SJSF

Sigh, not sure why I didn't think of this before but yes, the 50mm f2.8 Braun is pretty much a paperweight. What I did was I tried it on my Canon EOS R with two different adapters - a LTM-to-R and then with a LTM->EF->R adapter. With the former, the lens doesn't focus at all. With the latter (the intermediate EF->R adapter acting as an extension tube), I get some objects in focus but still behaves odd.

 

Another oddity, perhaps more to do with the Canon R's MF system, is that with the LTM->R adpater - the Braun 50mm f2.8 brings up the MF focusing guide on the LCD (three tiny triangles on the LCD that must align and turn green when subject is in focus). This is in addition to focus peaking. Neat, I thought because I find it much easier to use the guide over peaking. Then I switch to the Canon 135mm f3.5 and no focus guide. Wait, what!!??! How does the camera know what MF lens is mounted and why does it care? Maybe between f2.8 and f3.5, Canon's algorithms decide there isn't enough light for the focus guide. Hrrrmmmmppphh.

Curious, how did you adapt the Paxette lens to the Canon 7?

 

Extension tube? (by my reckoning, you'd need a 15.2mm extension - I have an unconfirmed figure of 44mm for the Paxette FFD, vs 28.8 for LTM) What did you do to couple the rangefinder, or are you scale focusing?

 

I've always fancied a Paxette, handled a few at camera fairs long past, but never bought one.

 

oh boy! Now I look like an idiot maybe but see, I bought the lens of fleaBay. The ad said it is for LTM mount so I didn’t realize it was for an entirely different camera system until today when I found the 85mm F5.6 from the ecosystem. All this while, I haven’t been using any adapter for it - just screwed it on the Canon 7!! Does it mean the roll of film i shot is all going to be out of focus? The Canon 7 is my first “serious” rangefinder. Maybe I should stick to SLRs

I understand Braun Paxette lens are M39 screw mount but not all are compatible with Leica screw mount cameras because of the longer lens register. I am using a 50mm f2.8 Staebel Braun on a Canon 7 but wondering which other Braun lens will fit on it? The 85mm f5.6 looks like it should fit but what about the 38mm f3.5 that clearly has a big protrusion? Anyone try any of these on a non-Paxette Leica screw mount camera? Thanks.

Just wanted to check if anyone got their 6008AF recently serviced and their experience? Given the factories have been liquidated, are parts still available? Thanks.

I have now spent a few weeks with a Hasselblad 500CW and 120mm CF lens. Coming from auto-all cameras, I am still struggling with focusing when trying to snap pictures of my kids moving about and I feel I am getting better but metering, I feel is a lost cause. Outside, I can use the Sunny-16 rule but indoors, I am totally clueless. I've tried to integrate a handheld light meter in the workflow but there is no way it can keep up with my Auto-All 35mm gear or my kids.

 

I would appreciate if people can share their experience and workflow. Provided you can nail the focus, what do you do for metering indoors? Is it practical to use a manual camera for candid indoors photography or should I reserve my Hasselblad for more staged pictures and look to an auto-body?

 

I even got a metered finder for the Hasselblad but (1) makes the rig too heavy to handhold (2) the metered finder workflow works out to be pretty much the same as an external meter (3) the 45-degree finder angle is too annoying for framing.

Projecting images.

 

I have been shooting digital for all the years I've had photography as a hobby (some 20 years now) - until recently. Ultimately, you want to view the images - film or digital. I "project" my digital images on a 40" 4k LED TV mounted in the kitchen - a slideshow plays in a loop and is constantly updated with new images. Makes for excellent conversation around the kitchen table. The images up there are from all sorts of digital imaging devices owned by my wife, son and I - iPhones, dSLR, MLC and sent by friends/relatives/school. The ones shot with my Canon dSLR and some L lens clearly stand out and are a pleasure to look at.

 

And then there is the 120" projector screen where I project 35mm and 120 slides. The size of the projected images on the 120" screen, color and contrast blow the digital projection system out of the water. I tried projecting digital images on the same screen with my 1080p projector but they look like horrible phone pictures on the big screen with only 1080p resolution.

 

Maybe I could compare the two systems if I had a 100" LED tv and a 8k projector but then I probably would've to sell my first born :p

 

Also, remember - you can scan your film to digital but not the other way around :)

Thanks for all the responses and sorry for the delayed response.

 

Yes, slides are in Gepe anti-newton glass mounts. While the Noris Trumpf may not be a top rate projector (it was brand new in the box when I got it couple of weeks ago) I suspect the issue is that I shot a lot of the film at pretty wide apertures, mostly f3.5 or 4 - so very likely the Yashinon 80mm f3.5 isn't at it's best wide open either in terms of sharpness or color/contrast.

 

I managed to get the Rollei P11, I have, powered up but it's broken - the slide claws don't work and when I manually managed to get a slide in the projector, the projected image wasn't illuminated correctly. Hoping to get a Rollei P66E in the mail, later this week. And, again later this week, hopefully, I should get a few rolls that I shot with the Hasselblad 503cw, developed - so that will be a good data point to compare with.

 

Meanwhile, I am wondering what other lens will fit the Rollei P11 if I can get it fixed. One on is a 150mm/f2.8 but I cannot get any other lens to fit the mount barrel (the 35mm projectors seem to have swappable lens - the RT-300 and Carousel take all sorts of lens). The Rollei P11 lens has a ~74mm barrel diameter. The Noris Trump barrel is the same diameter as the Carousel/RT-300 but the outside needs to be smooth unlike the lens adapter for RT-300/Carousel which has a flat/ribbed side.

 

[uSER=2105396]@Gary Nakayama - SF Bay Area, California[/uSER] Thanks for that detailed checklist

Recently, I purchased a Kodak projector and for the first time, viewed 35mm slides on my 120" screen. For various reasons, I had never bothered to project these slides that I had shot some 20 years ago. The slides were shot with a cheap Canon kit lens and not so expensive film. And, even then - they sort of wow-ed me. So I thought to myself, if 35mm looks so good, I bet MF is going to look even more glorious.

 

Fast forward a few weeks, I own three different MF systems - a Yashica Mat 12, a Mamiya C330 and a Hasselblad 503CW. Now, I haven't received the slides back that shot with the Hasselblad yet but I projected slides from the Yashica and Canon 35mm on the same screen.

 

For 35mm, I have a Leica RT-300 with the 90mm f2.4 Colorpan and a Navitar 70-125mm lens. For MF, so far, the only working projector I have is a Trumpf with a 150mm/f3.5 lens. I got a Rollei P11 but still waiting for a power cord and 6x6 slide tray. The Leica, I can almost fill the 120" screen with the Navitar set to 70mm or bit smaller with the 90mm. The MF slides end up smaller width wise on the screen but almost fill the screen vertically - so even with a wider lens, I couldn't project larger images.

 

Now, granted that I am still working on focusing skills with my MF cameras and newer Canon L lens probably run circles around the old Yashinon 80mm but I am not seeing a huge pop in the projected images from MF compared to 35mm. So I am wondering, given that I won't see images larger than what can fill my 120" screen - is MF worth all the hassle of maintaining another system or should I instead work/invest more on my Canon 35mm system? Or, given the viewing format of 16:10, 6x4.5 will look richer and more detailed than 35mm?

 

One slide show that I did for my friends - the 35mm ones did get more applause than the MF ones. The pictures are mostly portraits and that is what I intend to shoot the most - family/friends.

Thanks for your comments guys.

 

Sorry, I didn't answer your question earlier, Rene. I sold the 300D because of several reasons. I wasn't using it enough in the place I was living but moved to San Francisco now. I was kind of bored with the camera after owning it for almost four years. I was selling my lens collection and the 300D ended up the on the block automatically.

 

Then a friend brought over his 20D+50mm f1.8 and I really liked the way it felt, the faster response and electronics and ofcourse the lens.

 

The lenses I am looking at are prosumer at the best. I can't spend $1000+ on each pro lens because of cost and weight. The lenses I own will be used for all around shooting - a bit of everything. Landscape, portraits, some action maybe. I intend to get a 35mm and try to shoot with it as much as possible to get some shooting discipline and a general walkaround lens that starts atleast at f2.8.

 

One lens that is common between Canon and Nikon is the 17-55mm f2.8. Nikon's rated slightly above the Canon and can also be used on full-frame but then the Canon is lighter and adds IS to it.

 

In the 24-xxx range, only Nikon has the 24-85mm f2.8-4. I don't think Canon has anything in that range and price. And although I have used non-OEM lenses like Sigma and Tamron and enjoyed both, I think I will stick to the OEM lenses this time.

 

On bodies, its most likely Canon 40D vs Nikon D300. Or, if I don't want to wait until December for a camera (thats when the D300 hits the stores) then I might go with a D80 for now and upgrade once Nikon's ironed out all the bugs out of the D300. I know its not a fair comparison because the Nikon D300 is a good $500 more expensive but the Nikon has some nice features that the Canon doesn't like the ability to use the older MF lenses, more flash modes, a much higher resolution LCD, a bigger buffer, and a few more.

 

Pentax - They sure have some nice lenses but Canon's CMOS sure is cleaner than the Sony CCD. Plus, I have the impression that Pentax dSLR electronics are slower than Canon/Nikon.

 

Sony - Wouldn't buy mostly anything from them. I just despise the company.

 

Another option I have is just buy a used 20D + a 35mmf2 and defer the decision for later. That way I won't have too much investment into gear so I can switch later.

Earlier I asked about which body. I guess the more intelligent thing would have

been to first decide on what lenses are good and then depending on that choose a

camera.

 

On the Nikon side, I was thinking of the 35mm f2 + 24-85mm f2.8-4 or the

24-120mm VR.

 

On the Canon side, I see that there is a equivalent 35mm f2 but I can't find any

general purpose lenses to match the Nikons. The "L" are nice but expensive and

too heavy for my casual shooting needs. Maybe the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 USM?

 

From shooting with a Sigma 24-135mm on a Canon 300D (now sold), I found that

most of my shots are between 24mm and 50mm. So I don't think I want any of those

18-2xx lenses.

 

Suggestions/Thoughts?

 

Thanks,

 

- Siddhartha

I think I can safely chose a 20D for now and spend the rest of the money on some expensive glass. My only concern is that I buy nice Canon lenses now and a few months down the Nikon D300 proves to be a real winner. It would be painful to sell all the Canon lenses, learn Nikon and get Nikkor lenses. I guess what I am really debating with myself here is, OH NO!, Nikon vs Canon. Or, Nikon D100 vs Canon 20D :)

The lack of a built-in flash on the 5D is an issue for me. Fill flash is nice and I am not a dedicated enough photographer to carry an external one all the time :(

I recently sold off my Canon 300D and almost all the lenses. Then a friend

brought a used 20D that he had bought to my place. I played around with it and

liked it a lot. The handling, the speed and the images that came off the

20D+50mm f1.8. That set me off dSLR shopping again. Here are the candidates. I

would greatly appreciate if someone can help me ask the right questions to come

to the right conclusion.

 

Canon 20D - Cheap. I can get a used one for less than $600. With any 1.6x dSLR I

buy, I intend to get the 35mm f2 lens. The 20D's price leaves room for couple of

nice lenses. The 8MP is enough for me (I was even happy with the 300D's 6MP).

The electronics seem fast enough. Overall, it seems to fit my needs. A major

irritant though is its tiny 1.8" LCD.

 

Canon 40D - The new kid in town that boasts 10MP with faster electronics, a

larger LCD, larger viewfinder, 14 bit A/D converter and Digic III processor

sounds really good. But for $1299 does it offer the "Wow" factor over the 20D?

 

Canon 5D - Its pricey at $2400. But the call of the full-frame is like none

other. Plus its apparently got a better viewfinder, something that always gives

you joy when framing. On the negative side, slower electronics and a heavier

camera. And it might be retired soon in favour of perhaps a 6D sometime in mid 2008.

 

Nikon D300 - Not in stores yet but seems like everything you could ask for and

then some more. What I liked was Nikon's 24-120mm VR AF lens. I thought coupling

that with the Nikkor 35mm f2 would make a great pair. The D300 sports a new Sony

CMOS sensor that should finally balance the scales with Canon on the ISO front

and that 3" LCD with 900,xxx pixels sure seems sweet.

 

Thanks,

 

- Siddhartha

Has anyone been using this Achiever 828 flash? I want to use it on my

Canon 300D but not sure what the trigger voltage is. Does anyone have

any info on it?

 

Thanks,

 

- Siddhartha