So what film camera/bit of kit have you been obsessing about today?

srichards said:
Have you thought of getting rid of both and buying a nice Minolta dynax instead? :)
Click to expand...

I don't think there's a system which I haven't considered as a potential replacement at one time or another! :LOL:

I thought seriously about switching to Minolta back in the early or mid-1990s after being impressed with their reviews. Made more than one visit to the local shop to fiddle with the display model, which had 1/12000th shutter speed, used Minolta's expansion card system and had the 14-zone honeycomb meter. I don't remember much else about it but ended up not switching for reasons I don't recall either.

I've looked at Dynax 7's when they've come up since but the lenses are in demand by Sony owners and I'd worry about service parts; certainly not as bad as the T90 but probably not as good as the F100.

Besides, I'm supposed to be cutting down, not finding more gear. ;)
 
Don't get the dynax 7. It's got an aperture system that fails and it's apparently not repairable. Mine died. This is why I got the 9. They are the ones wth the 1/12000 shutter speed. They seem to be well built. Minolta Dave basically said he'd never had a 9 in for repair and he had a 9 and used it a lot and it just worked.

2 cameras changed for one is cutting down. You just have to actually part with the other two :)

I'm tempted to find a broken 7 and see if it's repairable.
 
Strappy said:
Having previously been obsessing over all my cameras, today I've managed to focus (ha! geddit?!) on two in particular. And I'm still stumped. :(

I need to bring my 'collection' (a nice word for the random assortment of cameras, lenses and miscellany that I've accumulated over the years rather than addressing my GAS) down to a more manageable size so that I actually take a camera out with me occasionally instead of looking at them all, not making my mind up and wandering off thinking that I'll take photos next time.

I'm looking at two 35mm SLRs; the Canon T90 and the Nikon F100. I'll try to summarise the positives and negatives (ha! twice in one post!) for each and apologise for doing my thinking out loud.

Canon T90 - it's the camera I've owned the longest and have the most lenses and accessories for. I like the lenses, the fact that most are still relatively cheap thanks to FD incompatibility with EOS cameras, the handling is good, decent range of features including multi-spot metering BUT it's old, replacement parts are no longer available (though spare cameras are cheap enough if needed), mine is working ok but I'm always thinking of the EEE fault and manual focus can be annoying when you just want to take a photo.

Nikon F100 - lenses and accessories are more expensive, especially full-frame Nikon lenses thanks to wider compatibility. The handling is good, features are excellent and obviously it's got Nikon's matrix metering, which is a major positive and as far as I know it doesn't have the spectre of failure following it as it's still new enough BUT when I used this camera for an extended period on a F&C trip to London, I found it lacked engagement because it felt that all I needed to do was point it in the right direction.

So the F100 is too do-it-all but the T90 can be frustrating, particularly if I'm in a hurry. The range of FD lenses I have means that I get stuck deciding which to take out with me and then dismiss it because the bag would be too heavy to lug around and then I look at the F100 and I only have two lenses for that ... so I dismiss it because of the limited choice. :confused:

I think a day spent with a roll of the same film in each and a 50mm lens should help resolve my dilemma. Or make it even worse. At least it'll be a sort of progress!
Click to expand...

Well Dean on the T90 you are probably finding it's a "can do everything camera" and it's sorta like going hiking and carrying around surplus gear you would never use AT THAT HIKE .....for me the T70 is the poor man's T90 and just has enough features for everyday shooting. So horses for courses like my firework shots when I could set the T90 for 7 secs (or up to 30 secs) with automatic wind on, but the T70 can only go to 2 secs unless set on "B" and to count elephants.
 
Last edited:
Finally found one of these little guys second hand and took their arm off with it. Just a little thing in comparison to some of the above but will save a lot of faffing around with phone apps. It will be mounted primarily on my M3 and it is loose, does anyone know how to firm up the spring plates on the hot shoe?IMG_0414.JPG
 
srichards said:
Don't get the dynax 7. It's got an aperture system that fails and it's apparently not repairable. Mine died. This is why I got the 9. They are the ones wth the 1/12000 shutter speed. They seem to be well built. Minolta Dave basically said he'd never had a 9 in for repair and he had a 9 and used it a lot and it just worked.
Click to expand...
Good to know, thanks. :)

I think before I do anything else I need to sort out what I've got ... I was looking through some of my gear photos last night and found a couple of pictures of an FD lens that I'd completely forgotten buying. :confused:
 
hoolio said:
Finally found one of these little guys second hand and took their arm off with it. Just a little thing in comparison to some of the above but will save a lot of faffing around with phone apps. It will be mounted primarily on my M3 and it is loose, does anyone know how to firm up the spring plates on the hot shoe?View attachment 96110
Click to expand...

You should be able to slide out the metal spring plate from the hotshoe by using a Stanley Knife and putting the blade down the front edge (nearest the lens) and flick the metal plate backwards.

If the plate doesn't come out, you could just make the foot on the light meter slightly thicker by adding some paper/card cut to the same size and stuck on it.
 
Last edited:
A snippet I found out just now is that the dynax 9 is apparently safe to use with infrared film while the 7 isn't. The 7 does have HSS wireless flash sync which is pretty neat and the lcd display on the back to show what each segment is metering at. I suspect the big screen on the back is why I went for the 7 originally :)
 
I thought the large LCD on the back was a drawback to the 7 as a second-hand purchase, given how LCD screens can be prone to failure due to age. I was looking at them because they came out after the 9 so I thought the more recent, the better. Though while it's terribly clever in being able to show exposure variance in each of the honeycomb cells of the meter, I can't really think of a time when I'd find that information useful or know what to do with it.

One question on the 9 - have you encountered any issues with SSM lenses? This review says that early 9s weren't prepared for the later SSM lenses and had to be upgraded to use them, which involved replacing one of the circuit boards.
 
Strappy said:
I thought the large LCD on the back was a drawback to the 7 as a second-hand purchase, given how LCD screens can be prone to failure due to age. I was looking at them because they came out after the 9 so I thought the more recent, the better. Though while it's terribly clever in being able to show exposure variance in each of the honeycomb cells of the meter, I can't really think of a time when I'd find that information useful or know what to do with it.

One question on the 9 - have you encountered any issues with SSM lenses? This review says that early 9s weren't prepared for the later SSM lenses and had to be upgraded to use them, which involved replacing one of the circuit boards.
Click to expand...

I don't think I have any SSM lenses. There was a way to tell whether it had the upgrade or not but I forget what it is. Possibly some extra menu thingy in the data menu. I've just used my old sigma ones on it and old Minoltas.
 
srichards said:
I don't think I have any SSM lenses. There was a way to tell whether it had the upgrade or not but I forget what it is. Possibly some extra menu thingy in the data menu. I've just used my old sigma ones on it and old Minoltas.
Click to expand...
I found a story from a message board claiming that they'd found the last stock of the required circuit boards at a single servicing place in Germany and managed to get the upgrade but it looks as though there will be no more.

It's not a major issue, I'd be more interested in older Minolta lenses such as the beercan than trying to get a bargain on the latest gear that will be priced for Sony full-frame users. But I'm jumping ahead of myself as usual; sell before buying ... it's such a novel idea that I have to try it at least once!
 
Ah, yes, I remember the tale of the charity shop Dynax! :)

I found another posting on dpreview's forums where a chap who seems knowledgeable says this about the serial numbers ...

what is the serial number of your camera? If purchased before 2001 or with a serial number lower than 15xxxxx, you are in the impossible (most likely) group. That's because the main flex and computer needs to be changed out and finding the new main flex might be more than difficult. If the serial number is 15xxxxx or higher, the flex doesn't need the change out. It does need to have the firmware reset. That would put you in the difficult group. The firmware ROM pack and connector cable and controller needed for this could only be found at a service center who took over all the KM service tools and got trained by KM trainers in the service move from KM to Sony. If you connect with one of these shops, hope that they have any idea what you are talking about or haven't disposed of the tools.
Click to expand...

So later serial numbers have better prospects assuming you can find someone with the right cable and software to do it. And to return to the subject of the thread, today I have been mostly obsessing about the Minolta Dynax 9 for reasons I don't really understand. :oops: :$
 
I have been obsessing about my EOS 80D and Tamron 200-500 lens - I managed to drop them onto a hard floor. Seem ok - but I have only had time for a very quick test.
 
I've discovered something ... I'm an idiot. I'm sure that won't be a surprise to most people but being an idiot, I tend to forget it regularly. :rolleyes:

Spent a lot of time yesterday looking information on Dynax 9's, finding old and new reviews and comparison tests, I even discovered that the only way to know if your Dynax 9 has had the SSM upgrade is to look at the custom option menus; if there is an option 20-4, it's had the upgrade. If not, it hasn't. And a while after that I realised ... one of the reasons I've been thinking of changing is for AF convenience in an SLR, reduce the amount of kit and clutter I don't need, move away from the T90 and its potential for breaking down. And all the while I've been looking at Dynax 9's, I've had the F100 sitting next to me. It's AF, it's got all the features I'm likely to need (and probably more that I don't know about yet) and it'll be serviceable with plenty of extras available because Nikon.

And that's why I'm an idiot, though it's also helped me realise that I may already have the camera I've been looking for. Plus I get a chance to type serendipity, which is always welcome. :)
 
srichards said:
But 1/12,000 shutter speed and mid roll rewind ;)
Click to expand...
Both are great features but I realised last night that I can't remember ever needing a 1/12,000 shutter and while the mid-roll rewind would be useful, for how often I actually want to do it I may as well stick with the old-fashioned way. Besides, the shutter and wind-on in the F100 is just sooooo sexy that I'd be rewinding mid-roll purely for that! :love:
 
I have been obsessing about selling some kit,but,which.

That is the question.
 
The old fashioned way.... curse for ages and then carry on with the film that's in there :D The feature I have used is the leave the leader out feature. It's part of the mid roll rewind. Makes it easy to dev at home if you have a daylight tank. Which I do and have never used. In fact I have 3 of the buggers!

Let me know what Minolta Dave says about upgrades anyway (y)
 
medwaygreen said:
I have been obsessing about selling some kit,but,which.

That is the question.
Click to expand...
First thing I'd do is not be daft enough to run through your thought processes in public because when you end up back at one of the cameras you were sure you were going to sell, there's a fair chance that you'll look a bit silly.




It's not just me, right? :oops: :$
 
srichards said:
The feature I have used is the leave the leader out feature. It's part of the mid roll rewind. Makes it easy to dev at home if you have a daylight tank. Which I do and have never used. In fact I have 3 of the buggers!
Click to expand...
I thought leader-out would be in the custom menus on the F100 but it isn't and after a quick google, I discovered a forum thread on the subject from 2003 which claimed that Canon owned a patent on leader-out, which is why Nikon didn't offer it as default. Except that Minolta did and apparently you could give your F100 to a Nikon service centre for 10 minutes and they'd change the setting to allow it.

It's all rather confusing but since I got a new leader retriever that works 9 times out of 10 instead of the 2 from 10 that I got with my last one, it's a fairly moot issue. It's this one and I really should get a second to keep in my bag for those mid-roll moments.

srichards said:
Let me know what Minolta Dave says about upgrades anyway
Click to expand...
Shall do. (y)
 
Well as usual I have been wondering around places and looking at, in no particular order:

Super Ikonta's.

Moskva 5 or 4.

Contax 645.

Hasselblad SWC.

Nikon F2 SB.

Canon F1-n

Guess that will be all until I see somthing shiney then "lust after" after that :D
 
As for auto everything 35mm SLR, I have a Canon EOS3 for that. I don't know of any irreparable/spares issues on that model, and it works great with the current range of Canon EF fit lenses. However, I don't tend to use it that much as I find it has part of the same thing that comes with a good quality digi SLR... it all becomes a bit too easy to get a great looking photo, so why not just shoot digital if the first place and save money?!

Working with the older generations of film camera without auto focus (or a coupled focusing screen), no light meter and manual shutter and aperture settings, slows me right down and makes me think and work hard for each shot, which I find totally different from the digital experience in an 'everyday' camera use situation (rather than setting up for a 'special' landscape shot or something like that). If I can wring a good looking shot out of a pre-80s film camera I feel as though I've deserved it and it's down to me more than having a 'great' camera. Just a personal view, but that's a bit of an insight into why I like film. :)
 
Mr Badger said:
As for auto everything 35mm SLR, I have a Canon EOS3 for that. I don't know of any irreparable/spares issues on that model, and it works great with the current range of Canon EF fit lenses. However, I don't tend to use it that much as I find it has part of the same thing that comes with a good quality digi SLR... it all becomes a bit too easy to get a great looking photo, so why not just shoot digital if the first place and save money?!

Working with the older generations of film camera without auto focus (or a coupled focusing screen), no light meter and manual shutter and aperture settings, slows me right down and makes me think and work hard for each shot, which I find totally different from the digital experience in an 'everyday' camera use situation (rather than setting up for a 'special' landscape shot or something like that). If I can wring a good looking shot out of a pre-80s film camera I feel as though I've deserved it and it's down to me more than having a 'great' camera. Just a personal view, but that's a bit of an insight into why I like film. :)
Click to expand...

Digi guys using film want to slow down, yet as I've always been a film users wanted the goodies that made cameras more convenient and faster o_O ... My first camera Pentax S3 didn't have a light meter and it was a PITA quite a few times when on a sunny day I'd take the exposure reading of my say my girl friend and just about to take the shot when a passing cloud would cover the sun :eek:..if only they had the T70 in the early sixties :D
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
As for auto everything 35mm SLR, I have a Canon EOS3 for that. I don't know of any irreparable/spares issues on that model, and it works great with the current range of Canon EF fit lenses. However, I don't tend to use it that much as I find it has part of the same thing that comes with a good quality digi SLR... it all becomes a bit too easy to get a great looking photo, so why not just shoot digital if the first place and save money?!

Working with the older generations of film camera without auto focus (or a coupled focusing screen), no light meter and manual shutter and aperture settings, slows me right down and makes me think and work hard for each shot, which I find totally different from the digital experience in an 'everyday' camera use situation (rather than setting up for a 'special' landscape shot or something like that). If I can wring a good looking shot out of a pre-80s film camera I feel as though I've deserved it and it's down to me more than having a 'great' camera. Just a personal view, but that's a bit of an insight into why I like film.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you're saying here and it's why I thought about selling the F100 in the first place, that lack of engagement. But then I look at my main digital gear (Fuji X-Pro1) and realised that I've hardly used it - fewer than 5k clicks in the last 3 years, I think.

I have a D70 and an Oly XZ-1, both give great results for posting online where most of my pictures end up so it's a bit silly holding on to the Fuji kit which I'm not using when I could get a couple of Nikon lenses to use on both bodies instead.

I have plenty of choice in film cameras from completely manual and unmetered through to the F100 so I'll still get my film fix in different ways. It's deciding which of them to keep and which to move on that's the problem. :)
 
I keep obsessing over Medium Format 4x5 and the Hasselblad 500CM, two different beasts but I keep going around in circles on which one to invest in, it's driving me mad.
 
Dork Knight said:
I keep obsessing over Medium Format 4x5 and the Hasselblad 500CM, two different beasts but I keep going around in circles on which one to invest in, it's driving me mad.
Click to expand...

Well it might help if you think what is the camera going to be used for...just for scenery or portraiture the 4X5 wins for quality and 6X6 is more useful for nearly anything and with interchangeable lens cost would think are cheaper but not as cheap as Japanese makes.
 
Sorry, my mistake ~ Large Format 4x5.

It would be portraits and landscapes for the 4x5, I know for a fact that the 4x5 would be used less than the Hasselblad but there's something that keeps drawing me back to 4x5.... then common sense gives me a slap and brings me back to the Hasselblad.

I scour the internet for prices and info on 4x5, then think about the Hasselblad and then repeat all of the above ~ I think someone needs to turn off my internet.
 
Dork Knight said:
Sorry, my mistake ~ Large Format 4x5.

It would be portraits and landscapes for the 4x5, I know for a fact that the 4x5 would be used less than the Hasselblad but there's something that keeps drawing me back to 4x5.... then common sense gives me a slap and brings me back to the Hasselblad.

I scour the internet for prices and info on 4x5, then think about the Hasselblad and then repeat all of the above ~ I think someone needs to turn off my internet.
Click to expand...

Also do you intend the camera for large prints as just posting here at 1000 X 828 px reduces the benefits of 4X5 although Nick's LF shots show a difference, but reducing my 6X7 to 1000 X 828px and comparing with 35mm (for same) does equalise quite a bit.
 
Prints would probably be limited so mainly for posting to the web, one of the main things I keep looking at is the depth of field/bokeh with large format.
 
Dork Knight said:
I keep obsessing over Medium Format 4x5 and the Hasselblad 500CM, two different beasts but I keep going around in circles on which one to invest in, it's driving me mad.
Click to expand...

I would recommend the Bronica SQ-A or SQ-B over the Hasselblad. Hasselblads look nice, but they are harder to use and are three times the price in my experience with no difference in the actual photographs.

Dork Knight said:
Prints would probably be limited so mainly for posting to the web, one of the main things I keep looking at is the depth of field/bokeh with large format.
Click to expand...

It's hard to recommend large format if you're only going to be posting to the web. There are some medium format view cameras though or you could put a roll film back on a large format camera?
 
skysh4rk said:
I would recommend the Bronica SQ-A or SQ-B over the Hasselblad. Hasselblads look nice, but they are harder to use and are three times the price in my experience with no difference in the actual photographs.
Click to expand...

Actually I might have to disagree with you, I had a Bronica SQ-Ai for a few years and it is indeed a fine camera, however I have now got a Hasselblad 500CM with standard 80mm lens and 150mm f4 lens. OK it is not mint but manged to get the whole lot for under £800, which I thought was not a bad deal, espcailly from a shop.

The Bronica I found was not withouut its issues, for me the battery compartment was probably the weakest point and nearly jamed the whole thing up with extension tubes. Indeed Hasselblads have their foybols but they are well documented around the web.

As for the "differnence in the actual photograph" well I think we would have to agree to differ, I think there is a difference but then that could just be me justifying the Blad :D
 
Knikki said:
The Bronica I found was not withouut its issues, for me the battery compartment was probably the weakest point and nearly jamed the whole thing up with extension tubes. Indeed Hasselblads have their foybols but they are well documented around the web.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is why I explicitly stated that I recommended the SQ-A or the SQ-B. I too experienced issues with the battery compartment on the SQ-Ai, but these issues don't apply to the other cameras in the SQ system. With regard to jamming, while it can happen to Bronicas, it is primarily an issue associated with Hasselblads.

Knikki said:
As for the "differnence in the actual photograph" well I think we would have to agree to differ, I think there is a difference but then that could just be me justifying the Blad :D
Click to expand...

I have never seen a picture from my Bronica that I wished I had taken with my Hasselblad instead. The photos look great.

In truth, both systems will outperform most of the photographers using the equipment. Because of this, I find it hard to recommend purchasing the Hasselblad, given the large price differential, unless you need a lens or accessory that you can't get in the Bronica system.
 
Last edited:
I've currently got a Bronica ETRSi which I think is a fine camera, if I was going to 6x6 (non-TLR) I would want to try a different manufacturer and think it would have to be the 500CM.

Maybe I should find a shop for some hands-on time with one....
 
Not interested in 6X7?...anyway if I get a sudden GAS attack, I alway supress the urge and think again in a few months time...and 99% of the time realise I didn't need the gear anyway. But if you have the money get what you like and don't worry about urges, afterall it would be less than you spend in the pub over years of the camera's use ;)
 
Dork Knight said:
I've currently got a Bronica ETRSi which I think is a fine camera, if I was going to 6x6 (non-TLR) I would want to try a different manufacturer and think it would have to be the 500CM.

Maybe I should find a shop for some hands-on time with one....
Click to expand...

Okay, but don't say I didn't warn you.

Hmmm... I wonder what @Carl Hall thinks about this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top