverter. My first impressions is that using the Kiron 2x will be fun, but it will force me to be much more careful while using it. I've shot a few frames, and already learned that I need to us my remote release to help steady the camera. As mentioned above, I'm looking at some slow shutter speeds for this lens/tele combo. Yesterday there was a heavy overcast, and even pointing the lens at the sky gave me a shutter speed of only 1/250 with 400 speed film. To get the best photos I can, I will need to be very careful with camera shake, concentrate on proper focus, etc. But hey, this is why I bought the 2x, so I could experiment.

Thanks again!

Jeff

Ben,

Thanks for the quick response! I'll remount the teleconverter and lens as you said, and I'll give it a spin. I'm very curious to see how well this combo performs. Looking through the lens/tele, I'm amazed at how close I can get to objects in the distance. 600 mm is really something, but from what I've read I'll need good technique to get good results. I also realize that this combo won't be as good as the Canon 600 mm lens, but for a few bucks I'll be able to play around and have some fun.

My goal for a time was to find a Canon FD 1.4x teleconverter. I see them all of the time at different places, but I haven't been able to pull the trigger. So, for one tenth the price of the 1.4x, I can give this option a whirl. If I like what I see, I can always get the 1.4x, which I've read is an excelent teleconverter.

Thanks again!

Jeff

Greetings,

I just picked up the Kiron MC7 2X teleconverter. I've already read all of the

drawbacks of using these devices, but for a very inexpensive price I got one

anyway. Now that I have it attached to my lens, I really don't know if it is

working properly.

I attached this 2X teleconverter to my Canon FD 300mm 4.0 lens, then I

attached this combo to my T-70. When I looked through the camera viewfinder,

the camera is showing f 4.0. I was expecting the camera to show f 8.0, as I've

read that the the 2X will double the focal length, and also change the minimum

f-stop by two stops. Shouldn't the camera be showing f 8.0 as a miminum

setting?

If I put the T-70 in program, (Program TELE) and the info in the viewfinder is

showing f 4.0, will I get a correct exposure? Do I need to use this

teleconverter in Manual, and make a correction?

I really didn't plan on using this teleconverter much, but I'd like to use it

correctly for the best results possible. Any help would be appreciated.

Jeff

Mark,

Are you trying to have the camera and flash work together, as in automatically setting f stops etc, or are you just looking for a way to trigger the flash and set the camera up manually?

I can't help you with a cable, but I can recommend using radio remotes triggers from *bay. I bought a set and use it with my T-70 and 299T. So far I'm happy with the results. I've only used it a few times, as I just got them. But, I'm looking at flash photography in a whole new light! The price for the remotes is pretty reasonable, and I've begun to play around with some off camera flash stuff.

Using the remotes I set up everything manually, and use a flash meter. Additionally, I've picked up an umbrella and stand, to fire the flash into. It is pretty slick, and when the weather cools off more I plan to try it more.

I think I drifted off topic a bit, but I hope this helps.

Jeff

Hello to all,

I picked up the Minolta Auto Meter IIIF. I guess at the KEH price, it was too hard to beat. I also just received my remote triggers, and just tested them out. Once the film is developed, I'll see how this combination works.

Thanks again for all of the help!

Jeff

Greetings,

I'm slowly in the process of collecting the gear needed to do a little off

camera flash photography. I plan to use as much of my current equipment as

possible to keep the costs under control, and I'm not a Pro. So, I find myself

in the market for a flash meter.

My goal here is to use my current 35 mm photo gear, a wireless remote, an

umbrella, and light stand. I'm gathering these items now, and have a good

handle on what I need. But, I really can't seem to get my hands around the

different Flash Meters that are out there.

I'm looking for a new or used Flash meter in the $100.00 price range. I'm

thinking that this will greatly help me with setting up the photos. Currently,

I've been thinking of getting a Minolta iiiF meter. I think it will handle all

of my meterings tasks. What do you think?

I also goof off and use a few old folders, and a stereo camera that don't have

a meter. I hope to get one meter that can do both reflective/incident

metering, and flash metering.

Am I on the right track? Can I do what I want with one of these Minolta

meters? Is there a better meter for what I want to do?

Thanks in advance!

Jeff

Everyone,

Thanks for the great information! I'll order the remotes, and other gear and give it a try. If this works out I might want to expand later. But, to be honest I think it will take me a while to master this setup before I move on to actual studio flashes, etc.

Yesterday I looked at the basketball photos on The Strobist, and I was impressed with what one can do with just a few flashes and a lot of imagination. As I've read here before it is all about getting the light correct. Once I understand this, I should be able to produce better photos.

Thanks again for all of your help.

Jeff

Greetings,

Lately, I?ve been reading a lot about off camera flash from a web site called

The Strobist. This web site recommends many different techniques for using

your flash remotely, for many different looks. I must admit that I?m amazed at

the results one can achieve by using your shoe-mounted flash off camera. I?m

also impressed that they try to use a low budget approach to lighting, yet

still get some neat photos.

Anyway, my goal is to give this off camera flash stuff a try. But, I?m not

entirely sure if I?m going about it the right way. My goal is to use my

existing equipment as much as possible. The only things that I think I need to

add are a flash meter, light stand and clamp, umbrella, and a way to activate

my flash remotely. For now I?ll be using a Canon T-70, with a 299T flash. I

hope to fire this flash using the E-bay radio remotes, with the hot shoe for

firing the flash. The Strobist spends a lot of time talking about ?Chimping

the image?, which we can?t do with a film camera. But, I hope the flash meter

will do the trick.

What am I missing? I feel that I should be able to get good results, assuming

I?m using the equipment correctly. Are the E-bay remotes worth it? If anyone

has any experience or additional information that you want to pass along, I?d

love to hear it.

Thanks in advance!!

Jeff

Ben,

Lenses drive me crazy. For the life of me I can't seem to know why certain lenses produce great results, while other lenses don't. For example, I have a very cheap Vivitar 80-200 zoom that I bought off E-bay years ago for a whopping $34.00. This lens is in good shape, but it does have some fungus. Yet, it is one of my favorite lenses. I yearn to replace it with a Canon FD 70-210, or perhaps the Canon FD 80-200L. But, I consistantly get good photos outdoors, so it isn't a priority with me. I'm also usually dissappointed by my Vivitar Series One 28-90 f2.8-3.5 zoom. This lens is in terriffic shape, yet the results are just OK. In fact, when I use this lens, I keep hoping for better results, and I'm usually dissappointed.

I have a Canon FD 100mm f2.8 that has been beaten up, yet produces my best photos on a consistant basis. I also have a good Canon FD 300mm f4.0 that I love. When I look to get a new lens, it seems to be a crap shoot. I did a lot of looking before I picked up the 28-90 zoom, and I thought I had a winner on my hands. Now, more often then not, the 28-90 spends most of it's time in my bag, and not of the camera.

I sometimes think taking photos is like cooking a steak out on the BBQ grill. Once in a while you do everything exactly like you did last time, yet the Steak doesn't turn out the way you had hoped. I scratch my head about this, and then just move on.

I've thought about the 135mm f2.0 before. I really like the idea of the speed, but wondered if it was worth the cost. You can pick up 135mm 2.5 or 2.8 all day long for under $100.00, which seems tough to beat. Then again, I love the look of my 300mm f4.0 and appreciate the photos when compared to my friends who use their cheaper consumer 70-300 zooms. I'll have to think about this some more!

Jeff

Ben, and everyone else,

Thanks for your response. I always figured it was something unique about the lens. Everywhere, from E-bay to KEH the 2.5 sells for more then the 2.8. I've never really heard anything bad about the 2.8, I just noticed that the 2.5 demands more in the market place.

I've been interested in this focal length for some time now. As I take photos of my kids playing basketball, I find I'm in the area of 135 often using my zoom. But, my zoom is an f 4.0. So, indoor shots are a little tougher to get a quick focus in the poorly lit gyms. I've been interested in one of these for the extra speed, and the fact that it will probably be sharper then my cheap zoom.

Thanks again,

Jeff

I've always been puzzled by the fact that the older Canon FD 135mm f2.5 usually sells for more then the newer Canon FD 135mm 2.8. Is it really a better lens? I realize that the 2.5 is slightly faster, but is this enough to make a difference?

Jeff

Alexandros,

My Canon FD 300mm f4.0 lens was purchased from KEH in bargain condition a few years ago. The glass is clean, the barrel has just a few of the smallest marks on it, and they don't show any paint loss, and the lens performs as it should. Overall, I've been very happy with this lens, and KEH overall.

Recently, I just bought a Nikon N-80, a 35-105, and a 70-300 lens for my sister from KEH. All arrived in great condition. Additionally, I bought a Tokina 90mm Macro lens for my Canon FD and it looked perfect. I've been happy with the equipment that I bought from them, and I would recommend them again. Good Luck!

Jeff

Peter,

You can pick up a Canon 300mm f 4.0 from KEH in bargain condition for $99.00 right now. They also have the Canon 1.4 teleconverter for $159.00 in LN- condition.

I have the Canon 300mm f 4.0, which I bought from KEH in bargain condition. It is a super lens, and my copy was in great shape. Make sure that you get the included tripod mount, as it is a pretty big lens. I've was looking for a little more reach like you, and the 300mm was the perfect answer. Like you I really don't use this lens too much. But when I need it, I'm very happy to have it with me. Others have written about the 300mm f4.0 L version being superior. But, for $99.00, this non-L lens is a hard lens to pass up.

Like you, I always seem to be in search of more reach. I've considered the 1.4 teleconverter, but I can't pull the trigger. For now, I just think I'll keep using the 300mm when I need something to get me closer.

Jeff

Thanks fo the quick response to my question! I'm leaning toward the SB-28. It seems to do everything that she will ever need.

Thanks again,

Jeff

Greetings!

Please bear with me, as I'm a Canon FD (Manual Focus) shooter!

Anyway, my sister had a Nikon N-55 camera with a 28-80 zoom lens and Quantaray

flash stolen from her car. She used this camera for all of the usual family

stuff, but also took a lot of photos for her kids school yearbook. She has

learned to appreciate the better quality of her indoor flash photos using a

speedlight instead of just the pop up flash.

I recently ordered for her a Nikon N-80 and zoom lens to replace her stolen

camera. What would be a good speedlight to use with the N-80? I'm leaning

towards the SB-28, or SB-26 but don't really know enough about the Nikon stuff

to make a good decision. I'm looking at picking up one of these flashes at

KEH.com.

My sister used to complain about her N-55 and flash combo, as they didn't seem

to work great together, and she couldn't use some features. With this flash

I'd like to get her something that will allow her to take full use of the

camera, and the flash! What do you recommend, within reason. I'm hoping to get

a good flash for about 75 bucks.

Let me know, and thanks in advance!

Jeff

I've always looked at Digital cameras and computers the same way. You really aren't buying a camera or computer, but rather you are buying technology that you will use for a period of time. In the future, you will buy additional upgraded technology. I don't see a lot of people collecting old digital cameras in the future.

Over the past few years I've enjoyed using my old cameras, and I recently added a Zeiss Ikon Ikonta to my camera collection. I enjoy producing photos with these old cameras, and I'm always pleasantly surprised at the results. With this old camera, or my Voigtlander Vito II, I've taken a few nice photos that look as good as anything I could make with my modern Canon T-70, 1985 vintage camera. Sure they are a lot harder to use, and for really important photos I'm not using them. But, when I'm just messing around, I love to be surprised. I don't see this happening with old digital cameras 25 years from now.

Jeff

Bill,

I understand your concerns about the T-90/70 electronics. But, if you liked the T-70, you should just pick up another one. At today's prices, you can get a good one for not a lot of money. If it has the same problems in 5 years use, you will have easily gotten your monies worth out of it.

I've been unable to pull the trigger and get a T-90 myself, as I fear the dreaded EEEE/HELP problems. I'm afraid that I don't use my gear enough, and the end result will be shutter problems from lack of use. But, I do have and use a T-70 and it has been working fine since I bought it new in 1985.

Good luck,

Jeff

Justin,

I've been doing a lot portraits lately. Just the kids and family, mind you. But, I can't say enough good things about the Canon FD 100mm f2.8 lens. My current example is a true beater. I mean it is more banged up then an old aluminum baseball bat. I've even got a nice little scratch on the front element. I picked this lens up for next to nothing, wasn't that concerned about the looks, and decided to gamble on the scratch. Well guess what? Even in it's current state it is a winner. It has produced some of the best photos that I've ever taken.

The Canon FD 100mm f2.8 is one lens that I can strongly recommend. The colors are great, the detail in the photos is great, and it does a wonderful job of bluring out the back ground to isolate the subject. When I've enlarge the photos to 8 X 10 you can see the small whisps of hair blowing off my daughters head in the breeze. The look and feel of the photos is super, and the images just pop off the photo. I've received many compliments of my photos when I use this lens. The lens can be bought in much better condition then mind for around $100.00. A great investment.

I would ask others about using a 200 mm lens for portraits. I've heard nothing bad about this lens in Canon FD, but working distance may be an issue. Also, there are two different versions. On the older one, I believe that the front element rotates as you focus. This may be an issue for you. If you are in a smaller room, you may not be able to back up enough to get the framing you want.

I also have a Tokina AT-X 90mm f2.5 macro lens that I really like. I've used it for some macro stuff, and for portraits as well. I haven't had this lens as long as the 100mm, but it is a fine lens. But, right now for an important photo, out comes the 100mm.

Jeff