k._rivkin

If I may discern from the majority here:

 

As someone who used film for some time, typical "film bag" includes:

SLR, 3 lenses, 30 rolls of film. Why film ? Because it's much cheaper from B&H rather then abroad from some place on a corner. Plus there are a few films I like to work with, not sure if I'll find it, and I'm not sure if it was stored at 100F in Italy during the past a few months - I mean buying film somewhere abroad with no clue about their local rules is expensive and can lead to disappointments.

 

Now with Digital situation is basically the same, but you take CF cards (way smaller then film rolls), batteries (you most likely can do good with two, recharging them), and more expensive camera body with same lenses.

 

I would go with digital for sure, may be would bring small medium format camera.

I would seriously advice against buying any new Kievs. The conditions in Ukraine are continuing to deteriorate. The quality of Kievs produced are declining.

 

REassembled products as Arax and Hartblei are more reliable, but consider this:

 

a. Some of them are ridicuosly high priced (>Bronica).

b. Most of the distributors from ex-USSR who used to sell their gear are not dealing with any Kievs anymore. Repairs and replacements make it not worth the trouble.

 

When I spoke with a guy who used to sell buy, check and resale them, he advised me not to deal with Furman or Arax, but to find something that works and did work for the last 3 years. Some pro used gear that was cared about.

 

Arax and Kievcamera are selling their stuff in the States, and do have ok reputation, but you are taking a risk buying the quirkiest camera around just to save some $ on optics (the body will cost more then used bronica).

Not too costly (due to digital stuff it's much less expensive then 35mm today) or too bulky, but imho there are a few problems - how to connect it to the tube - I believe there are should be a well known solution but it's probably more expensive then 35mm.

With 700$ you can buy even the most expensive brand - used Hassy.

Don't go for new Kievs, only used that are known to work can and will work.

Koni-Omega Rapid - 150$

 

Top of the line interchangable optics, 6x7 negative, interchangable backs.

 

Cons: Feels like holding an anti-tank system.

 

From this and up to 500$ go cheap systems - Bronicas, Kowa, most of Mamiyas etc.

I'm sorry for being little bit off-topic - just wanted to share an old story.

Once I had a frinedly chat 3 photographers who returned from Israel. one was hired by israel travel ministry. One look at his pictures and the image of israel "safer then ever", "tourism, blue sky and no freaking war", "no soldier but sexy girls in tights" was jumping from every page.

 

The second one was a zionist/"help israel now" kind of guy. On his grim and stern photographs there was a face of half-religious, half-zionist, half-militant and half-agrarian, looking at the far away horizon of his farmland, or reading something on a tank (again in quite peaceful atmosphere of locals playing closeby). The read out was "volunteer and help".

 

The third one was talented. He was a war photographer. He did not go for "hot" shots like children blown apart, or brains on walls, or blood on hands. There were no bodies, or conflict itself, but you get this uneasy feeling of desolation and slight danger when you look at them.

 

What did I want to tell - people israel is over photographed. You need something zesty to sell it.

One of my friends said to me "I charge as much as they can pay". There are some guidelines, but the price for the same time and quality can vary 10 times and more, so it's really hard to estimate. I saw people charging 5000$ for very crappy wedding job.

 

Sorry can't be of more help to you, and sorry before the public for being so pessimistic.

I had good experience doing it with 2MP cameras, so anything 3MP and up will be more then enough. Depending on how high you want to put tripod zoom/barrel distortion can be important or not.

I'm sorry if my advice is kind of snobish but I would definitely look into MF - Minolta TLR, Fuji RF or Koni-Omega.

 

It's really different. Otherwise you can do well enough with taking D70 raw and making it grayscale.

 

Just my 2c.

I would go against f717 on this one. I has some experience with this guy, and forget the desert - after a day at Miami beach he was making this characteristic "my focusing wheel has sand in it" sound for months.

 

What I thought to be aluminum alloy usually was some silver paint that comes off in a year over something grey. Scratch resistance non-existant.

 

So any sand storm in Iraq would finish this in all other aspects good camera in one day.

 

And that's the story for most of prosumer cameras - focusing knob if it's there is not sealed well, viewfinder can also have some leaking, so I would not bet by dollar on them standing any tests.

I do respect 300D - it actually much better sealed and much more robust then it could've been. In general it's so far ahead of all prosumer digicams out there. It's made of some tough water-repulsive plastic with holes around viewfinder being consealed by latex.

 

It does good in beach environment, and can stand a slight raining. I would not bet on something harder then that.

Both RB67 and C33 are heavier then they could've been. I did find Bronica/Hasselblad to be lightier and easier to hold.

Sorry for making an advice, I would do 2 tests:

 

1. Put you shutter on B, take out you back, press the shutter and look through the lens - do you see a problem with your lens ?

 

2. Shoot a blue sky against the sun.

 

For me basically it looks like scratches in the lens' center, probably on the second element. It should get worse against the sun, but for now it's just a low contrast area.

 

It does not look like just flare. Does not look like a light leak also, but the latter is actually very easy to check out.

It's more depending on your personal physiology rather then on some rules.

 

I have a terrificly sharp shot made with hassy wide angle at 1/30. In general I did not have much trouble using 1/30 to 1/60 with most of my optics.

 

TLR's can be very bulky to hold, especially Mamiya C3 style. I would say that actually for me my Hassy is as good in terms of holding as it gets, and it actually has less hand related shakes then my 35mm gear.

Yeap. It will also never beat Hasselblad.

 

The truth is that everyone will do something a little better and someone will make his camera a little worse...

 

But the determining factor is what you like, and what kind of glass do you have. The rest is bull.

 

Concerning Minolta - it's hard to judge something that does not exist. It's like trying to understand - will ionic cannon fire faster then Tesla gun ? :)

I use 3200 for MF. My responce is that my MF scans are way more detailed then my DRebel. But I would not print a3 from my 3200 scans.

 

On the other hand my Rebel is my primary shooting camera. It's not about trying to beat MF (as some people suggesting). Moreover I would laugh in the phase of someonee suggesting so. It's just much more convinient cheaper and productive then anything else.

Yes and no. The good thing is they work pretty much as all teleconverters do - they give you wide and tele at expense of some quality. The bad news is - you have to trhow sell away when you change your digicam.

 

Wide angle is must have for landscapes. Tele can be good, but problems with using tele from hands etc. can give you a lot of flustration.

What you hear is wrong.

 

Mamiya, Hassy and Bronica have somewhat similar quality of lenses, with a huge battle going around. My Blad is sharper in corners and has much better contrast then Mamiya TLR/black I used to have. But yet again some other lens can be a little bit better or worse, on individual basis.

 

My experience - go to a big shop/rental place and look at cameras. Must do is 645, 6x6, 6x7 formats - Pentax 645, Bronica SQ, Mamiya 645, Mimiya RB/RZ,7, Bronica GS-1, ETRS, Hasselblad and Pentax 6x7.

 

This is pretty much representative of what is out there.

1. I would shoot a test roll from a tripod - from f/4 to f/16, target includes center at 10 feet, off-center at infinity and something at 9 feet in corners. If it's soft then the problem is with a camera.

 

2. I know people who can't focus manually.

 

3. Yes, they usually do have slower focus rings...

Zeiss glass is very good but not _that_ much better rather then other glass on the market.

 

My 150$ Koni-Omega used to be sharper in the center (and much softer in corners) rather then Blad.

Would second a Kiev Prism. Basically what you need is a bright prism. Some prisms (like new Kiev ones) will also offer you TTL metering.

Don't buy Kiev unless you know you are getting a working camera. Not "guaranteed", not "mint", not "terrific", but _working_.

 

Kiev has a very good optics.

 

Bronica is very good and much safer.

RENT FIRST is a great suggestion no one gave me in my time.

 

The result is that very soon I've realised that unlike 35mm (where the worst complain is that dial ring is half an inch away from where it's "supposed to be) there are cameras you love to use and the ones that you can't. So I've sold my stuff may times over on e-bay before I've got my dream camera - Hasselblad.

 

So - rent or at least hold in hands and find the one you like.

 

I would go Mamiya 645/Yashica TLR/Rollei TLR/Bronica 645 6x6 6x7/Mamiya 67/Koni-Omega /Mamiya TLR/Hasselblad

 

Something from those guys will suit you well.

Would back f707. Slow focusing, but it _does_ focus.

Ok I reformulate my question - Tokina photos that I saw were extremely sharp. But they also had lesser contrast and less "punch" then Canon ones. Is it a true permanent phenomenon, or it's just some occasional flare that messed up things ?