steve_singleton2

Hello, i´m kinda new to film photography and i want to buy a really good nikon camera. right now i only have a fujifilm zoom date 70 and between the nikon f70, f75 and f80 i don't know which one to buy o_O

I haven't found a F80 with a good price for now, so my doubt for now is really only between F70 and F75, between these two, which do you think would be better to buy?

One more question: do you think the differences between F70, F75 and F80 are significant?

 

Note: The lens that comes with the F70 is 35-80mm and for the F75 I can choose between 35-70mm or 28-100mm.

 

The price are pretty much the same.

I have an F100 outfit I'd sell at a reasonable price. Would include 28-105 lens and SB-28 flash. Let me know if interested and I'll provide details. Would offer 10-day money back guarantee.

At long last, I'm ready to sell out the equipment I used as a film photographer--Arca Swiss, Mamiya, Nikon, lights, stands, etc. Any suggestions as to what resources to consult (Ebay?) to establish fair prices or whether to piece things out or sell as kits?

 

Love to hear from someone in my shoes who's cleared out a quality collection of film gear in the last year or two.

<p>I bought the LX100 last summer before a trip to Europe and have taken a few thousand photos with it. As someone who worked with film for ages, I never liked the idea of having to compose on a LCD screen like a cell phone. The LX100's digital viewfinder does the job for me, at a resolution that doesn't reveal itself as a pixel pattern instead of a real through-the-lens viewfinder. And it's so compact I can carry it as a hiking camera. Drawbacks are that its little wink flash is external, so it takes some fussing to attach it for fill flash; battery life isn't great, so an extra is important; and it's sometimes too easy to move the exposure compensation dial without noticing (it doesn't have a detent or lock). I would prefer doing without the 4k video in favor of a lower price and fewer filter gadget settings to keep things very simple.<br>

But all things considered, it has good low light capability, resolution and color quality. I second the suggestion to buy the White book. I've been very pleased with the camera overall.</p>

<p>Just to round out the discussion, indeed I could not meet my requirements at the stated budget of $400. So I bent it upward, considerably. Was able to buy a late-model LX100, like new, for $650. It's early days yet, but the size suits me and the viewfinder is very workable. Didn't need 4K video (I don't have a monitor or TV to view it on), but overall, I'm happy with the purchase thus far. If I'm as pleased after my travels this fall, I'll keep it. If not, I'll resell it and hope not to take too much of a loss. Thanks to all who took the time to reply.</p>

<p>Peter, I agree that would be a terrific deal. However, I checked with Panasonic just now and they have no such direct offer at this moment. Where did you see it?</p>

<p>Thanks for all the good ideas and suggestions. It does appear that the models that come closest to my wish list are too new to show up as used or discontinued models that approach my budget. On the other hand, you guys have pointed out cameras that I hadn't considered before. And it sounds as though the G16 doesn't have the viewfinder I want. In particular, the LX100 sounds very appealing, if pricey. I'll keep my eyes open and maybe run across a deal. If I buy right, I might be able to take my European trip and resell the camera without a big loss, then wait for prices to come down on the models I favor. Almost like renting!<br>

Again, thank for the great tips. </p>

 

<p> After hauling my SLR on a recent backpacking trip, I'm ready to add a compact mirrorless rangefinder travel camera. But I don't want to change 45-year-old shooting habits by composing without an actual viewfinder, even if it's electronic. I want the ability to quickly and accurately change focus; have a moderate fixed-lens zoom range (wider better than longer); reasonable compactness; and a price under $400, new or used. I'd prefer to upgrade my SLR rather than spend a ton on a travel camera.<br>

Huge megapixel counts are actually a drawback for me since I never print really large files and don't want to upgrade my computer to better handle them.<br>

So I'm looking, as always for the best compromise between image quality, handling, size & weight, and cost.<br>

My thoughts so far: Canon G16 seems cost-effective and reasonably compact, good enough quality for me, but I hear nothing about what capabilities the viewfinder offers.<br>

The Fujifilm X30 has the electronic viewfinder and seems to offer the old-school feel that would be comfortable for me, but rather exceeds my budget. Without a collapsing lens, it also seems bulkier to pack and carry.<br>

The Sony X100 M3 really exceeds my budget, but has the electronic VF and offers extreme portability.<br>

Exactly none of these cameras are available to me to evaluate in the local camera store, so I'm flying a bit blind here.<br>

Very few reviews or user reports include detail about the viewfinder experience, which is an important point for me.<br>

Any ideas or suggestions would be appreciated.<br /><br /></p>

<p>May I answer a question you didn't ask? That question is how to go about shooting a commercially acceptable group shot of 30-35 people.<br>

Rather than worrying about buying a lens, I'd urge you to think through the shot in other ways. First, you really want to shoot outdoors, because I'm assuming you don't have professional flash units, light stands, umbrellas, wireless triggers, etc., etc. A good shot needs good light and creating it takes practice and expensive equipment. Just cranking up the exposure index isn't a good substitute. If speedlight flash is all you've got, you're going to have trouble getting even exposure of the group from front to rear. If bouncing off the ceiling is possible, that would help, but it will cut two stops of light and require a larger aperture, hence shallower depth of field.<br>

Never set up a location shoot without scouting the location, ideally before you quote a price. That's asking for trouble until you see what will be involved. You want an attractive or at least neutral background in the shade. Is there a better location close by? Maybe it's slightly less convenient for people to walk a bit to the location, but they're paying you to get a memorable photo not to make things as convenient as possible. You're the director of this shot and they are the actors. If you have confidence and are politely professional, they'll go along with your ideas. If it's feasible, try to insist that the shot be scheduled in the morning or afternoon, when you can pose the group in shade. Nice even open skylight will prevent blocked shadows and blown out highlights and you may be able to add daylight-balanced fill flash to add catchlights to eyes and open up any shadows. Outdoor lighting will also allow you to use a faster shutter speed to prevent camera shake and a smaller aperture for greater depth of field.<br>

<br />A tripod may or may not work for this shot. You'll want to be taller than anyone and able to look down on the group, after posing taller people in back and shorter in front. If you can't get above the group using what's already there, be prepared to bring a step ladder or at least a tall step stool to raise your point of view.<br>

Pose with the final print in mind. If you're going to sell 4x6 or 6x9s, your viewinder will be fairly accurate, if 8x10's you'll need to compose accordingly.<br>

Now to the lens. What's wrong with the 18-55? Your knowledge is more important than the lens you use. My long term suggestion would be to join the Professional Photographers of America (PPA) and attend seminars geared toward portrait photographers. The cost of doing so will improve your business-oriented photography faster than a new lens.</p>

<p>Another alternative is to pick up an incident meter. In my opinion, it's more accurate because it reads the light falling on rather than reflecting from the subject. If you get a combination continuous/flash model, that is also helpful if you ever use supplementary flash lighting.</p>

<p>As a light user of PS3, standalone version, I'd like to upgrade to the last edition of Photoshop and Lightroom available as individual programs. I don't need or want a whole suite of stuff I won't use and I absolutely refuse to buy in to software by annual subscription. In particular, I'm interested in more sophisticated selection tools. Can anyone advise me about available standalone versions?<br>

Steve</p>

<p>It's finally time to tackle the conversion of all those family VHS tapes. I'd like to archive them all to an external hard drive, that I can then use as a way to review the footage and edit the choice bits down for distribution to family on dvd. There's a lot of information out there about doing this, but I can't determine what is authoritative and what's not. Yes, I can purchase a $35 digitizer to put between my VCR and laptop, but will the quality be decent? What digital video formats are available and likely to last for a number of years? How large are the digital video files and how much storage will I need? What editing software will perform the minimal tasks I need?<br>

Can anyone point me to a good bock on the subject or a series of current tutorials on the web?</p>

<p>Thanks to all who responded and in particular for the suggestions about which scanning services/individuals people have had good luck with. Given the expense of a quality scanner, and my likely inability to devote myself to doing the scanning start to finish in one go, I'm leaning toward farming the task out. I do have a lightbox and loupe for editing and an Epson flatbed scanner, but that doesn't work well for the 35mm slides/negs.</p>

<p>With a large collection of family color slides, and mostly b&w negatives of many formats, I'm wondering whether it makes more sense to buy a film scanner and invest the time in learning how to use it, or to just to pay a service. If I were to buy a scanner, I'd probably try to hope to buy one with an automated slide feeder, then try to resell afterward without taking too much of a loss on the equipment. I don't intend to continue shooting and digitizing film, so I don't want to invest too much time or money in the process of preserving family memories. Can anyone who has been down this road advise me on a strategy?</p>

<p>Choose your time of day very carefully. I wouldn't want direct sun in the photo at all, due to the likelihood of extreme contrast. You say neon lights above, but I'm guessing you mean fluorescents? Either way, the color temperature of the lights are unlikely to match daylight. I would turn off the overheads for that reason. My temptation would be to use large white reflectors to bounce softer light than your flash affords back onto your subjects and help equalize the backlight. With reflectors, you can also observe the lighting effect in people's faces and also in all that glass behind them. You'll want to meter tightly so the backlight won't govern your exposure. Use whatever time you have before the shoot to do some testing with a volunteer model so that when people show up, all your experimenting is done and you can concentrate on posing and directing your subjects. Good luck.</p>

<p>Mark,<br>

<br />I second Tlaquepaque. There's a mariachi plaza, the Parian--a municipal square--colonial-era shops, etc. My brother Stan also operates a B&B hotel in Tlaquepaque, Casa de las Flores, which you can find on the web. He'll do everything he can to make your stay fun and connect you with the things you want to see. If you contact him, tell him brother Steve sent you.</p>

<p>Nobody has mentioned that there is a relationship between your metering technique, the exposure index of the film you're using, and the consistency of the lab. Assuming you stick with a particular lab, you need to establish what is a normal exposure index for your film (or dial in + or - exposure correction--either way, you're biasing the metering in one direction or the other). Once this is done, you may find that your normal metering practice will work well. Some people can and do use spot metering effectively, but I always found it easier to use incident metering, which measures the light falling on the subject rather than the light reflected from surfaces of varying reflectance. You can get an incident reading by metering a gray card (clumsy but effective) or by using a hand meter. Keep in mind that you'll have to experiment a bit with each different emulsion to get your baseline normal and then tweak from there as you gain experience with different light conditions.</p>

<p>Since your question suggests you're looking at others' results and wishing yours were better, I'd suggest that we first need to consider what sort of enlarger you're using. A condenser enlarger needs 20% or so less development because it prints with inherently higher contrast. Either will yield high quality results, but most development times are given with the assumption you're using a diffusion enlarger (either a color or a "cold light" fluorescent head). Given these variables, it doesn't help much to take a cookbook approach without that information. As long as you don't see signs of agitation streaking, your agitation technique is probably ok and what you need is control over exposure and the overall level of development you're giving the film. Use all the good recommendations you're getting about dilution, agitation technique, etc., but do yourself a favor and use a "ring around" approach to narrow down your own results with your own equipment--that is, expose film at several different EIs and develop for several different times and see for yourself what prints well. Taking time to experiment will serve you well because it gives you a method to refine your results no matter what film/developer combination you use.</p>

<p>Since your question suggests you're looking at others' results and wishing yours were better, I'd suggest that we first need to consider what sort of enlarger you're using. A condenser enlarger needs 20% or so less development because it prints with inherently higher contrast. Either will yield high quality results, but most development times are given with the assumption you're using a diffusion enlarger (either a color or a "cold light" fluorescent head). Given these variables, it doesn't help much to take a cookbook approach without that information. As long as you don't see signs of agitation streaking, your agitation technique probably ok and what you need is control over exposure and the overall level of development you're giving the film. Use all the good recommendations you're getting about dilution, agitation technique, etc., but do yourself a favor and use a "ring around" approach to narrow down your own results with your own equipment--that is, expose film at several different EIs and develop for several different times and see for yourself what prints well. Taking time to experiment will serve you well because it gives you a method to refine your results no matter what film/developer combination you use.</p>

A CF card reader and a number of CF cards from my camera just helped me back up

critical files before some PC surgery. That lead me to wonder: besides my

digital camera and now mini-backup use, could I use a CF card in an MP3 player?

Has anyone done this with reliable results? If so, I'd love to hear what

player you use.

Thanks guys. The spreadsheet really helps as a display of the variables. The NEF point is well-taken also. Now at least we'll have good talking points when we sit down to plan.

Two other photographers and I will be shooting an upcoming event with our

D200s. To assure technical consistency of the image files, I'd like to have a

printed checklist we could use to standardize our camera menu settings. It

could also be useful for recording personal settings for other shoots. Can

anyone share their own or point to an available Excel, Word, or even PDF file

for this purpose?

If there's any way to try before you buy, I'd sure pursue it. So much depends on personal working methods, that it's hard to generalize. Weight, lens selection, ease of focusing, point of view (waist or eye level), tripod mounted or hand held, interior or outdoor natural lighting and consequent synch speeds, on-camera or studio flash, square or rectangular format--your answers to all these questions will point toward a particular system. For me, an RB system gives me the best combination of alternative solutions, in a durable package, at a reasonable price; but I still use 35mm for candids or shots I judge won't go beyond 11x14. Calumet offers gear for rent, or you might ask pros you won't be competing with, visit camera shows, or schmooze with camera club people.

How 'bout a belt and suspenders? While it's good practice to use a lenshade, doing so can produce a false sense of security. There are times when judicious shading will improve the image even when a lens shade is fastened on the front of the camera.

First big job I tackled with an Arca 4x5F/6x9 combination required 4x5, so I got used to using the reflex viewer with 2X magnifier. It seems just enough magnification to allow me to confirm focus. The 6x9 reflex viewer, which I also have, lacks the built-in magnifier and I need a supplement. I noted Christopher's response to an earlier post that he uses a Silvestri loupe and darkcloth, but that seems to negate the convenience of the viewer. I had been thinking of rigging a pair of reading glass lenses, maybe like those flip up sunglasses baseball outfielders use, but haven't tried yet. Besides the loupe/darkcloth solution, can anyone suggest another approach?

Ask them if a recording company gets all rights to their music when

they make a CD. It might help to talk to them as if it's their work

that's at stake. If you can get them to be upfront about their needs

and fears, you may be able to negotiate an agreement. If not, double

your fee and consider yourself well-paid enough to forgo any future

income. However, you should ALWAYS reserve the right to use the

images for your own self-promotion, regardless of any other

circumstance (just shoot enough film for both parties).