carbon_dragon

I bought a Minolta Autocord years ago and tried it out. It was great, BUT I kind of got a crick in my neck and I didn't have any real way to scan the negatives (and all my developing gear was for 35mm). It was cool though and very sharp. It was a pretty cheap camera at the time too.

I don't know, you could almost see that as an advantage! Lightning photos. I used/use a wired remote. It's a bit awkward though. It's a shame the bodies are mostly unrepairable these days. I have a 1 and a 2 that are just paperweights at this point.

iPhone 6sPlus.

If my Contax RTS 1 (or the RTS 2) still worked, I might alternately consider that. It's such an ergonomic masterpiece. Sadly, old cameras are often hard to keep in service, especially early electronic ones. My RTS III is barely hanging on. Second gens are much better, the Contax Aria seems fine for the foreseeable future. I always thought the OM1 and 2s were in that same jewel like category. My friend used an OM1 while I had a SR-T-101 and then a XE-5.

Back in about 1977, I visited my dad in Australia and was determined to get a LOT of pictures out of it. I bought bulk rolled slides as I recall and got 19 rolls out of the bulk roll. When I got back, I DID have trouble getting processors to process it, but ultimately they did. This is because the wrong kind of color can mess up their machine and cost them time and money. I have bulk rolled a lot more Tri-X and Tech Pan. Usually I used it up before the it would probably expired, but not these days. I still have some Tri-X which is way way out of time. But as a non professional, I tend not to notice slight problems so it's been fine for me. That said, keeping it in the fridge is best (or even the freezer, though I am reluctant to do that with a bulk loader). It's a good way to really reduce your costs. But if you use a specialist film like Tech Pan, make sure you buy up all the specialist developer you need to process it because years later it could be unavailable. I still have some of that too and so far they still come out when I can tear myself away from my M10 and digital. Powdered chemicals seem to last forever, but liquid ones are more an issue (and Tech pan's are liquid). We'll see.

Despite still owning my first serious camera, a Konica 1, a gift from my dad with great sentimental value, it would be my first button rewind Leica M2, though I'd want the 5th gen Summicron 50/2 rather than the original 50/2 Dual range. The DR was a good lens, but I'll go modern on that. If the camera was ONLY going to sit in a display case, it would be the Contarex Bullseye which was a trial to use but awfully pretty.

Yes, loading something like the old HIE through the bottom of a Leica IIIf inside a changing bag was about as hard a job as I ever had in the old days. Even loading it into a Leica M2 wasn't that fun. Now regular bottom loading of an M2 with regular film was fine. It might just be what you're used to. You're also right that Contax was easier. I still have 2 Contax IIAs and loading them is pretty easy. However that takeup spool just won't let go of the film and you kind of have to cut the leader off the takeup reel getting the film out. On the other hand, Contax SLR? Pull leader to red mark and close case! Minoltas too. Maybe Leica thinks loading film through the bottom builds character? ;-)

Yes, that is right for me too. Some of my chemicals are old at this point due to how little I shoot even black and white, but I know I can do that and get results pretty quickly. Color though -- well I still have a fair amount of Velvia 50 in my freezer but if I shoot it, I'll have to come up with a place to send it, it will cost a lot, and it will take weeks probably to get the results back. Really hard to make myself do that. Not sure what the solution is for this really. You can't make this a viable use case.

Yes, I am not a professional by a long shot, but I use my smartphone to take pictures of the board games I play for board game forums but AS CAMERAS, whatever their picture quality is, they are awkward and difficult to use. Their ergonomics kind of suck. If you had a sort of mount or cage to insert the phone into that would give you more reasonable controls, that might make a difference. There are also some cameras that are ALMOST like smartphones with lenses. The Leica Ts for instance are kind of curved flat pieces of aluminum with a giant screen and a mount on the other side (and an EVF mount). That is pretty smart phone like and would be even more so with a small lens. But it is an actual camera and meant to be one, not a smart phone with a built in camera for ... occasional use.

Saw a Kodak advert where someone (their CEO? not sure) was talking about how well Kodak is doing and is even re-introducing new films (or bringing some back maybe). That is great if true. Except if it is, you'd think it would be easier to find places to process film. Maybe I'm old enough to be spoiled by being able to take it (in previous years) just to the nearest drug store. More power to Kodak I guess. If Kodak and/or Fuji go under, it will probably take film with it. Though you never know, there's still Illford and probably some chinese manufacturers.

I've been trying to watch some videos and it seems like the NEX-7 sensor might have been somewhat improved, possibly to have slightly better high ISO performance than the NEX-7 sensor (the nex isn't great), but they're still 24MP which is surprising to me after all this time. And the EVFs don't seem to have gotten higher resolution either, and in fact the 6000 seemed to have been worse. The video is better but that doesn't matter to me. Lenses haven't really improved much either, except that there are full frame (larger) lenses that can be used. Sony doesn't seem to have worked too hard on the 6000 series camera or lenses really, except to improve their video capability. It looks as if Sigma has created a decent normal lens though, their 30/1.4. That might be worth buying. The 6400 and 6600 are actually a bit disappointing given how old the NEX-7 is at this point. It's actually still a very relevant camera. But then lots of digitals are more relevant than we imagined they might be years after their creation. I mean truthfully, 40MP sensors are nice, but do most people need them? At some point the camera is good enough, though it still has to be repairable and that's where some cameras fall down (early Contax SLRs for example -- great cameras but fragile electronics and no repair possible).

Yes Ed, I never realized just how much they reduced the size. Those early 90 summicrons were monsters, especially in chromed brass. This one is great. I own the 135/2.8 Elmarit with goggles. I bought it when I was using an M2 because it used the 90 frame lines. God that thing is a monster. It's a pretty good lens, but SO heavy.

Yes well put, since I am retired, there isn't an office for me to bring a back up to. And most of my relatives are dead (at least the ones I trust). But it's a risk for sure. I'd have to back up at least 2 computers with very large drives and I don't really want to pay for that much cloud storage, plus I'm not sure I want to trust my data to someone else's keeping. And preferably your backups should be somewhere where they won't be affected by the same natural disaster too -- like in another city so a hurricane or tornado won't take the backups out too. Doing it right is complicated and expensive and probably beyond what most people need. You have to ask yourself what the consequence is of all your data being wiped out. For me, I'd lose all my music but I could recover most of that from CDs (depending on whether my house burned down) or from Apple iTunes by re-downloading it. And I don't listen to ALL my music so recovery wouldn't involve rebuying everything. Then my photographs could be lost if the whole house burned down, but if it doesn't, most of it is on negatives and there are 2-3 copies of every picture (plus some of it is in my iPhoto library which is cloud backed up). That would be the biggest potential loss. I could rebuy all my programs if I had to (now that I am no longer working). It's not like a business that folds because all its financial records or IP or designs are destroyed. It's not as simple as taking my backup drive and mailing it to my cousin in Houston. Because I continually take more pictures. I'd have to do that periodically and either the drives would start mounting up or my cousin would have to keep a few and mail the rest back (so I'm costing myself and my cousin a fair amount of money and trouble). You could mitigate the situation by bringing a hard drive every time you go visit your relative out of town and take some of them back with you, but that means if a disaster struck you might lose a fair bit of your pictures but not all of them. It's all about how precious your data is and what the consequences of its loss are.

I had one and only sold it because I had no way to scan medium format film. The pictures were excellent. As with any camera that old, you have to be very careful you know how to operate it. Luckly google is your friend and you might be able to find the manual online. Or at least get help.

Man I'd like to get out. But even without the pandemic it's pretty hot for a senior citizen in Georgia in the summer. Just bought a new 90mm though, so I'm hoping Fall might provide more opportunities. I'm afraid it will be spring though before we have a vaccine. I know some of you are better about shooting in your house or on your property. More power to you.

I always wear a strap but I still dropped a Contax IIA rangefinder more than a decade ago. It was pretty much totalled. My local tech tried and put it back in semi-useable shape and I eventually sent it to Henry Scherer and HE managed to fixi it completely. Those all metal cameras really took drops even harder than modern cameras with polycarbonate shells do. So really heavy duty cameras can be a little better protected than those old ones were. Yeah, cameras don't like to be dropped.

I still have a Nikon Coolscan V dedicated 35mm negative/slide scanner, but it only still works because of Vuescan since Nikon abandoned their software. You would think that even with film as a niche product that Nikon could make a steady profit by providing quality scanning of 35mm. Apparently not. I don't use film much these days but it's nice to have as long as it lasts. Most old pictures that I have scanned in I've used my Epson Perfection V500 because what negatives I had were large (and it was mostly prints). Epson did a good job with that scanning. I scanned all my Dad's family pictures to show to my relatives. Alas I only got them when my dad died so I couldn't really ask him about them.

Well this is more of a do what I say not what I do thing since I don't do this for my photographs completely, but as a former UNIX system administrator, to back something up you need at least 2 copies with one of them stored off site. And really you need periodic backups so that there is a history in case you have bad media or more than one. For people who work (not in a pandemic, so going in) you could keep an extra backup at work or you could mail them to a friend somewhere. I have heard of people's house burning down and they lose their entire library. Anyway, I have a time capsule which is getting old and it does back up my pictures (and my whole computer) But I also have a secondary drive using Super Duper (Mac program) that makes an exact copy of your drive and you can set it to run every night. I recently restored my OLD computer because it died and wouldn't even allow me to reinstall the OS. Super duper works and the computer is up again. But if my house went, that would be it. Given how cheap portable hard drives are, it's actually viable to keep buying new ones and mailing them to someone out of town in a way it didn't used to be.

I have purchased one from KEH. It should be here today hopefully. It's a used version of the 90/2 APO Asph. Thanks for all your feedback and advice.

That is great to see. The RTS was a great camera. I had a 1 and a 2 but neither of them have survived to today, broken down and useless due to electronics issues. My Aria and RTSIII is still going, but the RTSIII required a part about 5 years ago that required over a year and the only reason I got it done was that my repair person used to be a Contax/Yashica employee and knew someone in Japan who might have the part. It's tragic that these Kyocera/Yashica cameras (the SLRs and the Gs and even the Ts) are just so delicate these days.

What do you get when you buy the latest aps-c body?

Obviously this is quite an old camera at this point. It's APS-C and Sony still makes cameras in that form factor, I think maybe the 6600 may be the latest? What would Sony's latest APS-C buy me as far as improvements from the NEX-7? Also I have a lot of adapter rings for various lenses including the old Sony/Minolta SLR lenses. Would I need to replace any of these? If I upgraded to Sony's full frame cameras, would I have to replace the adapter rings (maybe especially the Sony/Minolta SLR one)? One more issue, does anyone have any recommendation for a small "pancake like" normal lens for the APS-C (presumably this would be a 30mm or 35mm) which is high quality and light weight? In case I need something really small and light. Thanks!

My camera is already pretty light, Leica M and 2-3 lenses. I'm down to a pretty small bag. Worse comes to worse, I can go down to something like the Sony RX1 or RX100 or something like that. But I still carry the M for now. I agree though, weight is really important.

There was a time when I carried a Contax SLR outfit which weighed a ton. At this point, even with a cross threaded strap with a belt holster, I'm not looking to carry a big heavy SLR again. I do have a Visoflex 020 so I CAN focus using that if I have to. But I'd rather not do it all the time. I haven't had focusing issues with the rangefinder except when using the M8 for infrared photography. With a Leica IR (not an IR cut, but the black/deep red old style IR filter 39mm) filter on the M8's lens, the focus is changed so much that I have to manually adjust it. But for normal photography, I'm usually focusing fairly well. Of course most of my photos are with 50 and 35 lenses. Half of me wants to say that I hardly ever use it so I should try to limit the cost. Half of me says the reason why I don't use it is because my existing 90 is from 1953. Plus who knows what I might be using in the future and maybe getting the sharpest lens I can is worth the expanse so I don't have to buy again later. Leica lenses are pretty much forever. That 1953 lens is still pretty much perfect. My IIIf and Summitar are still in shootable shape these days too. That's quite a tribute to Leica. I used my M2s for well over a decade and they were older than I was. At some point I probably will be forced to go with something with autofocus probably (like a Q or something). Plus my load carrying capacity won't improve. But for now I'm still M capable.

Hmmm., I wonder if I should be considering the 75/2 APO and the 75 summarit? I mean I have frame lines for those lenses too and their frame lines would be bigger than the 90 and it would probably be easier to focus too (and smaller). Some amazing shots Gregg M.