SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,421 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Dont blame me for starting a new thread blame it on bladerunner and arrpeegee :lol: they suggested it

Also is everyone happy with the spelling of the thread ? TOO MANY CAPS ? not enough ? Is it spelt wreight ? :lol:

Oh and is it spelt cameras or camera's ? lol

I'll start by saying, i've been considering getting a film camera for a while, there's a shop in the city centre here that sells nothing but film camera's they sell 35mm SLR's from the most recent to going back to the 70's and no doubt older than that.

They also sell lots of rangefinder camera's, does anyone have any knowledge or experience of either 35mm or rangefinder camera's ?
 

·
Doesn't like Reality
Joined
·
197 Posts
Hi,

I have some experience of 35mm, I had to use one for my C&G photography, but that was a while ago and now I can't remember much. Although they are very similar to the DSLR, only you have film in it instead!

I use Medium format or 120 and Polaroid so it's not much help to you...

If I were you I'd go proper vintage and go for something you have to manually wind on, then you can play around more with things like the double exposures, or don't fully wind it so the images half overlap and such. I guess it depends on exactly what you want to do with the film. Buy a £1 camera from a cheap shop, it'll be plastic and rubbish but produce some cool vintage photos. Also, exposed film is good, I'm yet to use any as it's not always that easy to get hold of.

However, you may not be into that sort of stuff at all! So um, I'll just shut up :D

It would be a good idea to invest in a negative scanner, and then you can choose your own settings rather than what a computer chooses at the developers. You'd be lucky to find anywhere that hand develops photos now, unless you have access to your own dark room with enlargers and such.
 

·
BAND
Joined
·
12,216 Posts
It's 'cameras' (plural). If you write 'camera's', it would mean 'the object belonging to camera' which doesn't really make sense (unless you know someone called camera :dunno:).


Also, it's Arepeejee, not Arrpeegee ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,630 Posts
I am looking for a new digital camera but want to stay compact as I don't want to carry an SLR around.

I currently have a Canon IXUS 500 (5MP). A superb camera, let down only by the small 3x optical zoom (but then what compact doesn't have a low zoom).

I was looking at replacing with the Canon IXUS 960 - which has 12.1MP but still only a 3.7x optical zoom. Also of the same compact size is the Canon IXUS 970 which has 10MP but a 5x optical zoom.

Any way, I was looking at a Canon Powershot as well. Which only had 8MP but had 12x optical zoom. It is a little bulkier though to be honest (more like a small SLR size).

Now how much difference will a higher resolution make up for lower zoom? As obviously I can zoom the image in software after the fact because it would be higher res. I know you can't zoom the whole pic obviously but I mean if I just wanted a section.

Is a 10MP with 5x as good as a 12MP with 3.7x (or better). And would it be worth the extra bulk of the Powershot to get an 8MP with 12x?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
*Lurker Alert*

I enjoy looking on here but don't post as I can't add anything to the archi-techy discussions. I mostly likes the piccies....

It seems theres lots of expert photographers on here so I hope you don't mind me asking:

I am looking at buying a DSLR to replace or complement my old 35mm Minolta Dimax. Anyone know if I can use my lens from the Dimax on a Sony Alpha 350, or even 700 if I save my pennies?

Or would that be a penny-wise, pound-foolish consideration when choosing a DSLR?
 

·
<Witty comment here>
Joined
·
3,961 Posts
What Dynax camera is it that you had? If it uses A-Mount (not MD) lenses then yep they all work on the Sony Alpha series, and really well too.

Personally, I'd wait a short while though because they are going to announce new products (a900, maybe some more consumer ones like an a400) at Photokina later in the year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Thanks for the quick and very helpful reply. I'll have to check which Dynax I have (spot the occasional amateur). Maybe a 4... It's only a few years old, so hopefully I'll be okay.

I'm not sure if I can wait until Autumn though. If I don't strike while the iron's hot I tend not to strike at all.
 

·
do me bad things
Joined
·
7,550 Posts
Keith.

My camera is a Canon PowerShot A530 (look around any tourist spot/gig/festival and you can't miss them!) It got 5MP, 4x optical zoom and 4x digital zoom.

You realise that when you get your image home and zoom in on a small portion of it, you're effectively digital zooming (unless your camera interpolates the pixels, but that's another matter), so digital zoom is not necessary. Now, if you take a 4MP image, and zoom in on the bottom left-hand quarter, you now have a 2x digitally zoomed image, but at only 1MP. So, if zoom is your primary concern, go for a better zoom rather than more megapixels.

That said, most images posted on the forum are less than 1MP anyway (1024 x 758 ~ .75MP) so if you're just wanting to post on the forum, you may as well get a high megapixel camera, knowing you can zoom right in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,630 Posts
Thanks Lewis.

When I said zoom in Photoshop or similar using the higher res of the image, what I actually meant was crop! I don't know why I keep referring to it as zoom in my post.

For example a 10MP image would print out at A4 without any loss of image quality. However if I took a 12MP image and cropped it to the same 10MP physical size so as to print a smaller section of the picture on an A4 sheet I would have essentially "zoomed" the image onto that 10MP section of the 12MP image. I hope that makes sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,630 Posts
But if I do not actually need the full resolution I can lose some size by cropping without losing image quality and therefore achieve what a higher zoom would have?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,630 Posts
Yes. Digital zoom must lose either image size (MP) or quality (ie creating larger pixels).

Optical zoom does neither.
But lets say I am happy to lose MP to achieve a "virtual zoom" without loss of image quality. Is 12.1MP with 3.7x optilc zoom comparable to 10MP with 5x optical?
 

·
Wise fwom your gwave
Joined
·
440 Posts
Dont blame me for starting a new thread blame it on bladerunner and arrpeegee :lol: they suggested it

Also is everyone happy with the spelling of the thread ? TOO MANY CAPS ? not enough ? Is it spelt wreight ? :lol:

Oh and is it spelt cameras or camera's ? lol

I'll start by saying, i've been considering getting a film camera for a while, there's a shop in the city centre here that sells nothing but film camera's they sell 35mm SLR's from the most recent to going back to the 70's and no doubt older than that.

They also sell lots of rangefinder camera's, does anyone have any knowledge or experience of either 35mm or rangefinder camera's ?
What do you want to know? If you are after a 35mm SLR i would heartily recommend on Olympus OM-1. They are completely manual, mechanical cameras and are VERY well made as they were the top of the range in the early 70's. They are significanly smaller than other SLRs of the same period and because they are relatively unknown to people who want anything with Canon or Nikon written on it, they are quite cheap (~£100 for a VERY nice one). The OM-2 is also worth a punt, essentially the same camera but with an electronic shutter and auto exposure modes (i.e. needs batteries!).

If you want a cheapo 35mm SLR, you can't go far wrong with a Zenit E / EM / TTL / 12XP etc. These are very heavy large manual cameras from the former USSR. Massively well built, if a little agricultural compared to the beautiful OM series. These take the M42 Pentax screw mount lenses, which can be had for almost nothing. Pay no more than about £20 for a Zenit.

In terms of 35mm rangfinders, again if you want really cheap, go Russian. The FED 1/2/3/4 are more or less direct copies of the German Leica 1/2/3/4's which are painfully expensive (£500 minimum). Of course, these won't be quite as lovely as a Leica, but are very cheap if you want the Cartier Besson look an the cheap! These FED cameras take the M39 thread mount lenses. As an aside, these FEDs have Lanthanum glass lenses which are slightly radioactive, cool huh? You may see similar rangefinders labelled Kiev or Zorki, these are much the same in terms of quality.

If you want a better rangfinder, you can't go to far wrong hunting down a 1970's Olympus. The 35 SP is the one to have (~£100), this is completely manual, but has lots of automatic features. It is also the only rangefinder ever made that has spot metering as an option. Olympus made plenty of different ones EC/ED/ECR etc. some have manual options, some do not. These don't have interchangable lenses. The Minolta Himatic, Yashica Electro 35 and various Canon Canonets are also worth looking into.

If you want to step into the wonderful world of medium format (120 rollfilm), you have many many options. Lets start with SLRs. Most medium format SLRs have a ground glass viewfinder in the top and are held at waist level, however some are more akin to 35mm SLR systems.

Ground glass SLRs to look at include
-Hasselblad 500c, etc. -- HUGELY expensive (£1000 and beyond)
-Fuji GX680 -- Massive studio only camera, VERY expensive.
-Rollei 6003 / 6008 -- Again, very expensive, also rather unreliable as these are getting quite old now.
-Mamiya RB67 / RZ67. -- RB 67 is the camera i reeaally want! (£300-£1000)
-Kowa Super 6 / Super 66, etc. -- Very hard to find as production discontued over 30 years ago. (£300-£500)
-Bronica SQA / SQAi / SQB -- Good cameras, but i have heard of some reliability and build quality issues. (£200-£700)
-Bronica ETRS / ETRSi -- Takes smaller images that SQ series (4.5cm x 6cm rather than 6cm x 6cm) (£200-£500)
-Mamiya 645 series -- takes smaller images than RZ/RB series (£200-£1000)
-Kiev 88 -- The cheap Soviet option :)

Viewfinder SLRs include:
-Pentax 67
-Pentacon 6
-Kiev 6

These are very unwieldy to hold!

There are also medium format rangefinder but are almost all vastly expensive. Such as the Mamiya 6 and 7.

It is however very easy to get medium format on the cheap. Pre-war folding cameras are generally quite good, watch out for the condition of the bellows though. These can be had for around £10. Zeiss Ikon, Agfa, and Ensign are names to look for.

Yet another, and probably the best, option are TLRs (twin lens reflex). These generally give very good results. The obvious ones here are Rollei's (Rolleicords are cheaper the Rolleiflexes). Any of the Yashicas (135G being the newest) and Minolta Autocords. I would rsommend the Mamiya C series however, i've got a C220 and it's awesome (£150). These are the only TLRs ever made with interchangeble lenses and close focussing bellows, so are probably the pinnacle of TLR design.

If you want to be down with the kids however, get a Holga. Gives very distorted and abstract looking images, kinda cool! Don't get on from Lomography.com though, they overprice everything hugely.

In terms of instant photography, get a Fuji Instax. The film is readily available and is cheaper than Polaroid ever was. Of course, don't get a Polaroid, as they have abandoned their film production so it will only get harder and harder to find.


Oh and DEFINITELY get a negative scanner!!

Please don't ask me about digital cameras, i have no idea!

I hope this has been of some help, if a little long winded...
 

·
Wise fwom your gwave
Joined
·
440 Posts
By the way, as a response to all you digital guys. Scanning a 6cm x 6cm medium format negative on maximum resolution (4800dpi on my scanner) will give you a nominal resolution of 144 megapixels (obviously depending on your choice of filmstock).

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,630 Posts
Ah ha - found the thread.

OK, so following on form the camera chat in the Skybar, can one of you photographers who actually know your stuff (unlike me :)) tell me if there is a way of working out how many times zoom a lens is on a DSLR?

My IXUS 980 IS point-and-shoot has a 3.7x optical zoom (with 4x digital which is rubbish!). According to Canon this is a 33mm equivalent of 36–133mm.

So when I finally get round to buying my DSLR (still thinking EOS 5D at the moment but doing more research) I would need a lens of 36-133mm to get at least the same zoom (3.7x) as my point-and-shoot.

Zoom is one of the things that really bugs me about the point-and-shoot and I would want better zoom than that sometimes.

So following my waffle, is there a quick way of working out roughly how many x zoom a 200mm, 300mm lens is equivalent to, because until I get used to them and my skills/knowledge increases the x rating means more to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,630 Posts
I fact can anyone recommend a good book or website that will help me get to grips with all the manual settings and the ins and outs of lenses etc.?

I have a few books on photography but they mainly focus on technique for specific tasks or composition rather than what the settings are for and how to use them if you know what I mean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,421 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
^^Thats a hard question to answer, at least it is for me. I dont think in terms of 3x or 4x i think 18-70mm or 24-80mm or whatever.

I think the best thing to do is pick up a few DSLRs and get a feel for them and have a look through the lens, as 18-70mm doesnt really mean anything unless you have looked through a lens and seen what the perspective is.

I think the 5D is a pretty amazing camera to have as a 1st camera though lol thats normally the kind of camera people build up to have when they have the money and experience (sorry dont wanna sound patronising when I say that)

Hopefully arrpeegee with be more helpfull he has more experience than me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,421 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
I fact can anyone recommend a good book or website that will help me get to grips with all the manual settings and the ins and outs of lenses etc.?

I have a few books on photography but they mainly focus on technique for specific tasks or composition rather than what the settings are for and how to use them if you know what I mean.
I used to go on this forum, might not be exactly what ya looking for but I learnt loads from here. There's photographers of all levels on there, including a lot of pro's

http://community.dcmag.co.uk/forums/
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top