celerystalksme

I have a question...

How good are compact/ultra-compact digital cameras at taking photos

in dimmer conditions (night time urban, dimmly lit interiors, etc)? I

ask because it seems like most lenses on small digital cameras aren't

very fast (actually, that's the same with small film cameras too,

usually). And also, from the reviews I've read, digitals don't seem

to do well beyond a 200 ISO setting.

Is there a compact to ultra-compact digital that can take good

handheld low-light photos? Or would I be better of with a small film

camera loaded with 400/800 speed film?

Thanks!

Edward,

"It doesn't happen by accident." Is there steep learning curve to shooting slides with a p&s camera? I'd like to learn. I have a bit of time before I go...and I have no qualms about buying slide film right now and trying to figure out how to shoot it if someone could point me in the right direction.

But...lets say that shooting slides is just not a very good option with a month before a trip. Then I have a different question: is it possible to get mounted slides after shooting color negative film?

The reason I ask is because I want to make this "Slide Lamp": http://www.readymademag.com/feature_12_slidelamp.php

Thanks!

Are tricks or guidlines to shooting slide film with a point and shoot

camera like the CM, GR1v or T3? I've never shot slides before and

wanted to try it out. Well, I was informed that if I've never shot

slides, it probably wouldn't turn out very well at all. You can't

simply point and shoot?

I still have a month before a short vacation (which is where I

planned on shooting some slide film). If someone could clue me in on

what to do, I can pick up some slide film and shoot a bunch of test

rolls before I go.

Thanks!!!!!!

Ahto,

How come the Contax T3 and Ricoh GR1v are no so good for slide film if I don't know what I'm doing? Do their meters stink? Do I have to shoot differently? I have about a month before my trip...so if someone could clue me in, I can go get some cheap slide film and figure out how to shoot with slides film in my T3 and GR1v...

Thanks!!!!!

Steve,

So lightjet is the best, eh? I just looked on my schools photo services site...they do light jet prints from slides. $16 for the first one, $3.60 additional for 2-3, $2.20 additiona for 4-9, and $1.70 additional for 10+.

I guess as long as I'm very discriminating about which slides I want printed, I can swing that sorta dough. Is there a place with better prices?

Are there any other quality options besides lightjet and ciba/ilfo?

Thanks!!!

I have a question...

What are my options for getting quality prints from slides? By

quality, I mean I want them to look at least as good as prints from

color negative film. I did a google search and found

cibachrome/ilfochrome but that's just stupid expensive. Any other

options?

Thanks!

So, I'm pretty terrible with a camera and I have no idea what I'm

doing most of the time so I need some advice.

I'm taking a trip to NYC...short 4 day trip. Probably bringing a

Contax T3 and maybe also a Ricoh GR1v (one camera for each of us).

I'd like to shoot color negative and slide film. What would you

recommend? It's NYC...it'll be mid-late October...I'll be shooting

outside, inside, day, night.

<br><br>For slide, I'm thinking Provia and for color negative I'm

thinking Reala(100)/Superia(400). Would they be good for taking

pictures of scenes as well as people? Also...what speed film do I

bring? 100? 400? Both? Other?</br></br>

<br>Thanks!</br>

I was leaning towards the T3 myself...I think that's the way I'll go. Might bring one other camera just for kicks.

Here's what I'm pondering for film...Fuji Reala for my color negative and Fuji Provia for my slide. That's it. They'll have to do for portraits and landscapes. I'm thinking I'll just take ISO400...not sure, might bring some ISO100.

Any thoughts?

Michael,

But will the Konica Hexar AF fit easily into a blazer pocket, coat pocket, or a cargo pants pocket? I'm looking for something quite compact. Also...is it difficult to shoot during daytime light with a shutter speed limit of 1/250?

Godfrey,

I'd rather have AF and autoexposure...just more convenient for me...

Andy,

Yeah, those three are somewhat similar. But the difference might matter...

GR1v: 28mm/F2.8, focuses 1.1ft-infinity, 2-1/500 shutter, EV2-17

TC1: 28mm/F3.5, focuses 1.47ft-infinity, 4-1/750 shutter, EV1.5-17

T3: 35mm/F2.8, focuses 1.1ft-infiity, 180-1/1200 shutter, EV1-18

They're very small and light...which I like. The TC1 seems like the weakest of the bunch unless it's lens is appreciably better or unless it can focus/meter appreciably better...and I doubt that's the case. I think it comes down to the GR1v and the T3. 28mm or 35mm? And do i need the shutter speed range of the T3 or the tiny extra EV range? I like the form factor of the GR1v as it seems to fit in my pockets the easiest.

Paul,

the gun is already packed and loaded! though, i don't think nyc is as dangerous as it used to be, i'd never pass on the chance to shoot someone dead!

(i kid, i kid)

So...I'm taking a short 3-4 day trip to NYC in October. I want to

bring a camera...something small, compact, easy to use: point & shoot!

I will be shooting slides and color negative. I need something that

focuses spot on, exposes spot on, and is VERY pocketable...

What would you go with? Contax T3? Ricoh GR1v? Minolta TC-1? Or

something else?

Thanks!

I have a couple old Argus AF cameras...and I'm about to acquire

another one. I'd like to have one restored to full working order so I

can actually us it!

Does anyone know of a place that does a CLA on an Argus AF?

Thanks!

Kelly,

The Autcord meter actually works pretty well with alkaline batteries. I have a EPX625 alkaline in there right now, with a piece of plastic to make it fit snuggly. When I hit the battery test button, if talls right in the middle of the "good battery" area. And it usually agrees pretty well with my handheld meter.

Is there a good medium format camera for traveling? I want one that I

can take on vacation and maybe even go hiking with! So size, weight,

and durabiity are probably the most important factors.

I have a Minolta Autocord CDSIII...but that's the only medium format

camera I've ever used. I don't think it'd make for a great travel

camera...or would it?

Anyways, shoot some suggestions my way! Thanks!

Alright,

So I'm considering getting a Rolleiflex 2.8F with 12/24. But I'm also

interested in the flat glass attachment. The TLR owner is unaware of

such an attachment and does not know if it will fit or not.

I read on a web site that the later 2.8F's are not compatible with

the flat glass back attachment. Is this true? If so, why did Rollei

do that? Did the later 2.8F's have a built in solution for flatter

film?

Is the whole flat-film thing overblown and should I not even worry

about it?

Thanks!!!

For the Xenotar fans...in what way is the Xenotar better than the Planar? I saw a l/mm lens test...and the Planar's had better edge to edge resolution. Was that a fluke test? Or are you guys talking color/contrast/bokeh that makes the Xenotar better?

Also, I've noticed several of you prefer the 3.5 lens over the 2.8 lens (for both Planar and Xenotar). Why is that? The same lens test mentioned above seems to show that the 2.8's have better resolutions at MOST of the f-stops they have in common.

Just curious...

Kelly,

Now you have me freaking out that my purchased is doomed to be a failure! I won't have an opportunity to examine the camera in person...cuz I'll be getting it from the internet (probably eBay). So I'm gonna have to trust the seller when they say "everything seems to work" and proclaim it is in "mint" condition.

Are there a lot of missaligned, mismatched, bastardized Rolleiflexes out there that can't take a good picture if lives depended on it?

Dave,

I've seen them listed anywhere from 1000g to 1300g. BTW...I'm also looking at getting a Rolleiflex...decisions decisions!

Red,

Why do you say that?

From the webpages I've read, the 2.8F Planar had the highest resolution at center/middle/edge at all apertures. NOTHING beat the 2.8F, as far as resolution. Granted, the human eye probably can't tell the difference between 2.8F Planar and any of the other Rolleiflexes...but still, better is better...

Also, on some of the Rollei boards, I have heard it said that the Xenotar offers more contrast than the Planar...and on one on any of the boards disagreed...

so there ARE two different xenotar lenses?

i have another question...is there a site telling the differences between cameras? like 3.5F type 1/2/3/4/5...what the heck are the differences? and the 2.8F type 1/2/3/4...what are the differences?

thanks!

Okay...I have another question...

How does the optical quality of an Autocord compare to the Rolleiflex? Some claim that the Autocord's lens is just as good as a planar or xenotar. Is that just Minolta fanatacism?

I actually have a Minolta Autocord...which I like...but I sorta want a Rolleiflex cuz my Autocord has some big time cleaning marks and I also want the brighter f2.8 lens on some Rolleiflexes...