brian_godfrey

<p>I have taken some 120 film to Walmart for processing and been very happy as they were actually processed by Fuji and the quality was excellent even if it took two weeks. But the last time I took in film they had the new envelopes as pictured above. Also the sign on the kiosk was adamant that they would not return your negatives, just the CD. Needless to say, I did not leave my film with them. It was the only reason I ever went into Walmart, but I did also buy stuff while there. I would say "too bad, Walmart, for losing my business" but I am not really so naive as to think that the few dollars I spent there amounted to anything to them.</p>

<p>Yes, things are looking up again. Thanks. I'm not technically "tracking" this thread. I just happened upon it while looking for another one I had asked about. I thought I'd update it in case anyone came along and wondered how it turned out.<br /> My faithful old GS645 folds down to a pretty small size and light weight for a medium format camera. It's much more compact than any SLR and has a very nice lens. I used to travel a lot back in the 1980s and '90s and it has been to quite a few cities in a few countries slipped into a corner of my briefcase. I hadn't used it for probably ten years and that just didn't seem right, so now it is back in service.<br /> The QL17 is nice and very compact with a sharp lens, but sure does take a small negative by comparison. :-)</p>

<p>For the record (I had a near death experience last March and was out of touch for a while) I decided to send the camera in for a complete CLA and had the seals changed at that time. I did, however, contact Mr. Goodman for seals for a Canon QL17 and was quite happy with them. Thank you for the info.</p>

<p>Funny how tastes and perceptions differ. Even though I use digital, I always think of it as gaudy, not smooth. :-)<br>

I know it gets rehashed over and over, but still seems to be true: using manual cameras greatly increases your understanding of light and lighting and that is what we are really photographing. And there really is no substitute for understanding what you are doing if you are after a specific result. Even photos shot with auto mode will be better if you understand light because then you can pick the right mode, the right time of day, whether or not to use flash, etc. For example, I made this image quite a few years ago with my (new at the time!) Olympus C2020z camera and a 12" circular diffuser. I think it turned out pretty good for a point and shoot in auto mode with auto flash:<br>

<img src=" alt="" /><br>

<p>The inverse squared law (or is it a rule or an administrative finding or...) applies behind the lens as well as in front of it. As you increase magnification the light that hits the film/sensor drops exponentially. In addition, depth of field becomes shallower, requiring smaller apertures unless you want a really shallow plane of focus and so the light reaching the film/sensor drops by at an additional exponential rate. Things get really dim back there. Hand held means that much brighter light (more and bigger flash) is required to prevent motion blurred images. At some point your flash will become powerful enough to cook living subjects. <br>

I think the smart thing is to buy extension tubes and see how you do with them. Remember that you can stack them for additional extension/magnification. They are inexpensive (compared to specialized macro lenses of any quality) and will always be useful because not every macro subject requires extreme magnification. If you still need more, can afford it, and think you can hold it still, go for the higher magnification solutions suggested previously. But I bet you are going to need a tripod. A flash would ruin that nice raindrop photo and so would motion blur.</p>

<p>Well that sure is interesting. Yes, the lenses I have seen have been expensive when priced. (Wow, so is that adapter!) Thank you!</p>

<p>Oh, and if you are shooting B&W or are not worried about absolutely faithful color rendition you can get a small flashlight to keep in your bag. The non-LED MagLights with the AA batteries work well and the beam width can be adjusted. I use them to provide a bit of fill light if I am shooting in ambient light. Just hand hold it and keep it moving a little bit because some beam angles are not uniform.</p>

<p>I could add that there are many other little things you can do if you are taking more than just a few mushroom photos. You can get some 1/4" aluminum rod, cut it to varying lengths, file points (it's easy, aluminum is soft), and thread it with a 1/4-20 die. You can then thread one into the bottom of your camera and stick it right into the ground. Try getting a lower angle with your tripod. You can get alligator clips with 1/4-20 thread on them and attach a pointy spike to them and use them to hold your little reflectors and such. Some flash units have 1/4-20 thread on the bottom, or you can get a Wein slave adapter with a 1/4-20 thread and the added advantage of a slave when you need one. <br>

These do-dads don't really take up much room in your bag. I use an old Domke camera back with reconfigurable padded inserts. I have arranged it with a narrow slot at one end for my folded up 12" reflectors and longer spikes. Shorter spikes and small cards and such go in a side pocket. The larger cards go in the back of the bag.</p>

<p>I do a lot of mushroom photography. You need to study studio lighting and then downsize it. Carry a few pieces of white card stock, some white business cards, some of both covered in aluminum foil, a couple of 12" round collapsible diffusers, low power flash!, and kneepads. The latter is the most important because it will keep you on the ground with your eye to the viewfinder while you compose and experiment with the light. If you can do it with natural light, you can easily see the effect of moving reflectors and diffusers around when you look through the viewfinder. If you need to use flash, you will need to learn a lot about it and experiment. Automatic cameras with automatic flash do not always work as you might expect. (Look for that little mushroom icon in the program modes. I bet you don't find one.) With digital you can easily check your work. With film you will have a bit of a learning curve. <br /> Are you photographing for record or ID purposes or for art? I think the photo you showed is already adequate for ID or recording. I see no shadows beneath the caps.<br /> If for art, you might want to try losing the sky and darkening the background quite a bit. Think of it in terms of portraiture. Every mushroom is different and in a different setting. So try to make every mushroom look unique and special by developing a whole array of tricks and tools. Patience is a virtue and the mushrooms will pose all day for you without moving...</p>

<p>I have seen a number of interesting lenses in DKL mounts. I've seen one on a Nikon camera and I think one on a Pentax. Is DKL a specific type of mount, or is it a brand name for a mounting system similar to Tamron's Adaptall? Or is it something I haven't even thought of? </p>

<p>Just for anyone else who might find this. I ended up sending my GS645 to Essex Camera along with a new bellows. I asked them to install the bellows, replace the film door seals, and CLA the camera. Their 2 week estimate became much longer than that. (I think 6 or 8 weeks, but I've forgotten exactly. I finally had to insist that they finish it. When I got it back, the bellows and seals were replaced. The camera is nice and clean. But the shutter speed dial is still very hard to turn. I don't think they did anything to it. I was tempted to complain and insist that they do it right, but if they couldn't do it after that long I was afraid they would just keep the thing forever if I returned it. I have no idea if the camera will make a proper exposure. I've taken some test film, but haven't got it developed yet. We'll see.</p>

<p>Me again. I do have the hood. It has had a UV filter stuck into it for at least 20 years. (It was there when I bought the camera.) I finally got the filter out, but I cannot get it or anything else to thread back into the hood. I need to figure out how to re-thread it or something. <br>

Or maybe I'll get a step-up ring with good threads and just glue it in to the hood.<br>

I'd also be interested in ideas to replace/upgrade the dumb hood arrangement.<br>

Meanwhile a word to the wise: if you buy one of these expensive hoods, make sure you can actually thread a filter into it!</p>

<p>(How do I delete a duplicate posting? My enter key stuttered.)</p>

<p>Ignore the little pictures and learn some about light and you'll be fine. Holga has fixed 1/100 sec shutter, f8 or f11 aperture. Sometimes that will be over exposed and sometimes that will be under depending on the available light and regardless of the film.</p>

<p>I agree with developing non-C-41 film yourself - if you have the equipment. It is very minor: a tank ($28 for a nice new Patterson one at Calumet, probably cheaper if you find one online) some chemicals, and some bottles to hold the chemicals. You'll need someplace dark for loading the film onto the developing reels - a closet at night in a room with the lights turned off is usually fine. All-in-all an investment of $50-60 if you can buy locally. You can probably get them and chemicals along with a bunch of darkroom stuff you don't need in a lot by watching Craigslist. At $5 a roll for processing, you would have your investment back in 10 rolls. And you might find that you like it so much that you shoot a lot more.</p>

<p>On the other hand, I had some C-41 120 film processed by Walmart and it only cost $1.88. And came with 4x5 prints which are kind of like really big proofs. Hard to beat that, but I had to wait 3 weeks.</p>

<p>Hi Scott, how did it work out?<br /> I am looking for someone to CLA and replace the bellows on my GS645. Camera Wiz did not answer their phone and the 800 number is disconnected. I sent an email to TLC, this afternoon, but it was after 5PM on the east coast so haven't heard back. I went to the camerarepair.com, but it seemed kind of an odd website that didn't inspire confidence. Has anyone had results from them that you can post?<br /> Thanks,<br /> --Brian</p>

<p>Anyone know where I can get replacement Fuji GS645 door seals? Mine are melting. I will replace myself.<br>

Thanks.</p>

I was there. There were a LOT of Olympus owners asking for more modern manual focus lenses, for example, and we were ignored. Most of their zooms, for example, were dismal in comparison to what you could get from Tamron for half the price. Ever look through the 75-150/4 zoom? I shot a laser through mine one day and it fractured into hundreds of beams. Even a good lens will usually have a few straggler beams but not hundreds.

They had the ability. The 90/2 macro lens that I still have stashed somewhere around here is probably one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used.

They canceled the OM-1 - a great manual backup camera even in the 1990s. And they did have autofocus, it did work well and faster than anyone else, but they cheesed on the bodywork (camera and lens). Their service became poor. I could probably go on but I'm tired of it.

 

What do I mind about the E-510? That's not the point. The E-510 does what I bought it to do. It is the company that I have no confidence in. I'm not going to go out and replace the E-510 until I need to, but when I need to, I will look around and see what's the best way to go. I'm certainly not going to be investing in lenses for it. They do have some decent lenses now, but I don't trust them anymore. They have lost my loyalty. If you are in business, any business, re-read this and think about how you run your own business. It is very difficult to earn a good reputation and very easy to lose it.

Harold is right and so was his dealer. Olympus pretty much abandoned the pro and advanced amateur markets in the late '80s and concentrated on consumer grade cameras. Yeah, they kept making their old OM-4Ti and a few lenses, but they made sure the prices were high enough so that nobody actually bought them, and they did nothing to modernize. The OM4ti was an awesome camera for certain specific things, but it was totally incapable of competing with other mainstream offerings in the general photography market. Olympus also had the fastest autofocus on the market at one time, but they packaged it in the crappiest consumer-grade shell in their history and with the worst lenses. They just couldn't envision where photography was going and so they missed the bus. Now it's going to be a really hard climb back out of the hole they dug themselves. Why were they only able to talk Panasonic (a consumer electronics company, not a camera company) into introducing 4/3 cameras? Why can I only get a few aftermarket lenses from Sigma and a couple from Leica? Nobody else trusts them.

 

I bought the E-510 because it offered Live View and I needed that. I wrote off the camera on my first photo trip to Italy and so I can toss it any time that I feel like something better has come along. Kind of like they tossed their loyal customers away...

If you can afford $800 there's the Panasonic/Leica D Summilux 25mm f/1.4 AF. It's fast, normal, and Leica. What more could you ask for?

"I haven't touched the system in nearly three years since going digital with my Nikon D2x's. Plus I don't have my darkroom anymore and am not processing film. I could really use the extra funds for some upcoming ...expenses,"

 

Which pretty much sums up why they aren't worth much anymore. I have about $10K worth of RZ equipment (original prices) which isn't worth a bowl of hummus anymore. A lot more people are in our situation than are looking to buy, so the price goes down.

I think the Bayer filter in the digital camera will limit the quality of B&W image that can be captured. But if you are making digital prints that may be offset by quality lost in scanning the negatives from a medium format film camera. I haven't seen anything in a digital camera that can even approach the sharpness and detail I can get from my Mamiya RZ67, but it is so much work to use that camera that it had better be better!

I'm sure glad I didn't know all of this gloomy stuff during the ten years or so that I happily used my GS645. It took the best picture of any pocket camera available at the time. So the closing mechanism was a bit fiddly; many cameras were fiddly back then. I never found it to be a problem. If it doesn't close easily, don't force it, think about what you forgot.

It just occurred to me: if you shoot at a faster shutter speed you will change the appearance of the water. The water looks very nice in your photo. (In fact, the whole photo looks nice.) So I think your only option is to be there when the wind isn't blowing.

Large format (or some medium format technical cameras) can adjust the plane of focus, giving you the apparent depth of field you want at wider apertures, thus allowing you to use faster shutter speeds to capture the image. But those of us with SLRs are not necessarily out of luck. Most SLR lines include tilt/shift lenses. They may not tilt and shift as far as a bellows camera, but they certainly tilt/shift farther than fixed SLR lenses. There are also third party options like Lensbabies. (www.lensbabies.com) Or you can buy an older 35mm tilt/shift lens and an adapter to make it work on your digital SLR. It may not focus to infinity on the full-sized sensors of Canon's top of the line SLRs, but probably will on most SLRs using smaller sensors.

 

I must say, however, that I agree with the patience school of thought. If you are going to photograph nature, it is much easier if you play by her rules. That means being there when the wind isn't blowing if you don't want wind blown vegetation.