Rick Helmke

<p>I've always liked this kind of work. I suspect it had a lot to do with me trying to making a living as a photographer. Too bad it isn't allowed any more.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>Morning all,</p> <p>I just ordered the 150 soft focus lens for an RB67 from B&H. At the price it was just too good to leave. I've never even seen one of these so I know nothing about it. This one doesn't have the discs with it but I don't know what that means.<br> What are the discs and what is their purpose? I'm guessing it deals with just how soft the lens can be in a given situation. I'm hoping this lens has a separarate aperture. Anything anyone knows about it would be appreciated. It should turn up tomorrow and I'm looking forward to trying it out. Thanks.<br /><br />Rick H.</p>

<p>For those prices? Both. I know I know but that is silly cheap for two very good bodies. Even though I'm a Nikon shooter I've tried several Canon bodies and used the 7E quite a bit. I think it's very good but the difference in the two is huge.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>I don't care if it was a set up, which it almost has to be, or not. It's a very cool photograph and I like it all over again every time I see it. It could never be done today. <br /><br />Rick H.</p>

<p>24 hours of shooting and about 15 more on the road. Presumably many more hours of post processing all using your equipment. Minimal overnight accomodations and don't forget you have to eat out much of the time. Cost of gas, wear and tear on the car. If you just feel like doing it then have at it but I believe I'd pass. You aren't really making any money.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>A lot of people including me still use a good bit of film each month. I think the F2 is the best thing Nikon ever made with the F4s a very close second. The F4 autofocus keeps getting knocked these days but on the few occasions I use this feature it works just fine. I've noticed the last year or so that I enjoy working in film more and have a nice if modest collection of film bodies. I like the F3 for other reasons but all three of the above mentioned cameras have one thing in common. They don't get in my way when I'm shooting. I can't find a digital camera anywhere that doesn't aggravate the sh!t out of me at least once during a shoot and that's been true for more than a decade. It ain't always progress.....</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>There should be a lead film bag available somewhere. I think someone was asking about how to dispose of one here a few days ago. That will be a big help in avoiding problems.<br> <br />Rick H.</p>

<p>I'm a big fan of the Nikon F2 and Nikkormat series but small and lightweight doesn't describe either. The OM cameras and glass are superb and much more compact and lighter.I've never owned any OM gear but have seen a lot of it around and it appears robust enough for most people.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>Why do you need to get rid of one? They are almost giving most of the MF glass away these days. I'd keep them both but if you decide to get rid of the 50/2 then send me a PM.I loaned out a 50/1.4 and will never see it again so need a replacement. I don't use it often but when I need it, I need it. Even splitting hairs you won't see much difference in the two in your work. It's mostly going to be about functionality. <br /><br />Rick H.</p>

<p>I figured this one out years ago. A 28mm, preferably a Nikkor and preferably on an F2.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>I've never been able to appreciate White's work. It always felt like something was missing to me. Probably a lack of imagination on my part.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>I recently saw (again) both 'Close Encounters' and 'Full Metal Jacket'. There is a scene in the first showing a bank of motorized camers firing away and they were all Nikon F2's with MD-2 units in place which was Nikon's top of the line at the time. One even had the correct 250 exposure back on it. In FMJ which is set several years earlier there is a press room scene among others in which every Nikon I saw was an F which would also be correct. Not sure if the different versions were accurate though but I suspect they were. I don't know why I'm always looking for that sort of thing but I do.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>It might be good for customer relations, especially with this parent who will likely go out of the way to trash you. OTOH I may be getting old and bad tempered because I would have to politely decline the refund at this point.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>What film are you processing in Tmax? It sounds as though something may be off in your dilution. Personally unless it is Tmax film I'd go back to HC-110 or d-76 and I'd use the times Kodak gives you.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>The Waltons are doing the same thing every major sports franchise and the rest of the entertainment industry is doing. They are trying to gain control of every image and prevent anyone else from making any money from them. The Waltons apparently have decided to be retroactive about it. I wouldn't be suprised to find they are able to convince some judge they are right. In any case they can afford to simply keep at it until the studio gives up or goes under. They could have done the decent thing and offered a large pile of money but I've noticed the Walmart empire rarely does the decent thing.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>And oh yeah, be damn careful over there.<br> <br />Rick H.</p>

<p>As much as I love both of those film bodies I'd leave the F4. Take the F2 and 28/50/105 plus one about 200mm or a fast zoom to cover that. Can't speak to the mirrorless stuff though.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>

<p>Evening all. I've said before that there is more film in my freezer than food. Some of it (the film) has been there long enough. Free to a good home, three 25 sheet boxes of Ektar 4x5 film and seven boxes of 25 sheet Tech Pan. All out of date for several years but all have been frozen since delivery. I know because I was the one who put it in the freezer. You can have all or part of it. If interested e-mail me at <a href="mailto:f2shooter@hotmail.com">f2shooter@hotmail.com</a> and send me the pertinent information.</p> <p>Rick H.</p>