claude_batmanghelidj

I just got hold of an ELM, and I shot a couple of rolls of my daughter, using the waist level finder and at 1/15

and 2.8. Almost all of the shots were either blurred or out of focus. My question is, what is the lowest hand

held speed practicalable with the ELM, and how to use the WLF at a distance, without peering through the diopter.

Any tips on using the ELM as a fast action camera?

Then why are there two batteries in there? Should I only load one?

Wow, that's amazing. You can get 2000 exposures out of one battery!? So, if there are two of them, it means 4000 exposures between changes!?

Hi all,<P> I just bought an old ELM, which is a very nice camera. It has a couple of "Hass-EL" replacement

battery converters which use the old 9V transistor radio batteries, the squarish ones with the contacts on the

same end, with the little clips.<P> I have read all kinds of things, such as they will stress the motor, or they

are too weak and will die quickly. <p>Does anyone know the truth about these? My Hassy seems to work fine at the

moment.

I had the 6003, and it is a very nice camera. However, there were a couple of problems that made me sell it. The first was the batteries (very primitive technology). There may be some way of rigging a Li Ion rechargeable or a NiMh at the very least, but even here in Tokyo, I could never figure out how to do it. The regular screen was a pain to focus, and finding a replacement was tricky, not mention the cost of a -2 diopter. Backs cost an arm and a leg, but the rotatable 645 seems amazing, if you can find one. Lenses, everything is phenomenally expensive. It was out of my league, pricewise, but a really nice camera.<p>If you have bags of money, go for it. Otherwise a Hasselblad may make more sense.

Hi all. Many thanks for the answers. I got first three rolls of film back, and a fair number of them were out of focus. This was very disappointing. On the positive side, the camera was very cheap, about 200 bucks, like new, and with only 700 shots on the frame counter. It is also lightweight, syncs at all speeds and has the VF through which you are not shut out of the action as you are with an SLR.<P>

 

I was messing around with it, and noticed that the distant readings the AF gave were often all over the place. I am wondering if it is a case of simply giving it some time. I have dumped the Contax G system for this very reason, and it would be too bad if such a promising camera had to go the same way.

I did something similar in 1997 in Ecuador, when up in the Andes. I took an 8008 Nikon, a 28 2.0, a 50 1.8 and an 85 2.0, as well as an Olympus Stylus point and shoot. To be honest with you, I could have made do with simply the Stylus and the SLR/85 combo. The Stylus for most stuff, and the SLR/85 for portraits and getting in closer.

<p>

If it was me, I would take the 5D and the 24-105, with a standard 50mm 1.8. Keep it light and simple. Why cart all that gear around?

<p>Keith, what I was thinking, with my question, was based on my experience shooting an M. The M, quite honestly, allowed me to capture things that are not possible with any other camera. The M interface is basically perfect. I agree it is about the photographer, but my experience with the M has been that it is a camera that does what I want, as opposed to many camera designs that force you to adapt to the camera... if that makes any sense..</p>

<p>Well, Keith, as they say, a picture is worth a thousand photo.net posts...</p>

Hi all,

 

Does anyone here have experience using the GA645? Is it possible, after getting used to using the camera, to be

able to capture as much as you can with a Leica?

 

I am interested to hear especially from people who have used the GA for a long time, and been able to make it

work for them.

 

Cheers!

Leica lenses are outstanding, and in many cases, I believe that the R versions are superior to the M versions.<p>I can personally vouch for the 90mm 2.0, 2.8 and 50mm 2.0 lenses. The best I have ever seen. In fact I am talking myself into purchasing these lenses again, to use on my EOS....

Wow, it's great to hear all this good feedback about the P645. I have one too. I bough the 645n with the 45, 75 and 150 all AF versions, and I think the entire package, including the top of the line AF Pentax flash unit, remote release and 220 extra back cost me a total of about 900 dollars. I love this camera. Simply amazing. The images are no different from what you would get with a Hassy, except they are 645 and not 6x6.<p>

 

 

I concur with the auto exposure being spot on, the shutter/mirror slap is very quiet, and very low vibration, and the AF is fast and sure. I love this camera. Get one, you will not regret it.<p>

 

 

Having said that, I would love to also have a Hasselblad, but when push comes to shove, this outfit is probably more useful, for less money, especially in view of the fact that I have three top notch AF lenses for the same price or less than a Hassy with back and standard lens.

I wonder if they could license someone to manufacture the film?

Hi there,

 

I like to rummage the used camera stores here in Tokyo, and dug up a Super 23 last night. Paid about 90 bucks for it. The VF was foggy, so I unscrewed the top plate, three small black screws and the chrome screw that holds the frameline adjustment tab on. Then you can pull the toplate. After that you unscrew the one small screw that holds the little plate over the VF. Then you can clean the surfaces underneath.

 

The problem I had was that I could not get at the front glass or into the eyepiece. There is fog in there, and nothing I can do about it. I have a special tool for unscrewing the rings that hold lens elements in, but it was way too tight for that, in the eyepiece.

 

Other than that, the 100mm lens has a lot of dust in it. I am kind of wondering what to do with this. I would not mind using it, but my friend Peter in Kyushu who specialises in Mamiya Press gear had a mint one of these which he sold for just under 500 dollars. The mint one is so nice, it is hard to keep using one that has been around too long, like the one I got. Having said that it is perfectly useable, and probably makes nice sharp pics. I guess I'll take it out for a test drive on the streets of Tokyo soon enough...

 

Anyway, back to your ebay purchase. I would return it. It really is not worth messing with. I will try and get you in touch with some reputable dealers, so you can get a nice one.

 

Ebay is really hell like this. At least this dude will give you a refund. I would take it.

 

Regards,

 

Claude

Cheers Matt,

 

I concede your point, that I am "severely overestimating the nature of a non-problem."

 

I'm fine to leave it at that. That's the great thing about the web. It is wide open and even photo.net is constantly evolving. One great thing about flickr is that you can host your images there and then link them here for feedback from this site. Flick will not go away, and I think the best thing is for photo.net to find ways to work with it, and try and bring in traffic from that site, and vice versa.

Just to expand, browsing the threads in Flickr, it seems highly unlikely that for example a woman posting a question would suddenly find herself running a gauntlet of sneering replies demanding why she had not done a search first, or some other kind of condescending criticism, or where a forum devolves into a pissing contest.

 

A lot of us are pretty comfortable with the old school male dominated authoritarian, old testament style, but in other places this whole paternalistic model is being seriously questioned.

Hi guys,

 

Thanks very much for all of the feedback. Is it just me, or does it seem like photonet is very much a white older male environment?

 

It would be interesting to know the demographics for the site.

 

Maybe there ought to be a rule, a kind of affirmative action that moderators, be apportioned a significant number who are below the age of say 30 or female.

 

Really, I am not trying to start a fight here, and it's all just based on a hunch.

 

Flickr casts such a wide net, I could not even imagine this thread taking place there.

Just read an interesting article on user input to websites, and how an over emphasis on control is stopping

old media, think NYT, BBC, from increasing their influence on the web.

 

Well, it got me thinking about photo.net's increasingly stringent policies on posting.

 

Anyway, here is the article: <a

href="http://www.scientificblogging.com/science_2_0/old_media_still_spooked_by_user_generated_conte

nt">Click here</a>

 

Any thoughts?

Please, first of all, forgive me for asking this question without first making a

search. Even links to the relevant threads or sites would be very helpful.

 

Anyway, my problem is that I have a case full of DVDs and CDs packed with images

in all kinds of different folders. I want to back everything up onto a hard

drive, and then reorganise it, back up the data on DVDs and also, if possible

archive everything online.

 

That way, I would have all the data stored at three different sites.

 

1. Is there software that will extract all the data and organise it

automatically, say by date?

 

2. Any recommendations for a hard drive? I have a Mac Mini, and I thought the

best solution would be a very large external hard disc, with a firewire

connection, to store all my pictures.

 

3. Is there such a thing as a rewritable Blu Ray disc or recorder?

 

4. Can anyone tell me more about archiving online. I don't need anything fancy

just say a half a terrabyte of space to dump data which is easily uploaded or

downloaded, and has built in redundancy (if that is the right word)?

If you are in Tokyo, I can tell you a good place to go, and get one used, but in like new condition, should be very cheap.

now a jpg out of the camera<div></div>

Hmm... I don't get it. I just shot three shots, and they are all fine. Two jpgs out of the

camera, and one raw file saved as a jpg.<div></div>

Another good question.

 

I am shooting JPG, and I have been applying unsharp mask at various settings which I gathered from old threads here on pnet. However, I have been experimenting with RAW, with which I am not familiar, and trying to expand into using RAW.

 

I really know little to nothing about any of this, and it's all been hit and miss. I need to find ways to archive my files, as well as optimise them for print and for web use. In any case, I guess this will involve learning photoshop, much better.

 

My previous method, was to simply shoot jpegs with my D70 and be done with it. This does not really work with the 10D, which needs much more PP.

Oh, just to add, one nice thing is that I can use old Nikkors with this and get metering. I picked up a 105 AI and a 28 AIS for a total of $100, and have been playing with them on the EOS. The only trouble is it is hard to focus. Anyone have any aftermarket screens that worked for them?

Hi everyone,

 

Thanks for all the replies. I have in the meantime (since my earlier posts)taken the camera to Canon here in Tokyo, and they reset the back focus to optimum setting. However it is still soft. I have not made specific tests though, so it could be anything. I bought one of these cameras about three years or more ago and returned it for a Canon XT, which is was perfect (I traded that for a Sony R1, which I was convinced was the digital Holy Grail, close but not quite. Then traded that for a D70 which was great, however, still curious about the 10D I sold the Nikon and got one of these.

 

Please spare me any remarks about the above insanity. I am sure whatever anyone says will be valid, but thats my problem, so please don't worry about it.

 

Anyway, I am very keen on the 10D prints, which really do look heaps better than the D70 output, which may look sharper on a PC, but in output is not as graceful as the Canon output.

 

However, for web stuff, the Canon comes up short, without any PP.

 

Umm..well, that's about it for now. Like I said, I will keep messing with the Canon to get the best results. One thing I have learned is that it is good to stick with one camera, get to know it.

 

Hope I am not sounding frvilous...