mark_ryan2

Did I see a similar post on FredMiranda and I think there was a link to:

 

http://burren.cx/photo/alternate_hoods.html

 

I thought I saw a link to a page that had the wide zooms with the different hoods superimposed. Don't know where that is. I think the EW-83E is really only good for keeping me from hitting things when I get too close.

http://public.cps.canon-europe.com/Issue_15/index.asp

 

Or click on the Issue 14 link above, and then click the "home" tab, which then lets you get to Issue 15.

Maybe not totally relevent for you, but I'll throw in my hard leaned lessons.

 

1. If you paint the room, make it red shade. Papers are less sensative to light in the red region. I guess black would be best, white if you have controlled light leaks. I liked a red tone since it is the best compromise of not making the room a darkhole when it's time to turn on the lights.

 

2. Expanding foam. I made my lab in basement nook and the 6 inch boards drove me nuts trying to make it light tight. I suggest using the cans of foam insulation with the straw applicator to fill any gaps that need plugging. It is pretty easy to run down a seam between boards. The foam expands as it cures filling large gaps, and can be cut down with a razor to leave surfaces flush.

 

3. If you can cut a hole in the wall, I just made a baffles and used a fan to blow air out of the room. I just made a box about 1 foot square with offset boards in the middle and one end, like at a doorless bathroom set-up. Paint the inside Flat black, and you're in business.

The 50/1.8 is so cheap that it almost begs to be bought, but I agree with the above poster about a 35 and an 85. The 50 is just so blah on a FF body for most shots, the Goldilocks compromise. Having said that, if you were to only get one lens I'd get the fifty and "zoom" with your feet.

 

The reason I like the 35 over a 28 is that a 28 is pretty wide and you can get some pretty odd distortions with it. A 35 covers a good angle but you aren't going to have to worry that much about making peoples' faces look goofy if they get too close, or having people in the foreground look like giants compared to people a bit farther away. You have to get pretty close to a group of people with a 28, which can feel odd.

 

An 85/1.8 is an excellent single person portrait (head and chest) lens. From about 6-10 feet away with the lens wide open you'll get sharp focus on the subject with the background being sufficiently blurred. A 100 might work better if your family is camera shy, they are really small people, or you have a lot of little kids to shoot. It lets you take the same pic as the 85 but from farther away, or lets you get tighter in on a subject. A 100mm lens might give you fits if the room is too small to get far enough away to get everything you want in the frame.

 

I'd suggest the primes over the zooms, a 1.4 is two stops faster than a 2.8 zoom and way faster than a 4-5.6 consumer zoom. That's the difference between shooting at 1/60@1.4 and 1/15@2.8 or 1/4@5.6. Try to not use flash, it just kills the pic usually and makes everyone self-concious.

 

If you still want to stick with a Fiddy, I went with the 1.4 and money was tight when I did it. Besides the faster speed, it has better autofocus, a metal lens mount (I've cracked plastic ones), and it looks cooler ;).

 

But remember, the most important thing is not what you shoot with, its that you actually take the shots.

 

The best thing about taking the family pics is that you aren't in any of them.

Hands down the best camera to use, especially digital, is a borrowed camera!

 

I have a 20D and I agree with a previous poster, it is all the camera you really need. The D200 is pretty cool, but some coin more.

 

8 vs 10mp is even less important than 6 vs 8mp. Really it just comes down to how much you can crop a pic for a certian size and quality. I figure I'd need 20+mp to really step to the next level of performance, and I'm willing to wait for the 70 or 80D when it comes.

 

The biggest thing to me about using MF lenses on a 1.5crop body is how well you can focus them on the screen. I've seen reported that the D200 has an improved viewfinder and better compatibility with MF lenses than other crop cameras.

 

It does seem like Canon has a more varied line of autofocus and especially IS/VR lenses than Nikon.

 

If you have time, or you are prone to buyers remorse, I'd wait to see what Canon is going to do.

Rob,

 

Are you a chemist or a biologist?

 

Mark

Whoa, whoa. Get a Wein DIGITAL slave. I have one on my 283 with a 20D and used it just last week. The digital versions filter out the pre-flash crap and fire the flash just right. I guess the pennut version would work, but the hot shoe has a 1/4x20 on the bottom for mounting on tripods. The hot shoe doesn't have contacts on the bottom, so you can't just put it between the 20D and 283 and use the flash on camera- you need a flash to let it rip.

 

I would suggest the 285 version though. It allows you to set the power out-put. I've used the on board sensor and "color code" setting on the 283 to try to manage output, and it works, but it is a bit of a kludge. If you can't manage the power you'll need to move the flash back and forth, or change the aperture.

 

To me, with digital instant feedback, I'd rather have more control with manual settings than the uber-tech ETTL-xx system. When it was film, I could see the need. You have to get the shot, and it's not like you can see a flash picture very well.

 

I'm looking for a good way to trigger the offcamera 283 with the main flash. As you've done, I've turned the power down. I've used a 3x5 or 4x6 card kind of wedged into the flash/prism area to shoot the flash towards the ceiling of the off shoe camera. It works also. The slaves don't take much light it seems.

 

Mark

I'm looking to expanding into MF to compliment my 35 rangefinder and

digital gear. I'm new to MF, so some of my questions are general

ignorance, some specific about the GX system. It seems the GX would

give the biggest advantages over my other gear with bigger negatives,

and the ability to do tilt and shifts. I've learned a lot with the

achives here and Danny's site, great resource.

 

What happened to gx680.com? I really didn't see all the info that

some older posts seemed to alude to.

 

It seems that the III is not really more capable than I and II?

 

On parts swaping, the I & II can use the III series backs with the

different masks (Could someone explain "backs" and 120 & 220 inserts,

how hard is it to reload film?)

 

I'm getting that the AE finder is nice, but people still usually use

a handheld meter.

 

What is the diffence between GX and GXM lenses? I thought I saw

someone make that distinction.

 

What would be a checklist of parts I need (like backs and parts,

batteries, chargers, remote releases, finders)?

 

What would be the price range for a 65mm lens with a recommended kit

set-up? I'd like to add a 80-100mm 35mm equivilent portrait lens

later.

 

I see Robert White is often suggested as a source, but I don't see

him with much. I travel to Denver, Chicago, Dallas, Houston,

Minneapolis - any shops there specialize in 680s?

If you do buy a 10-22, make sure you practice with it before you go. I've used my 17-40 on my EOS 630 and I'm always amazed how what I thought I was going to get thru the viewfinder isn't what I get on film. You have to get REALLY close to things or else you can end up with distant looking pictures. Posting on the web accentuates this even more since the pics are small and of low resolution. Tilting up and down adds distortion.

 

Practice, practice.

 

Mark

 

If EF-s is a downer, how about the Sigma 12-24, its full frame. Also, maybe you can rationalize more glass by buying used with the thought that you'll sell it when you get back. I'd try fredmiranda.com for their Buy&Sell, lots of Canon gear going around.

I just bought a Leica CL (Minolta version) because of one major problem with EOS gear - It's way to BIG. The EOS mount is big, I think the Canon marketing people have figure out that people want their prosumer DSLRs to look like pro models, so BIG, Big, Big. My EOS 630 is smaller and my New F1 is even smaller.

 

I can't take a 20D/17-40/4L on business trips, but I can take the CL with a 40/2 lens and tmax 100 rolled into plastic film containers so I can keep them in my pocket when I go thru airport security ;)

 

90-95% of the frames I shoot are with the 20D. I do think if there is a niche in the digital market, it for a prosumer compact digital camera, with the controlability of a current DSLR. Looks like that Sony with the APS class sensor is getting close, just add more manual controls, and a real finder of some sort.

 

A 35mm film camera and my SD-IV fim scanner give me a 12MP full frame camera!

To the "FD from the Dead"..

 

400/4.5 IS USM

 

I gotta think Canon knows people are clamoring for fast mid-teen primes.

I just got a CL and one thing I really like is matched needle metering. I use a Canon New F1 also and I love it in that also. It seems to give me more info than even/hi/lo LEDs. If the R3a had a display like that I would have gone with that, being newer and such.

 

For $500 you could also get about 8-10 Zorkis and Feds with a lens for each. One combo should give something good ;)

I know the Sigma's have issues with linking with the latest digital bodies, but then I see reports of Canon bodies not working with Canon lenses. Seems like Tamron has broken the code. I wonder if it would easier or harder to do with a manual lens? Would the "sensory depravation" of not having all the distance and other info make it harder?

 

Seems like Ziess has been able to leverage their brand into other cameras, I wonder how profitable it has been to them?

1. If Leica is in such dire straits financially, why don't they

release some of their R lenses in EOS mount? Doesn't have to be

autofocus, but auto diaphram would be nice. I'm always hearing on

the web about FF sensor EOS users eschewing even the Canon L glass

and going to other manual mounts. The price point would be above

Canon L glass, so not really a direct competitor. I heard somewhere

that the money in cameras is actually in the lenses. Yes, Leica has

their own digital camera now, but I would think they would like some

fast cash now.

 

2. If rangefinders have built in distance information, why don't the

flash units use this info rather than TTL? Seems to me the most

important information with using a flash is how far away the subject

is from flash? TTL can be fooled by dark and light subjects, right?

At first I couldn't tell if it was a switch issue or a sticking issue. With the rewind handle back, if I jiggle the camera, it moves to the center, or the appropriate place.

 

I actually had it out today shooting and I didn't notice the sticking needle, maybe because I was just moving more than when I had it sitting down at a desk last night. I'll have to see if I can get it to do it again tonight when I get home.

 

Thanks for all the help.

 

It says on its Front "Leitz minolta CL" and on its top plate "Leitz minolta". How does the version affect pricing. Form Gandy's site I assume this one was sold in Japan and made its way over to the US? I kind of like that it doesn't scream "LEICA". It is going to spend a lot of time in my briefcase and in hotel rooms. I'd hate it to grow LEICA legs and be liberated.

 

Am I correct in that there were "Leica CL" , "Leitz minolta CL", and "Minolta CL" versions?

 

Thanks,

Mark

Just got a Leitz minolta CL SN 1018XXX and the meter seemed to act

funny. It would only meter sometimes with the wind handle in the

stand-off position.

 

I finally figured out that the meter needle had a tendency to stick

at the top of the range, but will fall to where it should be with a

little jiggle.

 

Will this "loosen" up or should I return it (I have 30 days). I

assume a CLA would fix this?

 

Thanks!

I really wish they would come out with a IS version of the F4, but I guess that is the 70-300 IS?

 

Interestingly to me:

70-200/4 + 300/4 IS = 70-200/2.8 IS + 1.4X teleconv. (with in about $200 bucks if I have B&H right)

 

Still hoping for an OS version of the Sigma 70-200/2.8 to come out.

Lee,

 

Are you seeing the resale on the 1Ds at about $3200 bucks? Where did the 1Ds start out.

 

I see the 20D and 5D and the 1d MKIIn and 1Ds MKII as two couplets. The 5D and 1Ds MKII are both full frame and not really geared towards sports or fast action shooting. The 20D and 1D MKIIN are crop cameras built for speed.

If we are going to raid the KM tech warehouse, how about that built in anti-shake? If you're going to dance with the digital Devil, you mine as get all you can. Imagine a fast 35 with anti-shake at iso 1600. I think that would make the ultimate low light machine; rangfinder, clean high iso sensor, and anti-shake.

Shoot first, write emails later? Hehe.

 

Just put some rolls thru my Zorki, can't wait to see what I got.

Considering that the people lamenting the rise of digital imaging are doing it over a digital medium, I wonder what the the hard core Ag-philic shooters are saying back and forth by snail-mail?

Hasn't Nikon started to use Sony for APS-C CMOS sensors? I wonder if

the APS-C sensor in the Sony DSC-R1 at 10mp might end up in the next

D100 or D70 replacement?

I think the manual says something like not having anything attached on theUSB port right next to the SD-IV. I've gotten the same issue at times, and a mix of making sure the door is closed and re-booting my computer made it go away.

Did you shoot vertically with a flash? I was just looking at the shadow she casts to the right. Just wondering if the room was fairly dark and the autofocus might have had a hard time. The scene just doesn't seem right for 1/200 af f11.

 

Have you shot any outside, with the lenses shaded of course?

Eddie,

 

Is that Columbus comment an original? It's right up there with if frogs could fly...