wladimir_schweigert

Here we go again Will,

<p>

Check out David Allan Harvy's equipment requirements in a link next

below to your posting. Less equipment, more photography!

Will,

<p>

Here's the deal:

<p>

If you show up at a wedding as the pro with an instamatic, you'll

elicit loughs. "Perception is reality," remember? If on the other end

you suck at photography and show up with a foot-square mamiya 6x7,

you have the croud. So unless you are brilliant at photography, don't

show up with less than a Rollei 6x6 with all the whistles (TTL flash,

fill flash, etc.). Then you can rest assured, you have the client,

croud and the cash.

<p>

On the other hand, if you know something about photography and your

clients are the kind that relly appreciate creativity, get yourself

two Licas with say a 24, a 35 and a 90, load one with Fuji 400 the

other with good ol' Trix or Afga 400, get a small portable flash and

you'd never need to look back.

<p>

wlad

Question: are there any plastic aspheric elements in the cosina

lenses? They may look pretty and be good, but how long will they

last? I have a 90 tamron, sharp but there are streaks inside the

elements which I attribute to plastics, poor manufacturing

techniques, and we are talking famous Tamron. You get what you pay

for.

<p>

Wlad

You are all wrong. What I would save up for would be a Leica that

uses the existing lenses and changes somewhat the format of the

existing 35 mm film by removing one side of the sprokets. They could

make then a square 30 by 30 mil. Leica that would beat enything on

the market. Perhaps the film base could be made thinner.

<p>

That would be some camera. If 8 by 10 is your thing, you'vee got the

same quality as of today. If square you'd have a Hasselblad quality,

or better yet, small format camera. Leica could offer eventually such

camera as a reflex and more lenses.

<p>

Leitz, give me a Leica M of that spec. with a single 30 to 50 to 75

mil lens with a max. f stop of 2.8 throughout and pinsharp and I'd

save the $10,000.00 can. to buy it. This is not a contract, but a

suggestion.

<p>

What a camera that would be! A SQUARE LEICA!!!!!!!!

<p>

Wlad

Thanks to all who answered. Here is the latest info I have: APS is

designed for snappers and in order to atract and keep these segment

they developed a new tech. in camera and printing: thinner film base

to avoid image difusion, magnetic info for auto printing machines,

new emulsions for good color/grain etc. And it appears to work.

<p>

I bought the yashica T4 to take snapshots and if needed, use the pics

for other purposes (exhibit, publish etc.). I thought it to be a

decent camera and either it is junck or it is a lemon. There a

features missing: exposure comp. and now I realize: manual override

for focusing because its zone focusing is not at all good compared to

the particular APS a compared it to.

<p>

I thing it is quite OK to randomly evaluate two diff. systems when

all you want is to load a film, have it developed and presto. Since I

have printed a good number of rolls with my yashica, I think I can

say it stinks.

<p>

I will grant you al that you can take a Leica shot into a crammy

developing place and get junk. It happened to me. Even some so-called

custom place, the printing sucks. But the Yashica is a goner.

<p>

I will save and get a Minilux with a zoom or a Contax. Or APS!

<p>

Wlad

Is APS sharper than 35? A relative visiting from Germany took pictures with a Canon zoom APS and they are sharper than my 35 pics from a Yashica compact 35 with that venerable Zeis 35mm. That Yashica has kruined some of my pics from my trip to Argentina and I feel I will take a hammer and give that litle plastic marvel a good "jammer." I needed my leica to show that my pics are good and sharp and I read somewhere APS being sharper because of the film base being thinner?

<p>

Any comments? I considering APS for snapshots or digital!

<p>

Wlad

Kenny, I use a lot of black and white: Agfa 25 and 100. Rodinal with

25 - Microdol mixed 1 to 3 with both: 12/13 min. for 25 (rated at 12)

and about 15 min. for 100 (rated at 50) both temperatures at 20 C.

You'll be hard pressed to find grain in these negatives in the grain

focuser under the enlarger and the tonality and sharpness is great.

<p>

I prefer leicas for black and white and color in either leicas or

nikons.

<p>

For color I am partial to Fuji Reala 100 and Superia 400 and

sometimes 800.

<p>

For slides Fuji 50 and 100 and Kodachromes - Also Scala, a fabulous

film.

<p>

Wladimir Schweigert

Several points:

<p>

1) There is no such a thing as a professional camera, nor such a

thing as a fine-art camera. There are cameras professional

photographers use, there are cameras so-colled artist photographers

use. And some are durable, sharp - others are toy-like and produce

soft photos. All can be used professionally and to make "art"

whatever that is.

<p>

2) You already have a camera. Do produce some good pictures with it.

<p>

3) Upgrade? Is just as relative a term as nikon better than lica

<p>

4) Darron Spohn first tells you to get a 4x5 or to stay home. But

then he says that the camera doesn't make a difference. What is it

Darron? Besides, if you printed so much and made so many photos

Darron, you should know by now that a sharp lens, a good camera and

flawless technique can produce photos in 35 mm that makes 4x5

shooters green of envy in landscape, arquitecture or whatever.

<p>

5) Most important point Owen: Buy tha camera that suits your

temperament or else tame your temperament and shoot with whatever

camera you can afford. If you are slow and deliberate in your

approach a large format will satisfy you more. If you are hurried a

35 mm will do fine

<p>

6) I shoot with rangefinder leicas and the cameras don't suit my

temperament. But I cannot afford a Hasselblad. And I do produce good

photographs which are deliberate and resemble larger format work.

They might not have every spec of dust sharply delineated nor the

tonality of a bromide contact print, but they come mightily close.

<p>

7) Lastly: sharpness and tonality alone a good photo don't make (This

is bad English, sorry!)

<p>

8) Good luck

<p>

Wlad