1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Don't forget to change the clocks on your camera equipment!

    Dismiss Notice
  1. simon ess

    simon ess

    Messages:
    6,178
    Edit My Images:
    No
    On reflection, I don't think it was getting any harder to focus. It's more that I was initially seduced by the brightness but my patience with the focusing was running out.
     
  2. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    434
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Snip:
    The size that camera looks, I don't think Suz should have much trouble finding it at all, really! :LOL:

    Teasing aside, I'll look forward to seeing some photos from it. (y)
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2017
    Andysnap and srichards like this.
  3. srichards

    srichards

    Messages:
    9,228
    Name:
    Suz
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Film loaded I think. Cat surprised by flash :snaphappy:

    Only thing that is irritating is the dial lock button means I find it difficult to turn the camera on or off with one hand. You have to press the button and move the dial. There will be knack to it I'm sure but it's quite awkward for me.

    Looking at my film stocks I've got several slightly out of date rolls to get through!
     
  4. David_H

    David_H

    Messages:
    184
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I had fun and games with my Nikon F601 yesterday when it came to using manual mode. Kept coming up with the error fEE on the LCD. I think this was purely because I was trying to use an AF lens which didn't have an aperture ring. Being a bit teed off about this, I decided to have a search around for a camera with a suitable lens so that I can play to the full, i.e. manual focus, set aperture etc and found a Pentax P30n that appears to fit the bill on evilbay. As of twenty minutes ago it is now mine for £15.00 plus P&P - no one else wanted to bid on it. I've got some Fomopan B&W film so I will see how I get on with that camera when it arrives.
     
    ChrisR likes this.
  5. Kei

    Kei

    Messages:
    238
    Name:
    Kyle
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm torn between a 210mm f4.5 APO for the 67, a 300mm f5.6 ULD for the 645 or an AE prism for the RZ67.
     
  6. Kevin Allan

    Kevin Allan

    Messages:
    738
    Name:
    Kevin
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I have an AE prism for my RZ67 but rarely use it outside of the studio; whilst I can carry an RZ, two film backs, and three lenses for several miles, the prism is the tipping point that makes it just too much to carry about. I do sometimes miss it when the camera position is too high to allow the use of the waist level finder, but you can't have everything.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2017
    Kei likes this.
  7. excalibur2

    excalibur2 Loretta

    Messages:
    7,938
    Name:
    Brian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    re prism It's what you prefer...for me I just don't like waist level cameras so turned my RB67 into a giant SLR with prism and "L" bar.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg

    Messages:
    5,138
    Name:
    Steven
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Sold the prism for my RB, far too heavy and far few use cases. Only time I ever rind it useful is composing something with the tripod at full height and I rarely shoot above eye level.
     
  9. mothdust

    mothdust

    Messages:
    1,004
    Name:
    Charlotte
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I sold the prism for my SQ-A too. If it had been the metered one, I'd have kept it, but as it wasn't, I prefer the enormous beauty of the WLF :)
     
  10. StephenM

    StephenM

    Messages:
    1,825
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I examined the metering prism for the RZ67 at Focus years ago, and decided against it. The image in the viewfinder was so much smaller than that in the waist level finder, and, unlike Brian, I don't like cameras that have to be held to the eye. I have only once encountered a situation where the prism would have helped, and that was when photographing at the Glen Nevis lower falls, with my tripod set up on the bridge (Google street view will show that this means "in the narrow road") and the required viewpoint being at about my height, not my eye level. I had to climb and hold onto the fence to focus and compose. The waist level finder made this more difficult, but still possible; the extra weight and reduced view of the prism would make every other photograph harder for me to compose. Plus hand holding is easier lower down the body than at eye level anyway. The metering doesn't bother me, as I'm quite used to a hand held meter, and don't go in for the close work where a TTL system would remove the need for calculations.
     
    trevorbray and mothdust like this.
  11. jj_glos

    jj_glos

    Messages:
    1,247
    Name:
    Julian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Just to bring down the level of conversation, just lately I have been struggling to not buy a 110 film camera. Not even one with all the frills, but the cheap as chips one that I had when I was a young kid. Even better it has the old flash cube extender, and I want to buy a load of (now expensive) flash cubes to go with it. I'm pretty certain I'm going to only use it once and it will end up in the cupboard but logic isn't driving this...
     
    eeyore and RaglanSurf like this.
  12. Techy Guy

    Techy Guy

    Messages:
    501
    Name:
    Rob
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Not a new obsession but always wanted a Nikon F4S, think I'll finally take the plunge soon. Some nice ones on evilbay along with a lot who have seen harder times. Missed a nice one on here some time ago, always hoping another comes up!
     
    Phiggys likes this.
  13. joxby

    joxby

    Messages:
    7,657
    Name:
    John
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I can't do it.......I just can't

    110 film, its tiny, I so want a 110 camera, love the form factor and design, but 110 film ??, love half frame cameras too like the Oly pen, its an absolute tragedy the thing only shoots half a flippin 35mm frame, I mean...wtf
    I shoot 6x6, I don't wanna go any pokier than that really, ok so I'll shoot a bit of 35mm cos I have to, y'see......it has to be usable, I wan't these cameras to use, I can't see the point in shooting a camera if its product is just so......limited, I don't own cameras just for the sake of owning them or put em in a glass box, I know people that do but I personally don't begin to understand that at all.
    Anyway, its a rant at manufacturers that make such desirable cameras yet built them to shoot a pathetically small frame of film, so pathetic I can't find a reason to shoot one...:D
     
  14. Andysnap

    Andysnap POTY (Film) 2015

    Messages:
    13,910
    Name:
    Andy Grant
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Each to their own John, each to their own. Some people really like tiny, look at growers of bonsai trees :D
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2017
  15. excalibur2

    excalibur2 Loretta

    Messages:
    7,938
    Name:
    Brian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well I'll never understand why use small format film cameras when you can use a mobile phone :confused:
     
  16. Mr Badger

    Mr Badger

    Messages:
    434
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The possible resurrection of a Polaroid 1000 camera I have in the loft. :thinking:
     
  17. joxby

    joxby

    Messages:
    7,657
    Name:
    John
    Edit My Images:
    No
    :Dwell you know what they say about the best things


    That's a different perspective you've got there Bri, but not everyone chooses what they shoot based purely on finance, the logical progression of your ideal beggars the question, why shoot film at all.
    I mean, ok if you've already got a load of film gear from yesteryear, it could make sense from a finance perspective to just carry on using it, but most people shoot film for a mirriad of other reasons related to the material, equipment and process itself, not because its the cheapest option, for most people wanting to shoot film, a mobile phone might as well be a toaster or something as equally useless for the job.

    I want to wet print my stuff, its not for everyone.

    I shoot some 35mm because its an extremely compact and versatile format compared to 120, but miles more importantly, it produces a half printable negative, without that you're left with shooting a desirable beautifully designed camera......just for the fun of owning it and shooting it.
    Do I wanna do that ?, well sort of....kinda.....lots of people do, but for me ultimately its a complete fail, its like walking off a cliff, I want to do it just for the experience of the freedom of flight/plummet/whatever, but if there is no product at the end of it, (ie I don't live to enjoy the experience afterwards)....what's the point, there are far too many sexy cameras that produce useful negs to shoot without faffing about with tiny formats...:)
     
    gazmorton2000, stevelmx5 and Andysnap like this.
  18. excalibur2

    excalibur2 Loretta

    Messages:
    7,938
    Name:
    Brian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well yes John.....every one to his\her hobby, it's just all the faffing around with 110, 126 (or whatever) when there are some lovely JUST 35mm compact AF (non zoom) cameras that were made that slip into your pocket and you can pickup for peanuts.
    Reminds of the story (re about not understanding other people's hobby), at the bootie when I was looking at cameras on a stall and a guy came up to me with something like a Brownie 127 and said " do I know what film this takes" well it just came out of my mouth without thinking and replied "what did you buy that for as there are some lovely compacts here going for under £2" :sorry: :facepalm::oops: :$
     
  19. joxby

    joxby

    Messages:
    7,657
    Name:
    John
    Edit My Images:
    No
    :ROFLMAO:

    I know....it takes all sorts to make a World though, and ya can't put a price on happiness..:)
     
  20. kendo1

    kendo1

    Messages:
    5,634
    Name:
    Ken
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ... or stupidity :)
     
  21. Asha

    Asha

    Messages:
    6,993
    Edit My Images:
    No
    or Brian!:D

    Edit ^^that^^ .......50 pence :ROFLMAO:
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2017
  22. Kei

    Kei

    Messages:
    238
    Name:
    Kyle
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    That's what I'd wondered. I carry my RZ in a lowepro toploader 75 and I know that with a prism, it wouldn't fit which would make life in the field a nightmare. I probably need to build up more faith in my handheld meter skills as I'm too chicken to shoot any slide film in cameras without any TTL metering. I tend to stick with the 645 as both the 1000S and AFD have metering prsims but remain easily transportable in the field. I think based on that, I'm better off focusing my attention on the 210mm f4.5 APO for the 67 as I already have 8 lenses for the 645 compared with just 3 lenses for the 67.
     
    Kevin Allan likes this.
  23. kendo1

    kendo1

    Messages:
    5,634
    Name:
    Ken
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ^ So, only five lenses to get for the 67 to catch up. Better start spending :D
     
  24. StephenM

    StephenM

    Messages:
    1,825
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    People did it with hand held meters for years. Why not take your meter out with you when you're using a TTL equipped camera, and check what you get against what the camera says (assuming that you're happy with the camera's exposure). You might find that using it in incident mode (if it has this) or putting the palm of your hand in the same light as the subject, metering from that and opening up one stop, will be more consistent.
     
  25. Kei

    Kei

    Messages:
    238
    Name:
    Kyle
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Would love to :), but that's not likely to happen. I originally planned on getting just the 65, 127 and 210 and now have 65, 75 and 127 instead. Fancy the 50 ULD and 37mm fisheye too but they don't come cheap and I doubt I'd use them that often. With 645 I really only have 35, 55, 80, 120, 150 & 210. I've got a pair of 80's (f1.9 & f2.8) and a pair of 210's. (AF and MF) How my dad made do with just the 105mm f2.4 on his pentax 67 I'll never know.

    I use a gossen digipro F which I treat as a reflective meter 99% of the time, using the averaging mode which shows the exposure range of a scene. I've only had a handful of slightly wonky exposures when using it so can't be all that bad. Just think I lack the faith to try it with the rather steep cost of E6 films.
     
  26. kendo1

    kendo1

    Messages:
    5,634
    Name:
    Ken
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I have the 45, 80 and two 150s - the f3.5 and an f4- for use on my 645. I use a Minolta autometer.
    I suppose I should sell the f4...
     
  27. excalibur2

    excalibur2 Loretta

    Messages:
    7,938
    Name:
    Brian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Turned down a Pentax espio mini compact for 10p...before you all say I'm mad, well I already had loads of compacts and then I'd only have to waste film testing it and if it was perfect what do I do with it, as all my other compact's results would have been just as good.
     
  28. StephenM

    StephenM

    Messages:
    1,825
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ah, but they might have been different; after all, the results from most 35mm cameras will be equally good, so we only need 3 (one to use; one as a backup and one that might be away being repaired, so we always have a spare).
     
    Asha likes this.
  29. joxby

    joxby

    Messages:
    7,657
    Name:
    John
    Edit My Images:
    No
    maybe he'd be lucky and get a double pano exposure light leak camera that creates art with every shot........ahhh, now we'll never know...:)
     
  30. srichards

    srichards

    Messages:
    9,228
    Name:
    Suz
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Whether the foolish auction purchase will be a box of delights or a box of sh...e!
     
  31. MartynK

    MartynK Opting Out.

    Messages:
    4,434
    Name:
    Martyn
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I've always wanted a Leica, probably an M3, and a Noct-Nikkor f1.2 to go with my FM and F2. I might be able to manage the Leica, at a stretch, but the lens(es) would be out of reach and the Nikkor will remain a pipe dream...:(
     
  32. Kei

    Kei

    Messages:
    238
    Name:
    Kyle
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Have you tried the normal nikkor 50mm f1.2 or older 55mm version? It's got some special qualities vs the other 50's you can get provided it's used at stops faster than f2.8. It's pretty good even wide open if accurately focused having a trace of swirl to the bokeh in the corners.
     
  33. RaglanSurf

    RaglanSurf Official Forum Idiot 2013 & 2014

    Messages:
    9,173
    Name:
    Nick
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I've got the 55mm f1.2 I love the look it gives but it's a pig to focus wide open.
     
  34. MartynK

    MartynK Opting Out.

    Messages:
    4,434
    Name:
    Martyn
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I haven't, no, but definitely something to look into. The Noct has always been sort of iconic, and I've wanted one since I first read about it, but I really couldn't justify it on any basis other than lust!

    I can imagine, but I'd like to try it at some point. Just possible that someone I used to know may have one, he kept most of his Nikon film kit (1960s - 1980s) when he retired.
     
  35. Knikki

    Knikki

    Messages:
    1,499
    Name:
    Nick (yes there is more than one of us)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Several bits Canon F1n AE, Contax 645 and Fuji 680 also 5x4 cameras.
     
  36. mothdust

    mothdust

    Messages:
    1,004
    Name:
    Charlotte
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  37. stevelmx5

    stevelmx5

    Messages:
    6,067
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I think RJ is using a Rollei SL66 at the moment for his tilt images. I reckon you'd have to be pretty committed to the art to carry a GX680 anywhere outside of the studio :0)
     
  38. StephenM

    StephenM

    Messages:
    1,825
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't know about that - I just checked the weight and found it was about the same as my first 5x4 camera which I carried around. Admittedly that's probably without the lens in the GX680's case, but the 5x4 required additional weight in the form of focusing cloth, double dark slides etc.
     
  39. StephenM

    StephenM

    Messages:
    1,825
    Name:
    Stephen
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'll admit that at the moment, it's a Kine Exakta that's caught my eye on the WY Cameras site. I can't be certain, but I suspect it may well be the very camera I handled in their shop a couple of years ago. To me, the attraction is a (very) soft spot for Exakta, as I used a Varex IIB for a number of years, and still have it (with non working shutter). As the first 35mm SLR, it's a piece of history; and conventional wisdom runs that the older the model, the better they were made.
     
    john.margetts likes this.
  40. skysh4rk

    skysh4rk

    Messages:
    2,724
    Name:
    RJ
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Yeah, I'm using a Rolleiflex SL66E at the moment. I've managed to adapt a projection lens to the camera, which means that I'm not limited to using tilt only at closer distances; I can tilt past infinity.

    I would love to experiment with the GX680 too, but it's probably too hefty for what I usually shoot.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2017
    mothdust likes this.

Share This Page