paul_sauer

I usually us D76 straight just because it still looks like classic Tri-X and doesn't exacerbate

grain too much. I follow the time/temerature timetable on the Kodak website and haven't

got it wrong yet.

I don't think it gets any more perfect than the FM/FM2/FM3A bodies. People talk about

Leicas, but I constantly marvel at the way these bodies feel in the hand, the way the film

advance winds, and the sound of the shutter. Mechanical perfection. The only thing that

would make these bodies better is a switch that would allow the user to choose between

Matrix, center weighted, and spot metering. Give me an FM bodie with an AIS manual

focus Nikkor and nothing is better.

The second favorite body is the F100. It's one of the few automated bodies that has the

charm of the older manual focus gear.

Never much cared for the 80s and 90s AF Nikon bodies, but that's just me.

Suk, here is a link for a review a guy is writing on the Epson v700, which will be almost the

same as the V750 except it's without the glass carriers.

The V700 is supposed to be around $500.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_1.htm

They will cost about $500 and $750. They're supposed to be stunning. Check out this

dude's in-progress review:

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_1.htm

Here's why you should consider a 645 SLR, specifically the Pentax 645.

They focus closer than TLRs, which have a minimum focus distance of about 3 feet.

The standard lens on a Pentax gets down to 1.5 feet and you can buy tons of used lenses

very inexpensively. The camera handles like a 35mm slr AND they are dirt cheap on the

used market.

The beauty of the Pentax 645 is they put a tripod screw on two sides of the body, so you

can easily turn it over on its side for portraits.

I'd go P645 if you want to save money, or go Hassey, which also focus close, if you're

feeling like spending some dough.

I used my D100 to meter for my meterless Fuji GW690III, which was filled with 100 iso

Provia. The D200's minimum ISO is 200. So I just made sure the Fuji's shutter speed was

one step slower to compensate.

The transparancies came out perfectly.

For more portability, I will try the same thing with my now worthless 3mp Olympus 3030.

Alejandro,

Actually Hasselblads are known to cost an arm and a leg. So the 500 in Hasselblad terms

means quite something else. As you know there was a 500cm, and that meant they

wanted 500 centemeters combines arm and leg flesh before they'd let you have the

camera. Their R&D staff soon realized that this usually made it difficult for fingerless

photographers to press the shutter release buttons or focus.

So, they just charged more in cash.

645 is the dollar amount the camera was originally intended to sell for. Pentax and

Contax and Bronica also competed at that price. But since the cameras were introduced,

the prices have fluctuated wildly.

6:45 is also the average recommended time the manufacturers want you to use the camera

to capture that "magic hour" in the morning and at sunset during spring and fall seasons.

I found when I started using a Mac the prints were off center. I'm told if I upgrade to the

latests Max OS, this might not happen. But the problem definitely makes it frustrating to

print with my Epson 1270.

You can get a used F100 in primo condition for around $400 if you look hard enough. I

think it's the finest film body I've seen and will work with the G lenses Nikon seems to be

putting out more and more these days.

The matrix metering is great, the build quality makes you want to shoot with it all day

long. I'm also a big fan of the FM2 and FM bodies for their tiny size and build quality.

Prices on used manual focus lenses are cheap, cheap, cheap. You can get a 45mm,

75mm, 150mm combo for peanuts if you don't mind a manual focus lens. The camera

feels like a large 35mm -- kind of a squarish Nikon F5.

For my money, Pentax 645 the best value in a medium format system out there.

Okay, I forgot I had film in my Autocord. I opened the back and saw it. I'm wondering if,

because of the way the film is wrapped around spindles and coated by paper, will I lose

the images I shot and have I ruined the rest of the film?

Yes, I know, I need a better system to tell me what's in the camera.

Thanks for your help.

Nice. Just keep shooting -- I'm always amazed at how good 6x6 on b&w film looks even

when I'm not trying.

I have a Vivitar 285hv, which many people say the voltage is too high to use with a

sensitive electronic camera without a device known as a wein safe sync. I haven't gone

and purchased this device yet, so I haven't dared to use my vivitar with my D100 yet.

But they were great on my old film-based Nikon FM.

Downside is size, weight, lack of speed in the lenses and a motor drive. I recommend you

hang on to your 35 body, a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4, and a couple of other primes. If you need to

cash in, sell the L lenses.

Of course, the upside to MF is quality of the prints, which are undeniable. I just went to an

exhibition where a guy blew up his 35mm photos to 11x17, and they looked horrible.

I find my P645 has problems whenever I try to use recharables in it. Regular alkalines

work great.

There's also a Pentax 645 with a build in prism and grip that handles like a dream. Used

manual focus lenses are ridiculously cheap. Really, a pittance.

My fear with the RZ67 and the Pentax 67 is that they would be too big to be practical.

Unless you plan to be on a tripod all the time, get a 645.

In my opinion, F100 is as perfect of an electronic film camera as there can be -- light,

solid, high performance.

The FM2 is the perfect mechanical 35mm camera, which would only be improved by a spot

meter.

I suspect D200 is the perfect DSLR.

I had a lens chipped by him, a 28mm 2.8 AIS. He took a very long time -- I think over

three months -- and after a while stopped answering emails and communicating. In the

end, I'm glad I got the lens chipped, even if the work created a "bump" in the focussing

action that I could feel as the elements move through and interior part of the barrell. He

epoxies the chip on there and it's not exactly an ultra precision job.

My advice to you would be to buy a D200 and not worry about chipping. Either that or

break down and buy an AF version of what you want to chip.

May as well hang onto both because you're not going to get much for either of them. I'd

sell the AF when you buy a 17-55 or 17-35, but then again having a compact lens is nice.

The AIS won't fetch you mutch dough. May as well buy an FM2 and have a retro film

camera.

I have the 1.8 and think it's great. The only bad thing about the 1.8 is that it's so good

that if the 1.4 is even better, you feel the need to get the 1.4.

I recommend renting a Pentax 67. The weight and size were just too much for street

shooting in my opinion. Some may disagree and say people act natural when a giant

howitzter of a camera is pointed in their face.

You might consider looking for a Fuji Rangefinder -- they come 6x7 and 6x9. No meter.

No interchangeable lenses, but much lighter than a Pentax 6x7.

I also second the recommendation of a newish Pentax 645. manual focus lenses are dirt

cheap and plenty sharp.

P67 is too big and heavy for my style of photography. If you can rent one, do it. Go on a

hike. See how it feels. I have both a Minolta Autocord (TLR) and a Fuji GW690III. Both are

as light or lighter than a Nikon F5. I also have a Pentax 645, which I love, but I feel I will

have to sacrifice for cash. Too many cameras means you never finish rolls of film.

My advice: really ask yourself if you can live with the size and weight of the P67. I'm sure

the quality is great. It's the useability that would frighten me.