jay_66

<p>Go for an SL or SL2. You can find SL's out there with the SL2 focusing screen retrofitted (i.e., split-image central patch). You will not find a brighter SLR viewfinder anywhere. I've been using M's since the 60's but I have my tank of an SL for long-focus work. I've handled and used both the R8 and R9; too many bells and whistles for an old Tri-X shooter like myself. Keep it simple--go with an SL/SL2.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Go on the cheap. You can pick up a Canon 40D for a good price. It's not full frame, so what? I wouldn't fret too much.</p>

<p>A good choice. I've literally been on, and photograped, every continent except Antarctica--I worked for UPI since my days in Vietnam. I'm semi-retired now, as is my wife (also a photog). We traveled throughout Europe, the Med and North Africa (Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Malta, side trip to Cyprus) just 2 years ago. All I took was an M6, a Tri-Elmar 28-35-50, a 135/4 and an old Noctilux 50/1.2. I shot Tri-X for b&w, Ektar 100 for color and some ISO 400 & 800 color negative stock bought locally.</p>

<p>What a pleasure to travel with such a light kit! The Canon EOS and gazillion lenses stayed home. I just can't hack it at my age with a large bag on my shoulder anymore. I FedEx'd my rolls home periodically for developing.</p>

 

<p>I have a brick of K64 in the deep freeze since 1999. Trying to pace myself to use it all up to get it into Dwayne's by the end of 2010. No problems whatever with the colors!<br>

 <br>

A chemist told me that freezing the film effectively stops any deterioration, it's like in suspended animation. The colder the better, it's like time standing still.</p>

<p>Thanks all. I think I'll go with the Portra as I'm more concerned with sharpness and fine gain. Color issues can be Photoshopped to satisfaction.</p>

<p>UP strap, hands down. Best frigging strap for any M camera, bar none!</p>

<p>What has anyone's experience been in shooting Kodak Portra 800 in indoor available light?</p>

<p>I'm going to be shooting indoors in a department store, mostly displays but also a Christmas light show (incandescent and LEDs). I'm using digital RAW capture for the bulk of the assignment, but the client wants some shots on film. I'm thinking Portra 800 will be perfect for not just the displays but the "light show." (I'll be using a bunch of M's with f/2 'crons.) Flash will not be an option.</p>

<p>I'm a Tri-X kind of guy and have been using it for 40+ years, I don't even need a light meter to figure exposure. But for color, unless it's K64 or the old Vericolor (I used for weddings), I'm not too sure of myself with color film as I shoot mostly digital for color, film for b&w.</p>

<p>Any commentary would be appreciated.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Good Lord, why all the restrictions in the UK? No photography during the ceremony? Crazy.</p>

<p>I haven't done wedding photography in decades, but here in New York City there are very few, if any restrictions, depending on the venue. Catholic churches tend to be the most liberal. I recently photographed a christening in a Catholic parish in Manhattan. The only rule was that here were no rules, as long as I "didn't make the pastor look fat!"</p>

<p>Glad I'm pretty much retired and don't have to deal with picky clergymen!</p>

<p>No, not a Ken R., a Bob F., ready to retire in a year's time.</p>

<p>A cousin of mine works for Fuji and had worked previously for Kodak. He tells me that Fuji is much more aggressive in their R&D as to film than what he saw at Kodak. I've been shooting film for 45+ years but as a UPI photog in Vietnam, I would have died to have digital capture. For making deadlines in the news biz, digital cannot be beat. We shot Tri-X in the field, had to get it choppered back to the lab for processing and contact sheet printing, then wire transmission if something was really essential, otherwise the end product had to be physically couriered here and there. There was no FedEx back in 1968 after the Tet Offensive!</p>

<p>That being said, I don't think film will ever totally disappear. It will remain as a niche and may even be "rediscovered" by a generation of photographers who cut their teeth solely on digital. I chat with he minilab operator at the local Target store and he tells me he has seen no drop off in rolls of film left for processing. The big difference is that most film shooters order a CD of their film rolls.</p>

<p>I am semi-retired and still shoot film for family events and for my own personal landscape and street photography, but my wife has gone totally digital. You can't stop progress but the death of film has been greaty exaggerated.</p>

<p>It's nice and warm, relatively speaking, here in NYC, in the 60's. I recorded the day's festivities on a seldom-used Leicaflex SL and 35/2 'cron with Kodak Portra 800 film. Decided to take the 'flex out and exercise it a little. The Ms deserved a day off for some well-earned R&R!</p>

<p>I've been using the second version 3E as the staple in my traveling kit since it was introduced. A really great travel lens, if you don't mind the slowness of f/4. A shame it was discontinued. They are not cheap on the used market by any means.</p>

<p>Elliot,</p>

<p>As a retired photojournalist, my advice in this stage of your career is to save your money and go with a more versatile SLR, film manual (e.g. Canon F-1N) or digital. You can always get into Leica later on.</p>

<p>Photojournalism has changed dramatically in just the last 10 years and lightyears since I was shooting with my M2s in Vietnam in the 60s and early 70s, and even then a trusty Nikon F was at hand for long shots.</p>

<p>Today it's all digital. There is absolutely no way you can survive as a working photojournalist unless you are shooting digital.</p>

<p>A Leica M will be great for street photography and candids where you can afford to use film as there are no deadlines to meet. (I routinely use my Ms for that and for family pictures now that I'm retired.)</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>I cannot conceive of a no-photography policy during the wedding ceremony, of depriving the couple of a visual record of their big day. I had no idea that things could get that restrictive. 20 years ago, the rules were scant. Things have gotten more draconian for photographers.</p>

<p>My experience was that Catholic Churches were the most lenient, many with no rules at all, at least where I'm based, in New York City. I remember a sign in the 1960s that was in the foyer of St. Patrick's Cathedral that said flash photography was specifically allowed, but to please clean up and do not leave spent flashbulbs and film cartons in the pews. The Protestant churches usually were more restrictive. Back then, the Episcopalian cathedral in NYC, St. John the Divine, had a strict no-flash policy and it is a huge, cavernous, dimly lit place; I don't know about now. St. Pat's, where you could use flash, was unbelievably lit up, almost like a sound stage.</p>

<p>The last "church" event I photographed was a friend's son's christening about 2 years ago. It was in a Catholic parish in Manhattan. The pastor said the only rule he had is that there were no rules, I was free to do as I please, walk where I want, use flash, not use flash, use a tripod if I want, etc., just don't trip over anyone or stumble.</p>

<p>The churches that had rules, I found, imposed them more for the convenience of the officiant than for the protection of the participants' event experience. A pastor banned flash because he just didn't like flashes going off while he spoke, or forbade you from entering the sanctuary because too much movement made him nervous. The reasons seem arbitrary and capricious, and really benefited no one while really hindering the proper recording of the event.</p>

<p>I agree that building a rapport is important, you can skirt the rules easier if the pastor or whomever knows you do not go crazy. After shooting in Vietnam, I was in no mood to have someone tell me what I could and could not do. I felt it hindered my creative freedom and if I thought I could get away with breaking the rules -- after sizing up the situation -- I did. If the pastor approached me afterwards in remonstration, I was effusive in my apologies.</p>

<p>Building rapport in covering Vietnam certainly helped, but we had virtually no restrictions, not like in the Persian Gulf or Iraq wars. If you could hitch a ride in a copter to the action and the pilot had room, you climbed aboard; of course, you knew it could always be your last ride on this earth, but that was the job. Today, with embeds and the like, it's totally different.</p>

<p>BTW, I love Australia. Many fond memories of R&R there 35-40 years ago.</p>

<p>My experience is that I was never booted out, but I really never did anything outrageous. I just pushed the envelope with flash, positioning, wandering where I wasn't suppose to go. I got dirty looks, but I think the officant would have been too embarassed to correct me or throw me out. The couple would have freaked and gone "postal" at the priest, minister or rabbi.<br>

Yes, I did do combat photography in Vietnam for UPI. After that experience, some supercillious "officiant" was not going to intimidate me. I did some rock concert work but back then access was easier, nothing like the nightmare it is today.<br>

I haven't shot a wedding in 20 years and don't miss it at all. Now with digital, the clients expect a burned CD with all the "proofs" by the end of the big day. I don't need to deal with that. God bless those of you that have the stomach to do it!</p>

<p>Do as you please regardless of what the "officiant" tells you. I know it sounds "ballsy," but what is the minister going to do if you start shooting with flash or go wandering? Stop the proceedings and throw you out? I think not. When I was shooting weddings 20 years ago, I did everything gonzo style. I ignored the "rules" and did as I please. I was not popular with the priests/ministers/rabbis, but I got the results. If they confronted me afterwards, I feigned ignorance or misunderstanding of the rules. I shot for UPI in Vietnam, so I was not--and am not--intimidated by anyone.</p>

<p>PS: I remember the photo girls at the Copa in NYC in the late 50s! Jeez, I'm getting old.</p>

<p>Try a vintage TLR and have a blast!</p>

<p>The whole "green" thing is a crock anyway. Follow the money. It's all nonsense pumped up by the crooks in government and their dupes in the media. Certain segments stand to benefit mightily in a financial way from so-called green initiatives. Look at who they support politically. A crock.</p>

<p>I started out with #26 flashbulbs in a CEYOO unit back in the 60s, then a small Braun unit Leitz was marketing then. In the 70s I moved up to a Vivitar 283 and have used that model for 40+ years. I have an SF20 in my bag and have used it a little but it lacks the bounce ability of the 283. When I shoot Tri-X, I rarely use flash indoors, but if I'm loaded up with K64 or an ISO 100 film, the flash comes in handy indoors. Also like fill-in flash in daylight.</p>

<p>Buy an M3/M2/M5/M6/M7/MP. Load up the Tri-X. We don't need no stinking digital!</p>

<p>Been a member for over 10 years. The membership fee is worth the price of the quarterly journal, <em>Viewfinder</em> . Never been to any events, so I can't speak to the age of the members. Closing in on 60 (rapidly!), I don't see that as a disadvantage!</p>

<p>Been there, done that. Take both the 40D and G10, you won't regret it. About 15 years ago I did a similar excursion with <em>just</em> a Leica M6 and a kit of 28-50-135 lenses. Got fantastic pictures. But I'd now take advantage of those 40Ds abd G10s!</p>

<p>Who says you have to tell the little woman anything? The less said, the better.</p>