kevin_itsasecret

My girlfriend shot a new roll of Fuji slide film this weekend and her

slides came back today. The greens (outdoor) came back red. For

example, a shot of her white dog lying in green grass shows the dog

as white, while the grass is red.

What happened here? She said she took it to an Express Photo

(guessing it's your average "photo" shop that sells more pic. frames

and disposable cameras than anything else...) so maybe that was her

first problem.

Any ideas?

Thanks.

Kevin

Quick question for owners of newer Hasselblad lenses...

A few weeks ago I was using a friend's older Hasselblad to photograph

a wedding. On his lenses, you had to adjust the shutter speed and f-

stop at the same time unless you wanted to press in a steel tab and

adjust either setting individually.

Are the lenses still made this way? I do not have easy access to new

lenses. If so, why? It seems like an unnecessary complication. The

only benefit I can see would be to rapidly change shutter speed for

faster situations or fstops for DOF. Of course, by having them move

in tandem, exposure would remain the same while only making one

adjustment.

Any other ideas as to the reason behind the design, and do the new

Hasselblad lenses feature easier independent adjustments?

Thank you.

Kevin

You could try using a softening filter as well. It's possible to be a cheapskate and get a UV filter and put some vaseline or drops of clear nail polish on it spaced apart to help fuzz things a little, although I'd just buy one that will be consistant. Or just get out the telephoto ;)

Good luck.

Kevin

Unless permanence is an issue for you, go digital. The quality is there and will save you SO much aggrivation and money. The studio is slowly converting to digital - just got a Nikon D100 and no longer have lab fees or the delays. We do high end portraits, and rarely do our clients care that their image is digital. Of course, the RZ (Mamiya) is used on request or for some weddings...etc.. The benefit with digital, especially for a beginner, is that you get immediate feedback with no cost so your can learn MUCH faster and cheaper.

Good luck.

Kevin

I didn't print it, but I did make one a while ago in Bodie, CA (the ghost town). I was backlit as I took a shot of the street with the abandoned buildings on both sides. They were closing soon so I hurridly made the shot, and left a shadow of myself about 30' long right down the middle of the road. Oops!

Kevin

David,

Regrettably, I am not buying both NOW :) The Mamiya seems to suit my purposes more than the Nikon, but I also feel that any photographer should have a solid 35mm system... For me that is all or almost all mechanical/manual, with a few good lenses. That FM3A system fits the bill nicely and may make a nice little addition when I stumble onto a few grand to get the body and lenses I want.

So many choices...

Kevin

Thank you Jason and David. Jason, you have eliminated my concerns with the Mamiya. I think that's what I'll be going with. The only 'problem' with the Mamiya that remains unresolved is how to pay for the system...

Think you guys could help me out with that one ;) jk...

Thanks again for your answers.

Kevin

I know it's not really a fair comparison, but I've narrowed my

choices to these two cameras.

I will be using it for photojournalistic work, weddings, travel and

portraits. I shoot almost everything in b/w.

The travel section (landscapes) is more or less covered with my 4x5,

although trips not exclusively for photography are becoming more

common and the time for the 4x5 less available.

I REALLY like the f-stop ranges of the Nikon lenses compared to the

Mamiya since I do a fair number of dim / available light

photography. However, I am also a big fan of the larger negative of

the Mamiya.

For portrait work, I've read that the Mamiya is not as good because

of the minimum focusing distance required with their lenses. Has

anybody found this to be a problem?

Also a bonus for the Mamiya is the silence of the rangefinder over

the SLR. I do not like to be in a church during a ceremony hearing

the click/clack of an SLR or on an assignment where a lower profile

is preferred.

Lastly, to anybody who has used a Nikon, how large can you make a

print? I'm going to be using all fixed focal length Nikon (manual,

duh) lenses. Was looking at the Leica but couldn't justify the cost

for 'just a 35mm.'

I have used an RZ before and was happy with the negative (but not the

size of the camera/lens.) My only 35mm is an OLD Minolta that

definately isn't what it used to be.

Anyway, fire away. I'd love to hear what you think :)

Thank you very much.

Kevin