jsbc

interesting viewpoint, Ian. It bears out my experience although I find a SLR to be inclusive and a Leica to be exclusive.

 

I take a lot of snapshots of my family using a DSLR and I usually zoom out from a longer focal length until I feel all the interesting action/people are in the frame. I know I should determine the perspective first and then walk forwards and backwards, but it never works in practice.

 

With a rangefinder, I deliberately start from afar and walk towards the action to get the framing.

 

Some of us feel there's a difference between shooting RF vs SLR. Personally I like using a waist level finder (this is why all the digicams I got have flippable LCDs).

The two time that I trimmed the film without a template, the film snagged and I got pieces of film everywhere. The other time there the film for some reason was ripped longitudinally down the middle bythe film processer who wasn't on the lookout for such things. .

 

If I have time, I would unscrew the lens and set the shutter speed to T. I also use a name card to ensure that the bottom sprockets catch when I advance the film through the first few frames. I get 3 shots per roll now, but I have a higher confidence the film is OK.

The Canon's movie mode is very, very good, Could be best of class.

I'll be interested in 5 if price is reasonable.

looking for signs<div></div>

another<div></div>

well...<div></div>

What would be best: Like the RD1, Cosina can design a manual focus body with Epson. A sort of reverse adaptall mount / or similar to the Olympus 4/3rd system. Then it is just a matter of switching the front end to use your FD, AIS, CY, M42, Pentax K lenses.

 

They can even cooperate with Sigma which has the Foveon sensor.

What you are proposing is kinda like saying we should be able to use SLR lenses on a non-mirror body like a Leica M3.

 

It works, but the fact that the H system has a removable film back erases much of the advantages.

 

A 80mm + extension tube + your SWC + filmback is not much smaller or lighter than a 500 + old SWC + A12. It is less rigid, and you loses through the lens viewing if you do shoot with 80mm lens.

 

Furthermore, it is safe to assume that most people who own SWC would have the basic body, after all, the # of basic bodies >>> SWCs.

OK, I have a Pentax 645 with a 45-85(?) zoom. Works for me. Slightly more expensive than your budget, but works well enough.

btw, about the other folders, there are some interesting compositions, and some that seem that snapshots, but presented as a whole, it seems a very deliberate approach to take note of the recurrent seemingly indecisive moments where everything hang in equilibrium. In fact the Idyll section seems to portray people who are seriously dourly trying to do nothing, rather than enjoying themselves as they should be.

 

I am not a critic (nor am I very good at expressing myself) but I also find that gross is quite masterly in his use of light and depth of field. Some of these images must be very 3D-looking as the central characters pop out of the background even in the slightly fuzzy webshots.

I like the one where the couple sat on a towel facing the sea.

 

It is extremely counterpuntal to HCB's similar photo of a French party. Now HCB's photo is about idyll. Gross Holger's photo is about a serious couple who don't know how to relax.

Even the SWC is DEAD!

The only thing that would make a Bessaflex better is a similar camera that comes with the Rollei mount and the aforementioned adapter....

 

 

But really, for the Bessaflex, what's there not to like. It is not plasticky - quite well built - and has a mechanical shutter. The lack of a hot shoe is a disappointment though.

 

One other think I forgot to mention: Yes, the Takumar lenses have the A/M switch, but I think they are not as convenient as people make out. I have pretty thick fingers. I also own some Tamron adaptall lenses which lack the A/M button, making them impossible to use on Pentax K-mount bodies, even if they are equipped with the adapter.

 

Finally, they allow you to use the CV 42mm lenses, which are excellent. I also use Pentacon lenses with a Pentacon/M42 adapter, so a genuine M42 mount allowss me to use the auto-diaphram.

 

So I don't think there's any doubt it is one of the best M42 bodies. The question is really whether (1) the price point is important, (2) whether it makes more sense to use a converter that's compatible with your more extensive SLR system.

I bought a Black Bessaflex ONE DAY before the TOP-CON version was announced! Boy was I screw!

 

That said, I think the Bessaflex is a great camera, and WELL worth the money.

 

Consider this, it is a small run order, and prices are naturally high. I don't know how much it costs in the US, but in Asia, it is less than 60% of a FM3A, and only slightly more expensive than a Nikon FM10.

 

I have Canon, Pentax and Contax cameras. Pentax are the worst machines to use a M42 lens on, because you cannot switch between K-mount lenses and M42 lenses easily.

 

I also have an AX, so in fact, I can even use M42 lenses with auto-focus functions. Yes, and Canon Pentax preserves stop-down metering.

 

That said, nothing is more convenient than an authentic M42 mount. Because not only is stop down metering a pain, (though solvable), the worse is really the process of metering, open aperture, focus, close down aperture, then press shutter. So in fact, even if you know the proper EV, taking pictures on a fast-moving target is well nigh impossible.

 

What about the old SP etc? Well, if they are functional, good. But the Bessaflex has the best viewfinder, as well as a meter. Getting the right aperture is just pressing one button. Too bad they did not build the Bessaflex with a AE function so you can lock the shutter speed when you stop down when metering.

Sharp photo, but appalling bokeh!

 

Btw, do you see a loss of constrast due to the additional light spill when using a MF lens on a small format camera?

It will not fit.

 

There is a thread further down whcih details how to hack the EF-S lens mount so that traditional EF mount cameras can accomodate the EF-S lenses. However, it's not ideal.

I have a D30 and a Nikon D70. I know 20D etc completely outperforms the D30 in every category, and the ability to use EF-S lenses means you should shop for a 300D at the very least, if only to ensure compatiblity with Canon's future prosumer offerings.

 

That said, the D30 is usable, and I use it in fact, more than the Nikon D70.

It's easier to leave the adapters on. I have Nikkor primes and I use them interchangably with EOS lenses.

 

This is better than the old M42-Pentax adapters which is a pain to remove from the camera bodies.

I think color consistency between different Leica lenses of the same generation is pretty important.

 

 

However, Leica M better produce saturated colors, if only to compensate for the inability to use polarizers.

Not exactly an answer to Salman's question, but I think external flash are very useful for PnS - I use an external flash with my T3, and also with my Ricoh GX digital camera.

 

It's the onboard flash that is the problem and the reason behind many poor shots. Another even bigger problem with the GX is that the user CANNOT turn off the onboard flash even when an external flash is attached. I don't know how it is with the CM, but it is worth checking out.

 

I still use a Minilux and its lens is fantastic.

Bob:

 

You have correctly identified the lack of fast - ultrawides, and the limitation this would impose on people used to shooting Leica lenses wide open (in fact most people disklike the Tri-elmar because of its F4 speed).

 

How does the RD-1 perform at higher ISOs, such as 400 and beyond?

Pretty good shot, but 1) do you need to focus. It thought you could turn it all to infinity 2) D30 is OK up to ISO400. That would save you a lot of trouble!

I think 35mm and 75mm makes a great pairing, and would go well with a 24mm. Check with photos, or even use your M's preview finder, a 75mm is not that different from 90mm.

HP-41 CV(X) is as much a classic as the Hasselblad that went into space. I remember attending the HP pavilion in Expo 85 when they mentioned that the HP is the backup navigation / trajectory device used in the Space Shuttle.