Paul Lewis1664881697

<p>My original Russian LCA definitely vignetted even at the smallest aperture. Never used a Chinese made one though.</p>

<p>I use the F4 in the 6 cell (F4S) configuration exclusively. The main reason that I don't use it with the MB-20 (which I have) is because of the aluminum L-bracket tripod mount that I have for the camera that works only with an F4S. I think the F4S works so well with heavy lenses not only because of the low center of gravity, but also because of how heavy it is. Adding an 85mm f1.4 lens doesn't feel like a significant increase in weight :)</p>

<p>If a manual focus camera suits your needs, you can't go wrong with an FM2n ... brilliant manual camera, classic looks, very well made.<br>

On the auto-focus side... I've never used an F100, but it sounds like a camera that would work well for you. Inexpensive on the used market also. The F4 is a great camera too (my regular shooter). It's a little heavy, but if you get the smaller battery pack (MB-21), it lightens the load. In my opinion, an amazing and beautiful machine. Matrix metering with manual lenses, great ergonomics, and everything you need and no extra, annoying junk.</p>

<p>About "getting enough light".... did you know that Kodak made 4-X in super8 carts? I can't remember, but it was either 400ASA or 800ASA. Discontinued in 1992.</p>

<p>I use a small, thin lightbox because scanning takes a lot of time, and I don't feel like loading a carousel. I can evaluate the slides much faster by spreading them out on the lightbox.</p>

<p>First camera I ever used: Kodak Instamatic X-15<br>

First serious camera I ever used: Minolta SRT-201<br>

First serious camera I ever purchased: Nikon FM2n (used)</p>

<p>I also have the Lowepro Mini-Trekker, and it's loaded to the brim. I usually carry 4 prime lenses, my Quantum flash, Nikon F4s, flash battery pack, filters, etc. I don't know what it weighs, but whatever it is, it's too much!</p>

<p>I'm in my mid-30s and had a bit of a different path to classic cameras. In the mid-90s, I became interested in super8 filmmaking, which of course depends on using cameras built in the 1960s and 1970s. About six or seven years ago, I realized that I was more interested in making still images and started working with B&W film and eventually Kodachrome and E6 films. Here's my progression from around 1996 to today:<br>

1. Minolta super8 camera<br>

2. Mom's Minolta SRT SLR<br>

3. Elmo 1012-XLS super8 sound camera and Beaulieu 4008 super8 camera (the most beautiful piece of machinery ever made!)<br>

4. Some messing around with Diana plastic cameras.... this didn't help my interest in still photography, it actually slowed it. Good thing I got rid of them all.<br>

5. Lomo LC-A Kompact, which made some beautiful images with Kodachrome film<br>

6. Nikon FM2n (with B&W and Kodachrome film)<br>

7. Nikon F4s (E6 and Kodachrome films)<br>

Next camera? Maybe an F6, a Pentax 67, a Mamiya 7ii? Who knows?</p>

<p>I like using older equipment usually because the workmanship is better, the design is simpler, and the materials are sturdier. However, I prefer to have cameras that have meters that use modern batteries.</p>

<p>Contact Horiuchi Color Lab (they do B&W too), which has multiple Tokyo locations. I had E-6 and B&W film processed by them and it was a very professional service:<br>

<a href="http://www.horiuchi-color.co.jp/index2/english/english.html">http://www.horiuchi-color.co.jp/index2/english/english.html</a></p>

<p>Your slideshow looks good, but your main pages load images very slowly. For instance, the bottom pic on the first page loads after the top ones do and it's only 110k. I'm on a very fast internet connection, so it's not my side.</p>

<p>Forget all that photoshop mumbo jumbo.... simple suggestion.... shoot on a sunny day during golden hour (about an hour before sunset) and position your model accordingly.</p>

<p>Do what I did...... sell them.<br>

I had about 6 different Diana models, some never used in the boxes, and I sold them all and bought some real camera equipment.</p>

<p>It sounds like you might be frustrated using a rangefinder when the viewfinder doesn't accurately represent the final image. Have you thought about getting an SLR with 100% viewfinder coverage, such as a Nikon F series?</p>

<p>My Lowepro mini-trekker is always packed full: Nikon F4s, 20mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.4 and either my Quantum flash or rarely an 80-200mm f2.8<br>

This leaves me the front pocket which holds my light meter, Quantum battery/cables and two pocketwizards (if I'm doing flash stuff that day).<br>

So basically all I can put in there is maybe my cell phone and a small pad and pen!<br>

However, I need to keep a small flashlight with me. I have found myself working in the dark and without one, it's been tough as hell. Another thing I need to bring with me is a small digital timer for long exposures.</p>

<p>I used to use my messenger bag as a camera bag, but that became a real pain because everything would move around in there.... couldn't keep it organized. Also, since my stuff was getting heavier, it was getting harder to carry on one shoulder. I decided to go with a Lowepro backpack, and really like this bag (Lowepro Mini Trekker) a lot. I carry four lenses, a body, and either my flash or 80-200mm lens.</p>

<p>The site is too busy and it's unclear what the purpose is. If you are for-hire or are selling prints, that wasn't clear to me.<br>

I don't like music embedded in websites, and I didn't like this particular song at all.</p>

<p>I'm more concerned about protecting the lens than I am about UV, but I get UV filters anyway.</p>

<p>If you need a camera with a working meter, I recommend getting a somewhat recent vintage that can use currently available batteries. If a fully manual camera is what you are looking for, a Nikon FM2n is a great choice. Excellent build and design, very accurate meter, and lightweight. Uses modern batteries.<br>

I love the F4 and recommend it to anyone that wants to use older Nikkor lenses in matrix metered mode along with modern AF lenses. The only negative to the camera is the weight. I've lived with the weight, but an F6 often looks like a nice alternative when I'm lugging my backpack.</p>

<p>Also, I'm surprised that more "toy camera" shooters don't use Kodachrome. I was really happy with the results that I got from using Kodachrome 64 and 200 with my Lomo Kompact.<br>

I think Kodachrome 200 was unfairly maligned as a film. It had its supporters, but for some reason a lot of people knocked it. I loved the film and had some 11 x 17 Cibachromes printed from it that look terrific.</p>

<p>A few things about Kodachrome....<br>

a. When rummaging through your parent's or grandparent's slide collection, if the boxes or slide mounts say Kodachrome on them, you'll be thankful that it wasn't 60s or 70s era Ektachrome. I see a HUGE difference when I look at slides stored identically that were shot on Kodachrome and other emulsions.<br>

b. I followed discussions about Kodachrome super8 for years at filmshooting.com and I heard it all (just like we hear here)... "it's too contrasty", "too slow", "too hard to process", blah blah. But I'm thankful that what I shot was on Kodachrome now that it's not available in super8 anymore (only tungsten balanced Ektachrome 64T). <br>

c. I bought a few reels of 16mm film shot in the late fifties off of eBay that contained footage of a local tourist attraction in New Jersey, and was quite surprised to find that they were shot on Kodachrome. Beautiful film footage that looks like it could have been shot yesterday...<br>

d. I used Kodachrome 64 for the past couple of years on a small project I'm working on, and when I look at these slides, I realize that either "the film fits me" or "I fit the film". For some reason, what I shoot on Kodachrome simply looks better than what I shoot on other emulsions. My current project requires that I shoot with a faster film (Provia 400x), but I'm looking forward to shooting more Kodachrome and will probably look for a project that will fit Kodachrome.</p>

<p>Super8 is great... if you take care in shooting your film (using a tripod, focusing and framing well, shooting in proper light), you will be amazed at the results.<br>

Be sure to check out <a href="http://www.filmshooting.com">www.filmshooting.com</a>. It's an excellent resource for super8.</p>

<p>I'm going by memory here, but wasn't what people were seeing in 1957 actually a portion of the rocket and not Sputnik itself?</p>

<p>I second David's opinion. I was surprised at how expensive cameras were in Japan. The Canon G10 was selling for around 55000YEN (approximately $550) which is far more expensive than the $410 that it retails for in the US.</p>

 

<p>I believe there is a line between a photograph and an overly-manipulated image. Where it is, I can't tell you, but I know it when I see it. I laugh at those that believe that I don't have the right to make that distinction and discount something that is phony.</p>