jcuknz

<p>Since storage is relatively cheap these days I think you have made a mistake in not keeping your camera originals. Many old time digital users made this error in the days when storage was expensive and have ended up with small files which are useless for larger prints etc as used today. I have a second hard drive and when downloading from camera the first thing I do is to place a copy of the camera file on the archive 2nd HD before then moving the camera file to my 'working HD'*. This means that I have the original always available .... a variation of the 'precious negative' of film days to be guarded carefully**.<br> *I am aided in this as I still use the Windows file system rather than one of the newer systems.<br> ** I used film for many years before digital and have negatives from way back, pre WWII :)</p>

<p>Keith .. Dpreview say that Fuji has a 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm)<br> https://www.dpreview.com/products/fujifilm/compacts/fuji_finepixs8100fd/specifications<br> which is a goodly size and capable, my Nikon is that.</p>

<p>After thought .... if you can remember how much time elapsed between photos posted and previous one that will explain the pure white of the lake shot compared with the first largely unmarked one which is just starting to fog the bottom [top of negative] ... another angle does camera live in bag to stop fogging? A check of the negatives will answer those question<br> the unmarked shot suggests you took three shot or two shots in quick succession that one and the one before and moved the film onto the next frame before it had time to get fogged :-).</p>

<p>Until I changed to M43 for obvious reasons I enjoyed working and playing with firstly a Nikon 5700 [x8 zoom] and the Panasonic FZ20/30/50 as they came out [x10 or is it x12 ]<br> The Nikon was a lucky choice for me being reluctant to take on debt to get a DSLR to replace my SLR and in a small compact contained what I needed a bag to carry with the SLR :-)<br> Today I also have a GH2 with the 14-140 lens to duplicate as close as possible the FZ50 with the bigger sensor enabling higher ISO use. Overcoming the main drawback of the 'bridge' as I know them which limited me to 100ISO ... no great hassle to one who used 100ISO film ... but being able to go to 6400 ISO is a freedom I enjoy occasionally.</p>

<p>I would suggest taping some black electricians tape along the top crack where the backdoor opens from the fogging in the 'house picture'. Fogging is worst at the bottom of picture which is the upper side of negative when in camera .... left is right too .... so probably right top third is where the leak is.</p>

<p>An alternative way of working in a fairly dark studio is to trigger the studio flash manually while using a long exposure in the camera .. say one or half a second or else use B to open the shutter to capture the flash.<br /> Not in a studio but taken this way with guy in hat triggering the flashes after giving us a countdown ....He suggested B but I used one second. The blurred loco lights give me away... hand holding :-)</p><div></div>

<p>The photo linked to and comments about it being shot with a 5x4 camera just show how one can loose quality by cropping. Since to get the shot he used a wide angle lens and cropped a lot of sky and foreground .... if digital that is probably more than half/ two thirds the pixels thrown away.<br> Whereas I would, and do, use a regular format camera and take a series of overlapping images to get the width without the height ... again throwing away pixels with the overlaps but ending up with at least three times the pixels of the single shot taken with the WA.<br> But for the small image seen on a monitor the difference is academic.</p>

<p>That the 'school' suggest you get a '35mm film camera' to my mind just shows how old fashioned they are and a digital with full manual overides will give you the learning experience at a much cheaper cost. 35mm film is horendously expensive and except as a nostalgic fun exercise for an experienced photographer is very much a wrong entry for a beginner.<br> While possibly a bit more expensive I would suggest a Panasonic FZ camera ... FZ50*. Such a DSLR-Like camera will give you pretty much all the features you need to learn about and better than a fixed 50mm has a 35-430 zoom....I gave up on my 50mm when I got my first digital :-)<br> *While the small body FZ cameras are good the 'large body FZs' have the feel of an SLR.Heavy enough to help with stability without the weight of a DSLR.<br> I am expressing my personal opinion based of use of the FZs, several as they developed, before I changed to Micro4/3.</p>

<p>I will just add one point which is that if you are competant in editing then a smaller sensor with a longer lens will give you far more resolution than a FF with a wide angle lens. I never use a stitch program and always, except for a 'quick job', do it manually. But I could be 'old fashioned' in that :-)</p>

<p>I suggest you play with the 'on-board' flash cut down by one or two stops to learn what it gives you, but not if the subject is looking at the camera [ red-eye ]. I have my camera set at minus one stop but for waist shots it needs to be cut further. The idea being to fill the shadows to an acceptable level without it looking like a 'flash-shot' ... much the way some use reflectors ... same principle but easier for a solo worker on the hoof.<br> A quick way to reduce it further is to hold your finger over part of the flash.</p>

<p>For your convention use I will relate what my boss did to me and my solution which preserved my reputation for reliability :-)<br> My birthday so boss shouted me at the pub. When I was suitably sossled he gave me a job envolope and off I went to a private do at another hotel.<br> I knew I was drunk so I set the camera to 8ft and aperture to f/8 [ Flash GN 56 imperial with 100 ASA film] and took everything at that distance.... all the shots came out great of course :-)<br> PS.... has anybody mentioned the confusing thing about flash today as opposed to the 1950's my story dates from. Back then most folk used imperial with the GN56 meaning f/5.6 at ten feet with 100ASA film but today often metric is used with f/5.6 used at three metres and a GN17. Both systems work the same way ... just don't mix them :-)<br> ASA = ISO effectively<br> I'm ancient ... yes I know I am :-)</p>

<p>Tracy ... it doesn't matter if you use a tripod or not .... what matters is that the camera is held [ pref NOT HELD :) ] steady by it being on something which isn't moving...... So while I agree with the lighting not camera suggestions I also know that Optical Image Stabilisation or IBIS In Body Image Stabilisation of a newer camera is worth it [ my 2002 Nikon bridge doesn't but my 2004 Panasonic bridge does :-) ]<br> I have taken a group photo with my bridge camera using a mini-tripod [uS$<25 ? ] sitting on a flimsie cardboard box which gave me the height I needed for the shot .... BUT of course I used the delay release to give the 'rig' time to settle down after I had pressed the trigger and left it completely untoughed ....hence my NOT HELD comment :-)<br> Have fun!!</p>

<p>I would suggest a 'pro camera' is what is in the hands of a pro tog.<br> I remember the story about a Magnum worker taking three Olympus P&S to Iraq.</p>

<p>A passing train taken from a train bumping over points [switches -USA terminology]</p>

<p>Since I still have the f/1.4 Takumar M42 lens I would add a Pentax SLR to your list if I was considering a film camera but having started in film I wouldn't suggest it for a beginner.... much better to pay a bit more for the advantages of a good digital camera from Panasonic with a good editor to match it. Digital can be worked manually as well as a film camera and with a much larger range of potential ISO to help with ambient low light situations.<br> There is nothing magical about film ... been there ... best forgotten ... but I suspect that is fighting talk and I would agree it could be fun for an experienced photographer but for a beginner ... no way! Sorry :-) </p>

<p>OOPs Sorry obviously I meant 42 and not 43 mm :-(</p>

<p>I am glad digital photogaphers have adopted the equivalent system as in the old days I never was quite sure what the 80 mm of my Rollieflex was compared to the 50mm of my 35mm cameras or the 135mm of my 5x4 beastie :-) *<br> But then until digital came along I never had more than one lens for each camera and love the zoom lens that digital brought me.<br> * or the 25mm on my 16mm film camera which I read once equated to a 90 on 35mm full-frame :-)</p>

<p>A final tip before I go for tea/dinner ..<br /> 50mm lens maybe here<br /> http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=50mm%20lens&_trksid=p2058484.m4389<br /> But I would check out what Cash Converters have if there is one nearby you or KEH mail order<br /> I bought my legacy lens and Pentax body from them in 1996 and the body lasted four months [ Water damage I didn't spot] but lens good as gold today in 2016 :)<br /> KEH have quite a few<br /> https://www.keh.com/shop/catalogsearch/result/?cat=26&q=50mm<br /> I bought my MFT lens from them, all US$700 of it :-)</p> <p>EDIT This lens for $29 is simular to what I got from CCs\<br> https://www.keh.com/shop/pentax-smc-p-a-50mm-f2-0-lens.html</p>

<p>My 55mm film camera lens reverse in front of my Canon s20 P&S<br /> But for your project you are going to need a reasonably good editor and Paint dot Net a free download while a bit kacky compared to my regular editor should be able to do the job for you.</p><div></div>

<p>Now not so big a magnification at about your max zoom.</p> <p>Further idea .. any lens you buy of say 50mm [ old film lens] can be reversed and held in front of your camera lens [ similar to how the russian did it but you could well get vignetting as I did when I tried it with my early P&S camera with only a 8omm max zoom.</p><div></div>

<p>Having just done what I should have done first and found you have a basic P&S camera much of what I have wrritten is of litle use to you ... sorry. but one useful tip is that your camera will work fine whatever [ almost] whatever you put in front of itds lens and you may need [ most likely] have to cellotape a lens to the lens body ... something which folk did years ago when they didn't have a filter thread to the lens ... and I suggest you start with any old [ not scratched :-) ]magnifying glass lying around your place to learn how big s aubject in frame you can achive ... will not cost you much and I will post a shot taken with a 60cent mag glass taped to the front of my bridge camera as an example of what can be done of one of my G scale model railway figures</p><div></div>

<p>Just a further comment ....to get tightly framed shots you do not always have to get in close, which can be counter productive for various reasons. <br> If you bought a 'kit' you may well have a telephoto lens/ or long zoom which is my preference for filling the frame with small objects. Here we use the 'close-up lens' to overcome the inability of long lens to focus close and the CU lens gives you the opportunity to work from a bit further back. A CU lens is normally of little use when used on 'short' lens ... the small amount of magnification is better gained in editing. <br> Typically with my 430mm lens and a two dioptre [ 500mm/20 inch] CU lens I can work between 13 and 20 inches from the subject and 1.5 inches across subject fills the frame at 13". I do not use more powerful CU lens because sadly IQ falls off badly in most cases. Often when using such lens the edges are soft but if the object just fills part of the frame like half inch in 1.5"that is not that serious a problem.<br> For some subjects it is better to use extension tubes and unfortunately with modern gear you need the more expensive 'auto extension tubes'as your lens needs to be coupled to the camera body electronicqlly thqt cheqper 'plain tubes' do not provide.<br> When I used a bridge camera i could only use CU lens but now with MFT ILC I have auto extension tubes for a better result even though I only have 280 instead of 430 max zoom</p><div></div>

<p>Flash reflections are a problem until you understand what is happening .... mirrors reflect what you can see in them so the idea is to put the light source outside the angle of reflection.<br> In addition to practicing your editing you should learn about 'Flash Guide Numbers' which will help you to use cheaper/older flash guns in the way folk used them in the past before automation took over [ I learnt about GNs in the 1950's and it is one of the easiest ways to take a photo ]<br> So to get the flash out of the reflection zone you need a separate flash unit which need not be that expensive along with an 'Optical slave trigger' and a piece of cardboard in front of the camera's flash which lets the flash work the trigger but doesn't cause a reflection from the subject.<br> If you are interested in following this ask questions, PM me?</p>

<p>The lens may be old but I still have a couple which with an adaptor can be used on ILCs but with the proviso that if Nikon made their camera with a greater lensmount to sensor distance you cannot focus to infinity<br> My briief search didn't get me an answer as the site I used to use will not let me in any more :-( but Wikipedia has a couple of pages on the subject of interest to you ... now I'm with MFT just about any lens will work for me so one of my first purchases was a MFT-M43 adaptor. I have various gear from my film pentax days.<br> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount<br> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_F-mount</p>

<p>Stay clear of the Ebay/ Amazon offering which for <$30 are likely rubbish and check with B&H New York or Adorama for a good quality close-up lens .... also what editing programme do you have. To sell on Ebay etc you do not need more than 1000x1000 pixels.<br> Read my answer on adjacent thread .. guy wants to know similar project to you<br> http://www.photo.net/beginner-photography-questions-forum/00dwGD</p>