steve_mareno

<p>Don't believe everything you hear in school (or possibly any of it). While you will definitely need great equipment for large landscapes, along w/ great technique, for portraits and other types of shooting it's more about the eye of the photographer, as well as having a really good subject to shoot. But why not just make a point of using the very best equipment that you can afford? I have a drawer full of Nikon negs, and while they are fine I sometimes wish I had shot them w/ the Leica. When you do not have an opportunity to re-shoot, which is nearly all of the time, use the best that you have.</p>

<p>These cameras are worth the hunt to get a working one, but avoid the sun at all costs! Even w/ a hood, and the correct one is useless, their uncoated optics will flare at the first sight of ol sol. The key to buying one is to scroll through all the usual suspects, like "camera appears to work/I'm selling this for a friend/bought at an estate sale" etc until you find one that says it definitely works, has a battery (w/ adapter) and comes w/ a return guarantee. I was infatuated w/ these once and actually sold a set of four, all working perfectly. I never adjusted to not knowing what shutter speed the camera had decided on and had too many shots ruined by flare, but the shots that did work were very sharp. As sharp as Contax G-1 cameras, another item that I have acquired and sold numerous times.</p>

<p>Matt Denton at Matt's Classic Cameras knows a lot about these, and his website may be able to help you w/ your shutter problem. It's probably a wire inside that came unsoldered.</p>

<p>I use an old Epson 2450 scanner. The film holder is crap, but I tape the neg to the glass and get very sharp scans. Cost was less than $100 and resolution is 2450, which will give you a huge file. It does a much better job w/ 4x5 than I ever expected. Very good for that, pretty good for 6x6, forget about it for 35mm. But I have a Minolta Scan Dual III for the miniature negs.</p>

<p>Enhanced Matt is a great printing paper, but it yellows. Sometimes very quickly. The Velvet Fine Art is wonderful paper, but as soon as you put it behind plexi or glass the texture goes away, and w/ the wrong image you'll see the texture ink pattern w/o seeing the beautiful paper texture, if that makes any sense. My neighbor shoots large format and refuses to put his work behind glass because he says it has too many reflections. He also wants people to see the beautiful fiber paper. Inkjet prints are not as rugged as B&W fiber prints, but if you wish to have people see the nice paper you have, you'll have to experiment w/ floating the print in the frame w/ no glass/plexi, and try some sort of archival matte spray for a protector.</p>

<p>Epson Velvet Fine Art. The blacks you get from it are fantastic. Beautiful paper just to look at w/o any image on it.</p>

<p>I'll tell you, I do not trust archiving files on a DVD. Seen too many of them that become unreadable for no reason. Until something better comes along I have them on my computer, and on 2 external hard drives that are kept disconnected from the computer until I need them. Every 2 years or so I replace the hard drives w/ new ones and sell the older ones.</p>

<p>As soon as I find a digital camera that's too small to hold properly, hangs at an awkward angle on a strap, has a buggy meter, and is nearly impossible to set shutter speeds on I'll let you know.</p>

<p>I'm in agreement w/ JDM. An optical finder is all I will use. You can't see a LCD screen in bright sun, and people look ridiculous holding the things out at arm length. Not the most stable way to hold a camera either.</p>

<p>Remove lens from camera. Install Leica lens. Enjoy sharp photos.</p>

<p>Take better photos? Just a thought.</p>

<p>Those "photos" are ghastly awful! The newest fad I suppose. Bleak indeed.</p>

<p>Some cameras can nail the shot really well w/ jpeg's. Others absolutely need RAW to get the best from the shot. The last Nikon DSLR that I had, my Photoshop 7 wouldn't open the RAW files so I went to RawShooter, a free utility, to open them.</p>

<p>There's a gal at our local market that sells her photos and she loves the Paint Shop Pro software.</p>

<p>Maria,<br>

You're in luck. I did a google and typed in "fuji finepix s5600 software" and the second website listed was one of Fuji's. If you click on it and read a bit you'll see that there is a link under the heading "FOR WINDOWS 2000/ME/98SE 1341KB", at the end of the paragraph, that will take you to Fuji's site that has the software download for the viewer you are seeking.</p>

<p>I think you've asked a great question Michael. One that more than a few people would like to see answered. It's unfortunate that the responses have been not much help, although Lad's idea of a MF camera is not really a bad response. A 6x6 or 6x4.5 folder would fit in your pocket and deliver very sharp photos that you could enlarge to 2x3 feet w/ ease. But you are seeking a digital P&S. Unfortunately I don't have any solid recommendations beyond a Canon A710 IS, A720 IS or A1000 IS. They have RAW and optical finders, which are requirements for me. The A1000 is 10MP. The others are less, but still enough to do a good 12x18 if everything goes right on the shot. My limited experience w/ digital tells me that if you're outdoors in strong light a good P&S will deliver comparable images to a DSLR. My Fuji E 550, which is pretty ancient by digital standards, will give as nice a shot in JPEG or RAW as the Nikon D-50 I used to have, and the D-50 was known for excellent images. When you want to do low light or portraits the P&S will do poorly, but for landscapes the little P&S cameras are great. I actually do have a 12x17 print on the wall and it looks very good, as even my 4x5 shooting neighbor will attest. I had to crop it or it could have gone to 13x19. That's more of a statement of my printer than anything else actually.</p>

<p>We're talking about color here, right? In B&W you'll have to go w/ the film cameras. As good as the Nikon D-50 was, I sold it because it couldn't deliver a decent B&W image if my life depended on it. For that I had to go to FP4, Tri-X and Fuji Acros and the B&W photos are fantastic. But for color the digital P&S's do a fine job.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks for posting those examples Les. The RAW is the clear winner.</p>

<p>Bill has a good idea there. Funny, I thought I was nobody from nowhere. I learned a long time ago that it was much preferable to being somebody from somewhere. It's a wise man that says he knows nothing about something. The fool always has plenty to say.</p>

<p>A slow zoom will probably be more trouble than it's worth, and all of the smallish cameras have slow zoom lenses. As said, the Konica C 35 is a great little camera. Make sure that the meter works.</p>

<p>Infrared film will cut through haze like butter. You'll have to load it in the dark and hand carry it through customs and figure out the exposures. May just be easier to get a UV filter or polarizer and shoot later in the day after the haze is burned off somewhat. Or early. Depends on what the environment is giving you.</p>

<p>40.5 is a relatively easy filter size to buy. Every time I buy a Rokkor 90 M mount lens I buy some, and then when I stupidly sell it later I end up w/ a couple. But a polarizer may be harder. Since your camera is not an SLR you'll have to make some markings on the polarizer to know how it's orientated. You're probably going to have to compensate a couple of stops for the filter and I am not sure how to do that on your camera. If all that is doable you would probably be better off looking for a step ring to go from your 40.5 to a more popular (bigger) polarizer size. That way you'll hopefully be able to use the filter on other cameras. Otherwise you'll eventually end up like a lot of us w/ a drawer full of filters and no lenses to fit them to.</p>

<p>Havana. New Orleans. Frisco. Actually, the best places to do street photography have everything to do w/ where you're shooting, and when. Why is it a ridiculous question? I cannot imagine for one second that Bresson's photos could have been made in Pascagoula, Mississippi and I've lived there. Nor could credible shots of Gay Pride Day have been made in Juneau, Alaska. Civil rights movement? It wasn't happening in Berlin.</p>

<p>If they used a Rolleiflex TLR, they probably turned out great. I can't imagine a camera w/ a better lens, and the lower angle of view would give more interest to the shots. Besides, as we all know, a good photographer could use a P&S camera and get professional results.</p>

<p>My local Hobbyville sells the black metal gallery frames w/ hardware for around $20, depending on size. A full sheet of 100 % rag mat board is $25 and will do 2 medium size (12x18) prints. Plexiglass I buy at hardware stores and it comes out to around $10 a picture. I cut my mats freehand, but you can buy small cutters that use a metal rule as a guide for $20. The foam board for the backing is about $4. Or, you can give the shop the job and pay around $100 per picture. If this isn't your thing, better to let the store do it and have professional results. They do it all day every day w/ good equipment.</p>

<p>A neighbor of mine shoots 4x5 and refuses to put his prints under glass because he hates the reflections. He floats them on mat board w/ a traditional black frame and they look great.</p>

<p>There are a lot of ways to do what you're doing, but my suggestion is to not tie up a fortune in framing, as generally a sale of one to two prints is considered a big success. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people tie up $1000 in framing and not have one sale.</p>

<p>I've had good luck w/ Fed 2 and 3's and awful luck w/ Fed 1's. After all the trouble I had w/ 'ol Oleg I would never buy another camera from him and definitely would not recommend him.</p>

<p>Sometimes it takes a time or two to get a good Fed 2, but when they're right they're neat cameras. As for the rest of the Russian cameras I've owned, all I can say is that the Russians make great tractors. If you want a camera that will be dead reliable and smooth to operate take Wendell's advice, or even get a Bessa R. There's a reason the Leicas cost as much as they do.</p>

<p>Are you shooting in RAW? I have one of these and it's a wonderful camera. I bought it because it has the RAW option and a very low shutter lag. Mine fires off another shot quickly even when it's set to it's highest resolution, but RAW is much slower. The flash will slow things down to a crawl too waiting for it to recharge, but I seldom use the flash so it's no big deal. You might try putting another memory card in it and see if that's the problem.</p>

<p>One thing to be aware of is that these cameras have a possibility of getting a zoom error message and becoming inoperative. Make sure that when you turn on the camera you don't have a finger in the way of the lens when it extends and keep the lens body clean and you should be OK. I am constantly impressed w/ the images from these little cameras. Great lens.</p>

<p>I went from Nikon AF cameras to rangefinders too Lawrence, and I really missed the little thumb wheel and AE lock on the Nikons. My experiment w/ a Bessa R3a was a failure as 90% of the time I couldn't see the shutter readouts in the VF due to flare whenever I was outside. Build quality on the Bessas is ok but only that. Not even close to Leica or even Nikon, but it's AE was a real boon to taking photos. I think you should just make the plunge and get an M7. It's a great camera and will have less of a learning curve for you. If you buy it right you'll get your money back if you don't like it. There are other options too. A Contax G1 or G2 make fine travel cameras, as does the Leica CM. But really, wouldn't an M7 w/ a 35 and 75 or 90 lens be at the very top of the list?</p>

<p>Bring a MF or 35mm camera also. Just in case. It's always enlightening to compare the same shots made w/ different formats too.</p>