gareth_pillans

I have a d7200 with 35 1.8. I love it, but I want something wider. I don't like going wider than a 28mm equivalency, so I know my best option is the 20 1.8g, but it's more lens than I want or need, and quite frankly I would rather the money. I've previously tried the 20mm 2.8d, and I personally thought it was terrible, even stopped down. I've not tried the 18-55 (I bought just the camera body), but essentially a 18mm 3.5 would suit me perfectly (if only there were a dx only prime). How does the lens stand up? Is it sharp and contrasty wide open? How does it handle flare/CA/ etc? What version of the 18-55 is best on the wide end? I'm fine with distortion, vignette and CA corrections in lightroom. I'm not bothered about the VR or 19-55mm. They might be used now and again, but I wouldn't miss them. If there's a prime lens out there that would suit my needs better, please recommend it. I've previously had the sigma 18-35 1.8 and it was far too heavy for someone who has shot primes and canon f4 zooms for years. The reason I'm interested in the 18-55 is due to its small size and lightweightness. Being able to carry it and not notice it in my bag is what appeals to me, as long as image quality is there. Something with more reach isn't really appealling, as I don't care for the zoom range and it just adds size and weight. As for the 17-55 2.8, it's big, heavy, expensive and more lens than I need. I'd rather stick with Nikon lenses, so would rather pay a little more for the 20 1.8g than the sigma 17-50 2.8, if the 18-55 isn't suitable.

I thought the bottom half of an ever ready case might bulk out the camera and the leather may have offered more grip. That 3rd party grip looks interesting, I'm going to have to hunt one down and try it out. Part of me is thinking, there's no point in selling the SRT as it only cost me £12 and I'm also one of those people who tends to hold onto glass. I might just get an xd7 and grip and keep hold of my srt and 135. Opps. Thanks for the input. Gareth

Hi, thanks for any replies, I receive. A bit of background info. I own a Minolta x700, with a motorized grip, 28 2.8, 50 1.4, 100 2.5, 135 2.8, tokina 28- 70 3.5/4.5 and tokina 70-210 4/5.6. The camera body plays up from time to time, so I decided to get a back up body. I wanted something that offered something different to the x700 and I decided on a SRT or XD7, but as the SRT was cheaper, I decided to try it out first. Another benefit is that whilst using my slow zooms, the focusing aids don't black out on the srt, unlike the x700. I love an all mechanical camera (excluding the light meter) and I currently have a spotmatic and used a k1000 for a few years, so the SRT excited me. On receiving the camera, I found that, when using it, the way I hold it, I'm ALWAYS pressing the DOF preview button, when holding it up to my eye. It's really hindering and I'm considering putting it up on ebay, but firstly I thought I'd ask if anyone else has this issue and has found a work around? I have fairly large hands, and the problem is worse the longer/heavier the lens I use. I love primes, and I use them almost exclusively, but fell in love with the two tokina zooms I have. I wanted to use the zooms almost exclusively on the srt, but the light weight 28 and 50 are a little easier to handle on it, but the issue still persists. Does an ever ready case help with grip? Are there any cheap 3rd party accessories that can help? Can I temporarily disable the dof button? Should I put it up on eBay and get an xd7? I bought the 135mm 2.8, thinking it'd be a cheaper alternative to the 100mm 2.5, but I didn't like the focal length. The 135mm is in amazing condition and the 100mm is battered, so I couldn't bring myself to sell it, but I think I might let it go with the SRT, as together they'd probably fund an xd7. I won't miss the srt, as I have my spotmatic, which has a working light meter, and better dof button placement, but it also only has one lens. Gareth

<p>Hi, I currently own a 50mm 1.8 mk II and I find its lack of a focal scale limiting. I'm also pretty useless with aperture preview, past a certain f stop. As I intend to shoot digital with the lens, I could use trial and error, to determined the depth of field, but I would rather be more precise and shoot as close to f8/11 as I can.</p> <p>I intend to get a 50mm 1.8 mk I (£100 used), but I'm wondering if it's worth spending more and getting the 50mm 1.4 (£200 used, £250 New) .</p> <p>The 50mm 1.8 mk I is 25 years old and can't be bought new, 2/3rds of a stop slower ( 1.4 would come in useful, as i prefer to shoot wide open than with flash), old af system (I hate the af in my mk II, but love the usm on my 100mm f2) and has a worse build quality (this has never been an issue with my mk II, which has an even worse build quality). As for IQ, they both hold their own and will do for my needs.</p> <p>I'm a prime shooter. I own a 28-105mm 3.5/4.5. I find zooms useful, but not as enjoyable. Its focus scale also confuses the hell out of me. I shoot a Minolta x-700, so the lens more than likely would only be used on my 6D.</p> <p>Selling the 50mm 1.8 mk II I already own, would get me about £50.</p> <p>I know I'm the only one who can answer this question for myself, but I would like to hear what you would do in this situation. Pay an extra £50 for a focal scale and a better build quality, on an older lens? or pay £150/£200 more for a focal scale, better build, newer lens, better Af system and wider aperture?</p> <p>Thanks,<br /> Gareth.</p> <p>P.S. I shoot landscape, street, portraiture and family photography. Using a combination of long exposures, available light and flash. If I only took one lens with me, it would be a 50mm.</p>

...So I have a Waist level finder on my Mamiya RB67. I almost always use it with the magnifier, but I find that sometimes the image in the viewfinder is a little soft or I can see chromatic aberrations in the corners. I've realised that the distance my eye is from the magnifier plays a big roll in this. My question is... Does the chimney finder have a better lens, that tackles these issues better? I'm assuming it should, because it isn't making a compromise for compactness and lightness? I'd like to here some views before I go ahead and buy one. Thanks, Gareth

Hi, I've recently bought a Minolta Autocord. The camera works perfectly and is in great condition, however, it has no ground glass and the WLF is damaged. I'm posting to see if anyone is in possession of a broken Autocord, with an intact WLF, that they're willing to sell? Thanks, Gareth.

It doesn't have to be the best viewfinder canon slr, just not as bad as the eos 500. Is the eos 30 decent? Ot seems to be the canon that is compared to the Nikon f80. Before I got a 6d I shot Nikon and had an f80, it's my favourite electronic slr.

I have a 6d, and my eos 500 recently broke and I sold my eos 3 not too long ago. I enjoy shooting film and I'm just looking for some recommendation on what canon slr to buy, to take advantage of my ef lenses. If the eos 500 had a good viewfinder and beeped to confirm focus, it would have met my needs... Cheap, easy to manually focus, hotshoe and m mode are all I'm looking for. The eos 3 had a great viewfinder, but it was more camera than i needed and as it wasn't my go to camera, it sat on a shelf more often than not. I was paying for features I wasn't using. I know the eos 3 isn't expensive nowadays, but I think I could get a camera that does what I need for less. A Nikon f80 with an eos mount would be ideal ;D haha Things that don't matter much to me are light meter, aperture priority mode etc, aperture preview button, size, appearance, type of battery it uses (unless they're no longer manufactured)... There'll be others but I cant think of them atm

Thanks, I had a look at the rangefinder and it seems like the lever which comes out of the rangefinder and rests on the focusing track was a little misshapen, so at times it rested on the adjustment screw and other times it caught the side of the bracket, where the screw sits. It seems pretty accurate now. I have some film on the way, so I think I will just need to do some trial and error and see just how accurate I can be. Though the film back adds like 3cm to the back of the camera, so I will need to press my face right up to it. Thanks, Gareth.

Sorry, I forgot to mention that. It's nowhere accurate, I did adjust it, but there's another issue with it, where it will sometimes focus on an object at say 4ft and it will say 4ft on the zone focus, but the next time it'll focus on an item at 4ft and the zone focus will say something like 10ft. I also though you shouldn't close focus with an older rangefinder, due to a lack precision? Gareth

Hi, sorry if this is the wrong area to post my question, but I thought large format photographers would have the most experience and expertise around ground glass focusing and shallow depth of field, on a view camera. ... So I've recently bought a Graflex Century Graphic, with a 6x9 back(I didn't go 5x4 or larger, because I like scanning film and using photoshop and don't have the funds to buy a larger scanner or upgrade my ramm, my pc already struggles with 6x9 colour film). It has a ysarex rodenstock 105mm 4.5 lens. When testing the camera out (I had to make a custom ground glass, I was testing that the film surface matched up on the 6x9 back and ground glass) I shot a roll of Ilford delta 100 of some static objects and finished off photographing my dog, so I didn't have 8 frames of boringness, when a few images, focused at different ranges, would tell me what I needed to know. Anyways, I got a beautiful shallow depth of field image of her, which the focus luckily landed on her eyes, and about 4 slightly out of focus images, which focused slightly in front and behind her eyes. This was due to the time between focusing and switching out ground glass and film back, she was sitting and swaying. The images of the static objects confirmed the focus is spot on, so this isn't an issue. My question is... Is there any techniques large format photographers use, to take shallow depth of field portraits with a view camera? I would like to photograph people with the camera, from about 4ft at f4.5, so focus will need to be spot on. Is it as simple as asking your subject to stay as still as possible and being as efficient as possible when switch ground class and film back out or will I need to close down the aperture? I plan to get an rb67 soon, so portraiture will be past onto that system, but I would still like to learn all the ins and outs of my graflex. Thanks, Gareth. P.S. I tried searching shallow depth of field portrait focusing with a ground glass, but I was getting search results about portrait orientation and shallow depth of field. I'm sorry if there is already a thread about this. I would appreciate a link, if there is.