jason_sprenger1

<p>The Canon XSi is a very nice camera in its own right, fully capable. I wouldn't see a need to upgrade for quite a while.<br>

For a first lens, I recommend the Tamron 17-50/2.8. It's fast enough on both the wide and long ends for available light photography, its zoom range is enough to be general purpose, and it's sharp enough to deliver the goods without breaking the bank. It's also not too heavy and comes with a hood.<br>

From here, you might consider a longer zoom or a fast prime depending on where you want to go in photography, but with this lens you'd have basic capability well covered.</p>

<p>The photographic process is about translation, translating the light reflected from a 3-d environment to a 2-d image, and that light's full-spectrum to a very narrow one. Without thought or creativity behind a translation you wind up with an automated or mechanical translation which too easily distorts what is being expressed. Of course, any modification of a translation can go too far and result in something unrecognizably different from the original.<br>

How far you go in a translation depends upon how you value the impression of reality.<br>

I think it Ansel Adams said, "The negative is the score and the print is the performance". From this analogy, it is not an unreasonably thing to say that the full aesthetic capacity of a great photograph is not realized until it is post-processed and that skill is required both in the capturing and in the post-processing.</p>

<p>For a fast RF lens, the Nokton 50/1.5 ASPH is a bargain. I'd say the performance per dollar spent ratio is very high. You'd have to spend thousands more for a sharper lens as fast as this one.<br>

But 50/1.5 is on the chunky side compared to the 40/1.4 if a small, RF camera set up is what you're looking for. I don't have the 40/1.4, but I do have it's younger brother, the 35/1.4 which is comparably sized.<br>

Body-wise the Bessa is conventional in operation very similar to most other late model 35mm cameras except Leica. The viewfinder is top-notch, both clear and bright. The camera is light and the rubber cover provides a decent grip, (the bulge on the right-side of the back helps). If you are going to use a neck strap, I recommend the accessory grip. Without it, the camera has a tendency to tip backward, though this may not be a problem if you choose the larger Nokton 50/1.5. <br>

The shutter release requires a deliberate press and the shutter has a metallic "clack" to it. The meter has been accurate for me and the AE mode is useful for street shots. Holding the AE lock is a little awkward, but it works fine.</p>

<p>I shoot film when digital isn't up to the task. There are two factors that decide the matter for me, kit size and resolution. Traveling, I like a small kit and this often means I take a 35mm rangefinder with 3 lenses, usually f2 or faster if flash may not be an option. Battery dependence is minimized and the Domke F-5xb is so nice to carry compared to an Domke F-2 or just about anything. There is the Leica M8/8.2, but even at used prices, I'm not ready to drop so much coin. <br /> However, with decent color processing getting more scarce, I'm carrying a Canon XSi with the smallish and light Tamron 17-50/2.8 more and more these days in the Domke F-5xb. I lose some lens speed, add battery charging to my routine and there's a different look, but I generally gain some ISO and I can make it work.<br /> On the other hand, there are times I want to print big and since there's yet no real replacement for displacement, I often go 4x5. I can capture in one shot what I'd have to stitch together from 6 or more DSLR shots. But that kit is big, the number of captures is limited, and color processing can get comparatively costly. Thus, relegating the 4x5 to car trips and dedicated photo outings, but 4x5 slides are seriously lovely.<br /> However, between an SLR with slide film and a DSLR with 8mp or more, the DSLR would do it for me. The kit size is the same and a DSLR offers at ISO 400 what most slide film delivers at 100. Fuji 400X is great but pricey. And not being Dennis Hopper in Apocalypse Now, carrying one camera is enough for me.</p>

<p>If the 50/1.8 or 70-200/4 @ f8 ain't getting it for you, I don't think anything will. I have both the 5D and XTi myself and wouldn't consider printing much larger than 16x20. I'm even hard pressed to recommend printing medium format film much larger than that.<br>

I regard film as printable at 8x for color and maybe 10x for b&w. For 24" or 28" wide prints and no expense spared, I'd go with a 4x5 field or press camera wearing a 150mm or 210mm lens, and exposing Provia 100F or some 100 speed b&w which would then be professionally drum-scanned and printed.<br>

Don't get me wrong, I consider a digital resolution of about 3000x4500 to be a sweet spot, the place were viewing distance and image size scale very well together, i.e. 10" viewing distance for 10"x15", 16" for 16"x24", etc. It's just that for optimum image quality, 240-300 pixels per inch is needed in order to stand up to examination at 10"-12". If that type of scrutiny is needed here, there is no replacement for a large exposure surface.<br>

These days, medium format digital can get you there too, but the expense is extreme, in the 10's of thousands of dollars.<br>

Indeed, with wisely chosen components, the price of a EF 50/1.2 might get you a 4x5 camera, a lens and some holders.</p>

<p>Another vote for the Crown Graphic. Fewer movements than the Shen, but some, and not usually a limiting factor for landscapes. Also going nuts and picking it up and taking hand-held shots is an option. I like the Pacemaker with Kalart side-mount rangefinder and the Graflock back.</p>

<p>For a wide angle lens, it depends on what you mean by wide. 135mm and 150mm are "normal" lenses but have a wider view than the 50mm, so-called "normal", for 35mm film. If you reduce the 35mm film frame to the 4x5 aspect, you find a 4x5 has a "crop factor" of x0.25. Thus, a 135mm 4x5 lens has a FOV comparable to a 33mm lens with 35mm film.</p>

<p>90mm is considered a wide with 4x5. You may find a used Schneider Super Angulon 90/6.8 that might work without breaking your bank. Plus, they are small enough to fit inside of a Crown Graphic when closed up. There's not a lot of movement possible with this lens, but for a Crown it might be a good option to start with.</p>

<p>What would most certainly drive Leica to an M9 would be the release of another comparable M-mount camera at a lower price point. If say Zeiss offered their Ikon with a 12mp APS-C Sony sensor, to stay on top, Leica would come out with an M9 with a 15mp sensor. For I believe it was the Epson R-D1 that ultimately moved Leica to the digital M as it is Zeiss and Cosina that very much moves them to make new M-mount lenses.</p>

<p>Another vote for the Tamron 28-75/2.8 I find it capable and fairly small & light for such a fast zoom.<br>

An ounce becomes a pound when you're carrying it all day.</p>

<p>Dreamier?<br>

Soft-focus filters or lenses, softars or even the less expensive Hoya version. Selective application of Gaussian blur in Photoshop. Fast, prime telephoto lenses to thin out the depth of field.<br>

"where ever and who ever i'm with"<br>

This suggests capturing on the spur of the moment and can be most difficult to capture and render in a fine art style. Perhaps it would be useful to note what you like when you see it and seek to create your picture later in a posed session with controlled, off-camera lighting.<br>

The pale reflection of your vision seen in a high ISO snapshot can serve as inspiration and a guide for subject matter, background and lighting at a later time when you're able to "make" the intended photograph.</p>

<p>Another vote for the Tamron cap. Center-pinch is nice particularly with deep hoods.</p>

<p>The aperture and shutter speed usable under a particular ISO value are not supposed to vary too much between brands. That's what the ISO exposure standard is all about and has been since folks used to call it "film speed" and used funny initials like ASA, DIN, and the others. If this is not the case for your camera, it requires servicing.<br>

Given the interior of a home at night lit with incandescent bulbs or the equivalent, a light meter might typically indicate an exposure of f2.8 at 1/30th of a second at ISO 400, well within the capability of every Canon DSLR released since the turn of the century, provided the lens mounted can open up to f2.8.<br>

If you expect to shoot at 1/60th, the lens must be capable of f1.4 for proper exposure at ISO 400 under these conditions.<br>

If you have a zoom that can only manage an aperture of f5.6, a shutter speed of 1/8th of second is required at ISO 400 under these conditions. Too slow to reasonably expect anything but blurry results without a tripod and accessory release.<br>

If the ISO is increased to 800, the shutter speed can be doubled and doubled again for ISO 1600, but at the expense of image quality, even on the best cameras available today.<br>

Of course, a DSLR can pick appropriate the shutter and aperture values for you, if you set the exposure dial on the top to either "P" or to the green rectangle.</p>

 

For hand-held photography, the 17-85/f4-5.6 has a very nice range, light to carry and IS. The 17-55/f2.8 IS offers a stop or two more speed at the expense of a bit of focal length. Either of these two offer a lot for an EOS with a APS-C sized sensor if only one lens can be used.

 

In Africa, taking along a longer lens is advised. Without a tripod or vehicle mount and traveling light, the 70-300/f4-5.6 IS or 70-300/f4.5-5.6 DO IS would serve as well as anything. The latter is more compact than the former but about as heavy or heavier.

FWIW, I remember hearing that in the movie "Charade", Cary Grant was back-lit in a scene and that gaffer's tape was put on the back of his ears to prevent "glowing ears".

My Crown Graphic often sports a Rodenstock APO Sironar S 150/5.6 and it closes just fine. It is the lens I have set-up with the rangefinder and normally stays with the camera. My Nikon 90/8 doesn't fit, but the wonderfully tiny, Nikon 200/8 does.

My usual 5D bag has three prime lenses, though which three depends on the expected subject.

 

For people indoors and outdoors, I take a 35, 50 and an 85. The 85 is normally for posed portraits and when closer contact would adversely affect the scene. Otherwise, my basic strategy is to have the 35 on the camera indoors and use the 50 outdoors to minimize lens changes.

 

I find that I can go a long way with just the 50, so it should be no surprise that my kit has two focal lengths on either side of the 50.

If it was me, I'd wait until I had at least as much money to spend on lenses as budgeted for the camera.

 

If I could only get one lens, I'd go with a EF 35/2, then later add a EF 50/1.8, and then a EF 24/2.8. But then I like primes and I'm not big on going too wide. If I had to get a zoom, I'd go with the EF 17-40/4.

 

But if waiting would dampen your enthusiasm, you prefer a zoom, and are going to get the 18-55mm, don't just get any 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, get the 18-55 F3.5-5.6 EF-S IS. The one with IS is the one that you'd want as it is optically improved over the earlier versions, over and above the advantage of IS.

For me, the EF 35/2 and the EF 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 would do it. Running after little kids for candids, I might use the EFs 17-85 for the range, but I hear the EFs 17-55 has better image quality. For full-frame compatibility, the EF 17-40 gets good marks.

 

As much as a decent lens, get a decent flash with a high guide number and learn to use it. Chasing kids and family, good light is very hard to come by when it's needed, even in broad daylight.

 

Landscapes are more difficult to light on your own, but thankfully they're much more patient and usually will wait with you for the sun to get into the right position.

I'd get a EF 28/1.8 for a fast normal. That's about $400 and takes the same 58mm filters as the 70-300. If later you find the zoom too long or not fast enough for portraits, a 50/1.8 could be added.

 

Alternatively, a EF 24/2.8 for a wide-ish normal lens and a 50/1.8 for a short, fast portrait lens. Both these lenses are under the $400 total and have good quality and speed for the money.

I went with mostly primes myself with the 5D. If it's your shooting style, it remains a good way to go with 5D.

 

With the 35/2, it's advisable to get a 52-58 step up ring since the other lenses you list take 58mm filters. And if you go with a polarizer, get a circular polarizer. You can use other filters if you want to, but I find that most color balancing is best done in software. If you have favorites for special situations or for effects that you like, you'll be able to use them just the same.

 

I use 2Gig memory cards and look on them like they're each 2 rolls of 36-exp. So go with usual load and divide by two. I think 2 Gig is a good figure with the 5D; in case one fails, you have less chance of losing everything. To get the images onto a computer, a nice card reader is also mandatory, offloading images directly from the camera, while possible, is a bit of a pain.

 

At the very least, get one spare battery. I find a battery will last me about a day of active shooting. The camera comes with one battery and a charger.

 

The 5D has a couple of remote switch options, even a cable release adapter. Often as not, I use the built-in self-timer option with the mirror-lock capability when I'm using a tripod. However, I use the remote switch RS-80N3 when doing portraits. The connector used with the 5D is what Canon calls the T3 and has been around a while.

 

For exposure, the LCD screen is somewhat useful in providing a preview but the exposure histogram graph that can be displayed is much more useful. It looks somewhat like the "Levels" graph in Photoshop. I find it best to treat digital like it was slide film. However, the camera offers exposure bracketing so you can play games combining images in Photoshop, if you're in a tough exposure situation. And shooting with RAW files, you can normally get a bit more latitude out of your images if the light was just plain bad.

 

Have fun with the 5D. It is a great camera.

For handy and convenient, the 70-300/4-5.6 IS DO might be a consideration.

 

A number of folks don't believe it is worth the extra coin over the non-DO, but in your case the compactness and build quality might be more significant factors. It's not lighter but it's more than an inch and a half shorter (43mm) than the non-DO and slightly smaller than your 24-105/4 L which would likely remain your main lens.

 

You could wear a lens pouch on your belt that can hold either lens so switching lenses could be as convenient as using two lenses could be.

I have the 420EX and it works pretty well for grab shots. It lacks manual controls so often as not, I use a Sunpack 383 which I find is a nice basic automatic flash with plenty of power.

 

I think with one of these flashes and a bounce card or a Stofen cup, you'd be set for candids and fill-flash situations when the built-in flash doesn't have enough power.

My favorite bag for my R2A with three lenses is the Domke-F5xb. I carry 35-50-90 lenses, a few rolls of film, a Sunpak 383 flash, a Bogen table-top tripod, and there's room for a couple of filters, a cable release, and a lens hood. If the flash is omitted, even more film can be carried.

 

If I go ultra, ultra light, use the Domke-F5xa which is 2/3rds the size of the tiny F5xb. If I carry my compact lenses, CV 35/2.5, CV 50/2.5, and CV 90/3.5, with the R2a, there's still room for some film and a couple of filters. If I omit the 90, I can carry a flash.

In an EX lens, I wouldn't expect anything to threaten image quality. If you believe this is the case, I also think you should call KEH and talk it over.

 

In the case of large format lenses, the expected worry for me would be gummy grease requiring a CLA of the shutter, particularly something in an old Synchro-Compur shutter. Even if the outside is mint, 30 year-old grease is 30 year-old grease.

 

But as to the glass itself, I'd still expect it to be clean if marked EX no matter how old it was.

Hmm, a little of James Nachtwey's world right here. Images from reality really are powerful things.

 

Some photog's dream for such opportunities, some foolish, some noble. Such photos may not win Pulitizers but it is photojournalism.

 

Thinking this over, nice snapshots of store fronts would be nice over by the "Member Recommendations" section of this web site, wordlessly adding to the value of the resource.

 

I doubt that Don can ride his bike everywhere, maybe other folks could contribute too. I understand some folks around here take pictures.

My impression is that moving to the Bessa R from a classic LTM Leica is like going from a '64 Dodge Dart to a Honda Civic. The former being good then, the latter being good now.

 

Framelines are good and parallex correction seems accurate. I've experienced nothing cut-off at the edges with my 35mm, 50mm, or 90mm. The framelines for 75mm are there too but I don't have one to test it. I must say, the switchable framelines are very nice if you're coming from a classic Leica LTM body.

 

The meter seems pretty darn good to me. Know that it is a center weighted jobby and behave accordingly. Following the meter, I've received good exposures from it even in the gloom of a redwood forest.

 

I worried that the range finder might be off having read some of the stories on the 'net but no such problems materialized for me.

 

The brightness of the viewfinder is very, very satisfying. Framing and focusing in a single view is definitely how it needs to happen.

 

You'll find the rewind knob is a little fiddly and the plastic back doesn't inspire. The top plate is plastic but seems solid. The camera is light but in no way toy-like.

 

The film advance lever is not ratcheted. Not a big deal for me but some folks expect to short stroke the advance lever.

 

Neither of my 50's collapse all the way. I don't have a 'cron or summitar but my 50/1.9 Canon stands out a bit. I generally don't bother to have that collapsed on the Bessa R as a result. I do carry the Bessa R with my 50/3.5 Elmar collapsed, however, and have had no trouble. Though most often I have a 35mm lens on the camera that hardly needs to collapse even if it could.

 

And if it is an issue, the Bessa R is a LTM camera which does limit you to LTM lenses. This is only a problem if you're contemplating bringing M-mount lenses into your system.

 

I find the strap lugs are rather awkwardly placed a bit far forward on the body. Good in that, the strap doesn't interfere with opening the back. Bad in that the camera wants to tip backward when the camera is being carried from a neck stap, particularly with smaller, lighter lenses. If you prefer to use a hand strap, I don't expect it would be an issue.

 

Like you, I found loading my LTM Leicas left a lot to be desired. The Bessa R has basically the same kind of form factor and it loads like a camera ought to load. As I result I am shooting more pictures with a rangefinder than I have in some time.

 

All and all, I am very pleased it. The nagging gripes for me are how the strap hangs and the fiddly rewind knob. The viewfinder, the easy loading, and the meter out weigh those concerns by an order of magnitude.