Thoughts from a dynasaur!

Dave Wilkinson

Dave Wilkinson

Veteran
Local time
3:25 PM
Joined
Feb 24, 2007
Messages
2,292
Just returned from a two week trip to southern Turkey, and after much pondering, took my Fuji S3 dslr, to save the hassle of xray machines, processing, etc. The resulting jpeg's (about 300!) are technically - if not aesthetically! - exellent, but somehow,- ( much to the dismay of my long-suffering spouse!) - fail to exite me a lot, as for most of the trip I wished for my Bessa or Fed outfits, and a few rolls of FP4 !!. Next vacation, to hell with the condascending remarks, and looks from other snappers, and the dynasaur tag!,- it'll be a r/f camera adorning my ancient, suntanned, torso!!. Now to a question,- permanantly residing in the glove box of my car, is a Zarya, with I26m,-& I love this simple camera for 'opportunist'-type shots. The 26m, at times seems a little 'soft', and I'm wondering if I will see any improvement from a I61l/d, that I have just ordered ?,- it's reputedly an improved design ?, I really like the results from a Fed 3.5 Elmar, collapsible, copy, but don't like the hassle of removing the shade and/or filter to adjust the diaphragm!!

Regards, Dynasaur Dave :)
 
You go!
I think I get more stares from other people when I'm walking around with film cameras (Hasselblad, Nikons, RF's) and I can almost hear them saying "I wish I was using something like that".
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
. The 26m, at times seems a little 'soft', and I'm wondering if I will see any improvement from a I61l/d, that I have just ordered ?,- it's reputedly an improved design ?, I really like the results from a Fed 3.5 Elmar, collapsible, copy, but don't like the hassle of removing the shade and/or filter to adjust the diaphragm!!

Regards, Dynasaur Dave :)
Click to expand...

You might see some improvement provided that the body - lens distance doesn't need adjusting. Most of these cameras were manufactured to low tolerances and each body lens combination was adjusted to give correct focus. This makes changing lenses on these cameras something of a hit and miss affair unless you are prepared to go to the trouble of checking and adjusting shims.

Fanshaw
 
I am a bit surprised, since at my trip to Istambul two years ago, i saw tourists the world over, and a good forty percent of them with film cameras. How good I felt !

Although I recognize that being Jerusalem another tourist spot, you may not find a film camera among any group of either USA or Japanese tourists. Lonely tourists of those countries here - another story.

And at this point I must confess, sincerely, that I suffer from the opposite syndrome. I cannot see myself looking at the back display of a digi from half a meter away. I imagine myself ridiculous. But each one is each one, and "al pan pan y al vino vino"
Cheers,
Ruben
 
Ruben,...I agree with you! - but to be fair my S3pro is a very capable SLR, - even so- only the fact that it earns me a little money, occasionaly, saves it from going towards a Ziess Ikon!!

Regards, Dave:)
 
It can be a lonely experience, carrying a film camera. I spent last weekend at the New Orleans Jazz Festival -- tens of thousands of people each day, hundreds of cameras, and I saw, at most, 3 film cameras a day.

Dave,

Give the I61 a shot! They are very sharp and contrasty. One of my favorite lenses.
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
J The 26m, at times seems a little 'soft', and I'm wondering if I will see any improvement from a I61l/d, that I have just ordered ?,- it's reputedly an improved design ?, I really like the results from a Fed 3.5 Elmar, collapsible, copy, but don't like the hassle of removing the shade and/or filter to adjust the diaphragm!!

Regards, Dynasaur Dave :)
Click to expand...
Dave, I recently did some comparative shots from I-26, I-61 (panda) and I-61 L/D. Admittedly I wasn't thorough in adjusting the lenses or body in any way, so they're just 3 random samples on a random body. I really couldn't tell them apart, with any conviction, on a 6x4 print. It may be that greater enlargement would reveal a difference of course. The only thing I think I see is a SLIGHTLY higher contrast on the L/D but I'm not convinced it's real.
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
Now to a question,- permanantly residing in the glove box of my car, is a Zarya, with I26m,-& I love this simple camera for 'opportunist'-type shots. The 26m, at times seems a little 'soft', and I'm wondering if I will see any improvement from a I61l/d, that I have just ordered ?,- it's reputedly an improved design ?, I really like the results from a Fed 3.5 Elmar, collapsible, copy, but don't like the hassle of removing the shade and/or filter to adjust the diaphragm!!

Regards, Dynasaur Dave :)
Click to expand...

Be proud to be a dinasaur Dave they survived on Earth for far longer than humans have ,or will!!
Seriously if you get a good Industar 61 L you wont be disappointed, but I still prefer the Fed 3.5 "Elmar" despite the hassle, mine is superb.!!
I keep a 28mm Orion on my Zarya, its a lovely simple camera!
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
Ruben,...I agree with you! - but to be fair my S3pro is a very capable SLR, - even so- only the fact that it earns me a little money, occasionaly, saves it from going towards a Ziess Ikon!!

Regards, Dave:)
Click to expand...


I don't get why you have to be 'saved' from a Zeiss Ikon, I would be rather saved by it. :)

Cheers,
Ruben

Ps
Lately i see on TV a lot of "National Geographic" type of educational films challenging monogamy as un-natural, or even as against nature. So you could carry in your pocket a Fed with a collapsible, for some underground visits to your beloved one.
 
I've settled for a combination of things. Cheap dP&S (for my wife and kid, and for me when I can't be bothered to bring the rest, which is not very often). R-D1, as digital is for me the most convenient way to post-process. M2, so much covered in gold vinyl that people either dismiss it as too odd or think I'm nuts for using such a bling thing.

The R-D1 shoots colour (though in RAW it doesn't matter much in the end). The M2 is B&W film. The lenses are interchangeable, and I can bring a few as they are small. What else do I want? :)
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
The resulting jpeg's (about 300!) are technically - if not aesthetically! - exellent, but somehow,- ( much to the dismay of my long-suffering spouse!) - fail to exite me a lot, as for most of the trip I wished for my Bessa or Fed outfits, and a few rolls of FP4 !!
Click to expand...

Dave, I totally emphatize with you. I've been wondering now for a while whenever I read comments that said: "The most important thing is the end result/picture quality"

While that concept does ring true to me, somehow I find the ring is rather hollow :)

Yes, I do care a lot about the end result, that's mostly *why* I took the pictures in the first place, but as of late something else has come to my attention: Taking the pictures with the *right* camera and lens also gave me a lot of excitement and satisfaction (especially when I managed to capture a good picture in the end).

Just as you did, I recently was on a trip bringing my OM-1 (sorry, my favorite RF, the Olympus 35 SP was on rehab) and a digital, while I like the results from the digital a lot, I sure as heck like the OM-1 *more* when I actually take the picture.

So, my point is:

For some of us, it's not just the pictures at the end, but also the process of taking the picture plays into why we do the things we do, that is using "archaic" photography tools.

This may be old adage in this forum, but anyways, it's new to me :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom