jeffrey_winn

I was flying in the US Air Force, and I took a trip to New Orleans for Marti Gras. While there I was using an old Pentax 35mm camera that my dad gave me. Well, after a long weekend of enjoying myself in the city, we were about to depart for home. Our car was packed and locked, and we just ran in to say good by to our friends who lived in N.O. During the five minutes we were inside their house, my car was broken into and the camera along with all of our luggage was stolen.

I ended up talking to everyone in our squadron about cameras, and the most popular camera seemed to be the Canon AE-1 Program. But, when I went to the store, I ended up liking the Canon T-70 better. I didn't know much about cameras at the time, or some may say now, but I just liked the T-70. This was in 1985, and I've had the camera ever since. I've added about 6 lenses to the origional 50mm 1.8. I've also added a 299T flash which I really enjoy using with the T-70.

Now, with everybody making the switch to digital I really appreciate the Canon T-70 and lenses. Too many point and shoot digitals take really poor photos, and I can't understand how so many people made the switch from film to point and shoot digital only to take a step back in photo quality. Obviously there are great digital cameras and lenses out there. But too may consumers like me jumped on digital. Since I have a few kids we take a lot of photos, and share them with friends. The canon T-70 and FD lenses do a very nice job, and the only limitation seems to be that of the photographer. ( I still make so many mistakes that it is funny at times. But, I still seem to produce good photos with the FD gear, and I can't see any reason to change.)

Jeff

Jeff

Greg,

I have the 300 f/4, (the Non-L version)and I like it. I'm sure the L version is wonderful, but I've been pleased with the regular lens. You will need the tripod collar, as the regular lens can be a handful without a tripod.

Jeff

Thanks for the good information. I'll be on the road for the next few days, and I hope to return to do some reading of the T-90 reviews. My fear is getting a T-90 that needs a lot of work right off the bat. But, I also think I might regret not picking one up at these low prices.

I read a good article in Shutterbug about shooting with film and then scanning the negatives if you are going to go Digital. This article really hit home, as this is what I've been doing to an extent. I'm not ready to shellout the big bucks for a digital SLR, and I've seen too many so so photos from the point and shoot variety of digital camera. So I plan to use my Canon FD gear for the foreseeable future.

More later...

Greetings!,

I've had Canon T-70 camera for about 20 years and I've been pretty

happy with the camera most of the time. I've learned to deal with a

few of the quirks of the camera, but like most T-70 users I've been

frustrated at times as well. I've always wondered if upgrading to a

T-90 would be worth it, or should I place this money into different

lenses or film?

The recent drop in prices for T-90's and other FD gear has brought

this question to my mind. Most of my photos are just the usual

family stuff. I've been happy with the Canon FD gear and I'm always

trying to improve. Also, as my kids get older I find my photo

opportunities are changing and becoming more varied. For example

I've used the a 300mm for both outdoor sports, and indoor dance

recitals.

My current crop of lenses include a Canon FD 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8,

100mm 2.8, 300mm 4.0, and two Vivitar zooms 28-90 Series One, and

Vivitar 80-200 4.0. For flash I use a Canon 299T.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Jeff

Thanks again for all of the great help. I need to find out how to mount these slides by myself.

All of the slides were on Kodacrome, and have really held up over time. The earliest slide that I looked at was from 1955, with later ones from as late as 1980. The camera and equipment were all from my wife's great uncle, who worked for Kodak for about 45 years.

Thanks again,

Jeff

Greetings,

Earlier today while I was visiting my In-laws, they pulled out some

old stereo slides from their wedding in the 1950's, and also photos

of my wife as a child. I was very impressed by the condition of these

slides. We talked for a time as we viewed the stereo slides with the

viewfinder. Then my mother-in-law informed me that she still had the

stereo camera that produced these slides. Sure enough, out of a box

came the Kodak Stereo Camera in mint condition. By mint, I mean

perfect. The box included everything from the owners manual for the

camera and viewer, to a sales receipt for additional light bulbs for

the viewfinder.

My question to anyone who can help is this: Can you still get the

stereo slides processed anywhere? If the answer is yes, I need to

borrow this camera, and give it a try. From a quick look at the

manual, it seems that you can use standard 135 film in addition to

the specified 335 film for the camera. So, if I can find a place to

process the slides, I may be able to create a few wonderful memories

for my kids to enjoy in the future.

Thanks again for any help!

Jeff

Sorry guys and gals, wrong section!

Jeff

Greetings,

Earlier today while I was visiting my In-laws, they pulled out some

old stereo slides from their wedding in the 1950's, and also photos

of my wife as a child. I was very impressed by the condition of these

slides. We talked for a time as we viewed the stereo slides with the

viewfinder. Then my mother-in-law informed me that she still had the

stereo camera that produced these slides. Sure enough, out of a box

came the Kodak Stereo Camera in mint condition. By mint, I mean

perfect. The box included everything from the owners manual for the

camera and viewer, to a sales receipt for additional light bulbs for

the viewfinder.

My question to anyone who can help is this: Can you still get the

stereo slides processed anywhere? If the answer is yes, I need to

borrow this camera, and give it a try. From a quick look at the

manual, it seems that you can use standard 135 film in addition to

the specified 335 film for the camera. So, if I can find a place to

process the slides, I may be able to create a few wonderful memories

for my kids to enjoy in the future.

Thanks again for any help that anyone can pass along.

Jeff

Greetings!

I've read the many good responses, and thanks again for all of the help.

I do have the tripod mounting collar for the lens, and this is how I've attached the lens to the tripod. This gives a pretty stable platform, but with the wind blowing it was causing a few problems. I was looking for a few good suggestion on how to shoot in this enviroment.

I did read the article on shooting with long lenses a long time ago. I guess I must review that article again.

I've been using this lens at shutter speeds around 1/500 sec. I have only taken about 15-20 photos so far with this lens, as I've been kinda of busy with family and work. But, the photos that I've received have been good. Most of the photos were taken in the back yard, without the strong wind. In this enviroment, I didn't have any real problems. On the beach, I just felt clumsy with the lens, and I think a few of the photos will be a little blury due to camera shake.

Thanks again for all of the help. I'll take this lens out again over the next few days, and I'll try a few different techniques.

Jeff

Greetings!

A little while ago, I asked and received a lot of good information

about longer range lenses. Well, I'm the proud owner of a slightly

used Canon 300mm 4.0 lens. I just got back my first few photos, and

I now have a few more questions.

To begin, I've been using this lens with a pretty sturdy tripod, and

I'm pleased with the results so far. But, I feel clumsy using the

lens. I guess it is the size and weight of the lens that I'm a

little concerned about. Namely, should I use the cable release when

using the lens to reduce camera shake. I think I might be moving the

lens a bit.

Earlier today I was out on the beach, and the wind was blowing about

25 MPH. For the first time I found it a bit challenging to keep the

lens steady. I had the camera on the tripod, but as I looked into

the viewfinder, there was a bit of movement during the wind gusts.

Other then a heaver and sturder tripod, is there an easy solution to

fix this problem. I read somewhere that attaching a length of bungie

cord to the tripod, and then stepping on this to add tension will

help. Has anyone else tried this?

Thanks again for all of the help.

Jeff

Greetings!

Thanks again for all of the helpful information. I ordered a Canon FD 300mm f4.0 today. It is scheduled to arrive in a few days, and I look forward to trying it out. I did spend some time looking at other lenses, including many zooms. But, in the end this seemed to be the best lens for what I hope to do.

Thanks again,

Jeff

Greetings!

Thanks to everyone for the quick and very useful information. Armed with the above info, I should be able to make a more informed decision.

My entire Canon 35 mm camera kit consists of a Canon T-70 with a 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 100mm 2.8, and two Vivitar zooms: 80-200 f4.0 and a Series 1 28-90 f2.8/3.5. My flashes are my old Vivitar 2800, and my new for me Canon 299T. I also have the usual tripods, lens hoods, and a remote release. As I've become more involved in photography I have tried to add a few pieces of equipment for certain situations, like my above listed question on lens selection. I've also learned a lot in the process of using the different lenses and flash.

My inital additions to my camera were the zoom lenses. I picked up both in very good condition for a song. In fact, the 80-200 zoom cost just a little more then the shipping. But, as I've used these lenses, I have seen a few shortcomings, and hence I've added the 28 and 100mm primes. My complaints about the zooms are as folows:

1. The 28-90 is a bit too heavy and bulky to drag around all day. Between chasing three small kids, and all of the related stuff that they require, I find that this lens is just a litte too big. I still use this lens often when I leave the house with just one lens, but I always wish it was smaller and lighter.

2. The 80-200 zoom just doesn't have the extra reach that I want. I'll be at some function with one of the kids out front, and I just can't get close enough. So, the new interest in some reach.

At last years recital for my little girl, I arrived about 45 minutes before the big event was about to begin. I assumed that this was plenty of time to secure good seats. Well, the place was already packed, and I was forced to sit pretty far back. But, using the 80-200 zoom and the 299T on a tripod I was able to get a few OK photos. In fact, we made a few prints for friends, as these photos were superior to thier photos using 35mm and digital point and shoot cameras, even though they were much closer to the action. This year I hope to arrive much earlier, and also carry a longer lens to get the closeups that I want.

My initial gut feeling after reading the different posts is to go for the Canon 300 f4.0 lens. I'm a little concerned about the size and weight of this lens. I realize that there really aren't many options for a light fast lens in this range, but I worry about the weight, and how many times I'll leave it home instead of taking it just due to the weight. If I get this lens I plan to use a tripod.

I wish they made a consummer level zoom for Canon FD that is the size and weight of the autofocus 70-300 zooms. But, I guess these just aren't available. My desire for this light weight consummer zoom is because I think it will get more use due to it's lighter weight and smaller size. I bought a 70-300mm zoom as a birthday present for my sister's Nikon camera. The size and weight of this lens are a big plus.

Lastly, I'd like to give a big thumbs up to the Canon 100mm 2.8 lens. I picked up this lens last December, and I now wonder how I got along without it. I'm a pilot, and naturally travel a great deal for work. Well, I keep a small photo album with me to show co-workers, and I cycle my latest photos in and out of this album. I either have gotten very lucky with the 100mm 2.8 lens, or this lens is just a winner. On a regular basis I receive the highest compliments of the photos taken with this lens.

Thanks again for all of your help, and I hope to decide soon.

Jeff

Greeting,

I have a Canon T-70 and several different lenses that take care of

most of my needs. But, I'm looking for something with a little more

reach. Basically, I don't have anything longer then an 80-200mm

zoom, and at times I wish I could get closer. For example, I have a

dance recital comming up, and at last years I was just too far away

to get the close up's that I wanted. I also see myself using this

len for outdoor photos of the kids playing organized sports, where I

can't get on the field. I'm not sure if I want another zoom, or a

prime. As of now I really haven't looked too much. But, I'm

considering the Canon FD 300mm 4.0, or a Tamron 60-300 Zoom.

Any advice on the above lenses would be appreciated. Additionally,

any advice on the way I'm attacking this problem.

Thanks,

Jeff

Donald,

Thank you for your advice on my new camera. I've been traveling for work for the past week or so, and I'm sorry it has take me so long to return your message. Anyway, I'm going to try to rescue the old film and get it developed some how. However, I don't think I'll be able to get new film for this camera. I've begun the process of cleaning up the camera, and I think it will remain as a display camera. I guess that I'm not cut out for manufactuing my own film.

This old camera was from an estate sale back where I grew up. It is in OK shape, but it isn't a real collector's camera. In any case, thanks for the help!

Jeff

Greetings!

I'm the proud new ower of a Eljy Lumiere camera. I open my mail box

and inside was a box from my brother containing the camera. I've

been talking to him about old cameras, and he just surprised me with

this old camera. It is in OK shape, but I need a manual to learn

more about it. Where would be a good place to begin this search.

This old camera also seems to have film in it. When I move the small

tab on the back of the camera, there looks to be sometime inside the

red window. This may just be the red window itself, with nothing

behind it. But, if there is film inside I would like to recover it.

Any suggestions?

Finally, can one still get film for this camera? I've done a basic

search of the internet, and I've read in several places that film is

no longer available for this camera. Is this accurate?

Thanks again for all of the help!

Jeff

I have a T-70 and can you also do an unlimited exposure with the T-70, as it uses the same remote switch?

Thanks,

Jeff

Gerard,

I'm having a lot of fun tinkering with this camera. Several years ago my plan was to get a new auto-focus system, with all of the bells and whisles. I wrongly figured that this newer equipment would solve all of my problems. I was luck to get some good advice from an Uncle who still uses and enjoys his old Nikon from the 1960's. Good photos come from good photographers. Most of my old bad habits wouldn't be fixed by any new camera, including Digital. So, I decided to stick to my trusty T-70 and I'm trying to really learn how to use it well. This process has really helped me creat better photos.

My plan of attack for the future includes getting an umbrella and using the flash off camera via a slave. I've read a few good posts on this topic, and I need to do more research to figure out what equipment I need to get good results. Does your bracket use a slave for the flash?

I did get back a few photos of the kids next to the Christmas tree, dragging the shutter. I was able to achieve the desired results of the childern properly exposed, with the background lit by the ambient light. I didn't have that cave look, but I need to work a bit more on this before I'm truely happy.

Take care,

Jeff

Gerard,

Great advice for using the tape and the 299T together. For some reason I was thinking that there was some setting that I was missing on the camera or flash to solve the problem. But, The tape solution sounds like a winner.

Do you like the 277T flash with the T-70? My only complain with the 299T is it's size. I think it weighs as much as the T-70, and it can feel top heavy at times. I sometimes find myself thinking that I should get a 277T for it's smaller size and lighter weight. But, then again I'm just a hacker trying to improve my photos, and additional equipmet really isn't the answer.

Thanks again for the advice, and I'll give it a try tonight.

Jeff

Mark,

The 299T does have two manual settings. One is full manual, and the other is 1/16 manual. When the flash is set to either of these settings, it will still drive the sync speed to 1/90 sec. The other setting is F. Number Set, where you can select eight different f-stops on the lens via the flash, with settings from f 2 to f 22. In this setting the 1/90 sec sync speed is also automatically selected.

For most of my flash photos I usually just use either Program or F. Number Set mode. I probably use the F. Number Set mode the most, as this is the where the flash needs to be for bounce flash. I was hoping to be able to use this one flash for everything, so I don't have to drag two flashes with me when I'm out and about. I also like the auto features of this flash and how it interacts with the camera. I can just put everything in Program, pass the camera to my wife and she can shoot away knowing that all she needs to do is focus and shoot.

I'll have to dig out my old manual for the Vivitar Flash, and see how a few photos turn out.

Thanks again for your help.

Jeff

Greetings!

I recently read an interesting post in the lighting section about

dragging the shutter. Basically it is setting a slower shutter speed

then your sync speed, so you can take into account the ambiant

lighting more in your photos. I like the concept, and decided to

give it a try with my Canon T-70 and 299T. Well, I was unable to get

the shutter speed to remain at the lower set speed. When I set the

camera to TV, and set say 1/30sec, it would automatically jump back

to the 1/90 sec speed with the 299T. This was the case with the

camera in the "A" position, or with another f-stop set.

Additionally, this happened when the flash was on any of the setting

from program on down. Can this be changed, as I like to use this

flash?

To complicate matters, I pulled out my old Vivitar 2800 flash and

powered it up. Well, I was able to set any shutter speed with the

flash up and ready. Since it is a non-Canon flash, the T-70 manual

recomments that I set 1/60sec. I'm assuming that I can get away with

a different speed, as long as it is less the 1/60. Is my thinking

correct here? Is there anything else I need to consider?

Thanks,

Jeff

Greetings!

Thanks for all of the good advice, and encouragement!

I plan to do a side by side test with this Rolleiflex vs my Canon T-70 with a 50 mm 1.8 lens. I guess that this will be the best and easiest comparison that I can get quickly. Both cameras are loaded with Fuji Reala 100, and I plan on getting both developed at the same lab at the same time. In this test, I hope to follow some of the advice posted, and make this a controled test. Additionally, I'll be able to use the camera setting from the Canon as a meter for the Rolleiflex.

After carefully looking at the photos again, I think I overexposed some of the pictures a bit. Most of the highlights were washed out, and this may be a big part of the reason for the softness in the photos. More accurate metering may be a help here. Additionally, I think I have some flare issues to deal with in a few photos. I think a hood, as suggested by many is in order.

As far as cleaning the camera and lenses go, I only cleaned the surfaces. I used the usual lens cleaning solution and was very careful. I did not take anything apart on the camera, except the top viewing screen. I removed the four small screws holding the assembly to the camera which gave me access to the mirror. I left the mirror attached to the camera, and I slowly cleaned the surface. After removing the years of grime from the mirror, I cleaned the underside of the viewing screen. Next I reassembled the camera, and the viewing screen was much brighter.

Attaching this camera to a tripod is currently a problem. I don't have the adapter for the different thread size. In the future I'll have to find one of these somewhere. I also don't have a cable release for the camera, but will used the self timer to cut down on camera shake in the test photos.

I had hoped to post a few of the photos for comments, but my flat bed scanner is currently out to lunch. If I can get it back on-line I'll post a few of the scanned photos.

Take care, and thanks again.

Jeff

Greetings,

Several weeks ago I began the process of looking for a Rolleiflex

camera. I stopped short of getting a camera back then because of

family and work issues. Well, I decided that I didn't want to wait

forever to get a camera. So, I picked up a "user camera" to see if I

even like using a TLR. I figured that if I liked using this type of

camera, I could always upgrade to a camera in excelent condition. If

I didn't like using one of these cameras I wouldn't be hurt, as I

didn't spend a lot of money on this camera to begin with.

According to the Rollei website, my camera, #1420261 was built

around 1953/54. It has the 2.8 viewing lens, and a 3.5 Xenar taking

lens. The camera is in ok shape, with plenty of scratches all over

the body. This didn't bother me, as I was going to use this camera

as a way to experiment with MF. The taking lens and the viewing lens

had a few small cleaning swirls, and I wasn't sure if they would be

enough to effect the pictures. The shutter seemed to be working fine

even at the slower speeds. I'm sure they are off a bit, but I hoped

that the film would make up the difference. I did take some time

cleaning up the mirror, and the screen to make it as bright as

possible. In any case, I was ready to try my first roll of film to

test the camera.

Well, the results were mixed. I found the viewing screen pretty

dark, and I needed the magnifing glass to focus properly. I also

found that framing the photos to be more difficult then I would have

guessed. I hope that I'll adjust to this more after a few more rolls

of film. I also found that I kept switching the way I was holding

the camera. I just never found a comfortable way to hold the camera.

This will change with time, and I'm going to concentrate more on

using the strap to hold the camera steady, and gently press the

shutter release with my finger.

I was pleased with the size and weight of the Rolleiflex. In fact, I

was actually surprised at how small and light it felt. I knew the

dimensions and weight of the camera, but it felt smaller and lighter

then I was expecting.

The photos themselves were just OK. I was hoping for sharp pictures,

but they came out a little soft. I took the photos using Kodak

Portra VC. This was the only film I could find in a local photo

store, and I'm currently in the process of shooting a roll of Fuji

Reala 100. Anyway, I guessed at the exposure for most of the shots,

as the battery for my meter died. I was using the sunny 16 rule, and

the exposure turned out OK. I hope to try again with a more accurate

exposure for the photos. But, I think the cleaning marks on the

lenses were the biggest factor in the quality of the photos. After

getting back the pictures, I again looked at the taking lens, and

the cleaning marks are right there. I cleaned the inside of the

taking lens, and I hope this makes a bit of a difference. But, I

think I'll have to settle for the softer look of the pictures with

this camera.

The Good: Size and feel of the camera.

The Bad: Framing the photos took a lot more work then I would have

guessed. This will hopefully change with time.

The Ugly: I believe that the lens cleaning marks may have a bigger

impact on the photos then I thought. I'll have to try a few more

rolls of film, before I stick to this conclusion.

Jeff

Greetings!

Thanks again for all of the good information! After carefully reading all of the posts for my questions, I think I need to do some more homework. Many of your collective responses to my questions leads me to believe that I'm currently unprepared to discuss a Rolleiflex or Rolleicord at this time. It's not that I'm no longer interested in getting a Rolleiflex. I am. But, I think I need to learn more about the different cameras before I can make an educated decision.

Lets face it. I can post silly questions here forever, and will receive a lot of good information. But, I need to learn more about these cameras before I can get the most out of any questions that I post, and seriously discuss the advantages of a Rolleiflex 2.8E vs. a Rolleicord III. I thought I knew enough to make the plunge, when in reality, I need to research this topic a bit more.

My plan of attack is to spend more time on the Internet reading about the different models, and getting a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each model. I also need to get a better understanding of the different lenses, so I can make a more informed decision. This understanding will hopefully give me the ability to match my needs with the correct camera.

I've currently entered a very busy time with work and at home, and I think I'll delay any purchase decisions for a few months. This way I'll be able to read and learn more about the different cameras. Then if I have any questions about a camera I hope to return here with very specific questions, that can only be answered by someone who has that camera. I really don't want to waste everyones time and effort answering questions that have been posted before, when I really should have searched this website and others better for the answers.

Thanks again for everyones help. I hope to return here in a few months more informed, and ready to move into Medium Format.

Jeff

Greetings,

I'm new to medium format, and like many others I'm trying to get a

feel for the current pricing of different Rolleiflex and Rolleicord

cameras. I've learned from reading many postings that the main

difference in pricing seems to be based on the condition of the

camera, especially the taking lens. But as I begin the search for a

camera, I can't seem to find a consensus on the price of a particular

model/lens combination. I'll find one camera listed for $500.00, and

another listed in the same condition going for about $200-250. This

is quite a difference in price. Does anyone know of any websites that

track the price of different Rolleiflex/cord cameras? I've found a

site like this for my Canon 35mm camera equipment, and it seems to be

a fairly accurate place to start. Searching on this website I've seen

many postings that I've already used to begin my search. But the date

of many postings go back to 2000, or before, and I know prices have

changed a lot in the past two years.

My objective with this new equipment is to have fun and be able to

print bigger enlargements then I can with 35mm. I will mostly be

using the new camera for portraits of family and friends, and a few

group shots. I really don't plan on giving up my 35mm system, and I

hope that using medium format adds another demension to my

photography.

I'm currently looking at the following cameras:

Rolleiflex 2.8F, E, and D. I've read many peoples comments

questioning the quality of the 2.8C, but I won't pass up a good one.

I'm also looking into the Rolleiflex 3.5F, E, D. I've learned that

both the Planer and the Xenotar are both wonderful lenses. I believe

that a late model 2.8F cameras in good condition will be over my

price range, but I'll keep looking and hopefully get lucky.

For an inexpensive option, I've considered one of the Rolleicord's.

For now I'm looking at either the IV or the V. One of these cameras

in good condition may be the right way for me to go.

I'm also going to add about $100 to whatever price I find for a CLA,

and I'll also consider the additional price for the newer brighter

screens.

Lastly, other then that website where everbody buys and sells stuff,

is there another place to find one of these cameras? I'm currently

looking at the major camera shops, including KEH. But, if there is an

additional place I should be looking, can you pass that information

along? I live in a small town, and the camera stores only carry newer

stuff.

Thanks for any advice.

Jeff

Robert,

I live in Charleston, SC. There are many things to do in the local area. This fishing spot is right down the street from our house.

Jeff