RdEoSg
Well-known
Anytime the words "want" and/or "need" are mentioned, you know you are in trouble.... 😀
A Public Confession
- Thread starter Bike Tourist
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 28
- Views 2K
icemendicant
Established
Hi Dick, welcome to the dark side...
I know what you mean - just last year I was happily using the Canon DSLR system I had spent a few years building up. I bought and sold on eBay, saved any surplus money, sent the children up chimneys, anything to afford a 1Ds MkII and a few L lenses.
Then, a year ago, I just happened across a Leica M6 on eBay. What the hell, I thought, lots of people bang on about these cameras, let's see what it's all about...
Anyway - I still have that M6. And an M7, MP, M3, IIIg and various M lenses, having sold the 1Ds Mk II and lenses to fund it. That's what I call being mugged by Leica!! ;-)
And now they release the M8. Come on kids, and don't drop those brooms...
Cheers,
Dan
I know what you mean - just last year I was happily using the Canon DSLR system I had spent a few years building up. I bought and sold on eBay, saved any surplus money, sent the children up chimneys, anything to afford a 1Ds MkII and a few L lenses.
Then, a year ago, I just happened across a Leica M6 on eBay. What the hell, I thought, lots of people bang on about these cameras, let's see what it's all about...
Anyway - I still have that M6. And an M7, MP, M3, IIIg and various M lenses, having sold the 1Ds Mk II and lenses to fund it. That's what I call being mugged by Leica!! ;-)
And now they release the M8. Come on kids, and don't drop those brooms...
Cheers,
Dan
RdEoSg
Well-known
Damn man!!! You need help! Definate addiction trouble there.. 😛
Oh Two
Established
It's odd how that goes. I'm considering selling off some of my Canon digital gear to buy another Leica body. I'm tired of lugging all the big camera stuff around. I think I would be happier lugging two smaller ones. I'm back to using the Leica over the Canon 2 to 1. What's wrong with this picture?
icemendicant
Established
Oh Two, I think it all depends on what you shoot. I'm very much a hobbyist but love to use beautiful machines. I found my digital gear was great for landscapes but I used the Leicas and B&W film for family shots and for having a camera small enough to keep with me all the time.
After a while, much as I loved the idea of doing lots of landscape photography, I realised that right now, with a busy job and three young children, I'm never going to get the time to do it. So I figured, spend the money on the kind of photography I can do for now. Who knows what will be happening in a few years' time? At least my RF gear is never going to go out of date 🙂
Cheers,
Dan
After a while, much as I loved the idea of doing lots of landscape photography, I realised that right now, with a busy job and three young children, I'm never going to get the time to do it. So I figured, spend the money on the kind of photography I can do for now. Who knows what will be happening in a few years' time? At least my RF gear is never going to go out of date 🙂
Cheers,
Dan
n8b
Member
Gas?
Gas?
I'm new and for weeks I've been trying to figure out what GAS means. Please tell me!
Thanks!😀
Gas?
I'm new and for weeks I've been trying to figure out what GAS means. Please tell me!
Thanks!😀
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
The consumers in here use GAS to mean gear aquisition syndrome.
n8b
Member
Thanks! I have a bit of GAS myself then!
Oh Two
Established
Dan:
Please check out my gallery. I just posted some Grand Canyon shots I made with the Leica. I made similar shots with the Canon digital for a side by side comparisons that I'll be posting on my web page in the near future as part of my digital vs film blog.
Right now you'll have to take my word for it, but for landscape I think color tranparencies still look better than digital. Color negative films usually come in a grainy second but they are far more forgiving than both. Digital colors are wildly intense (but can be tamed in the computer), skies tend to uniform in color, and clouds have no detail.
After years of dark room work and from the passing of my father (the photo lab center for our entire family) I haven't shot any black and white. For his 78th birthday my brothers and I bought him a Mac, a good scanner, and a printer. That was the end of his dark room days and he never looked back after having a dark room in the family home from 1939.
To be fair, 35 mm film and the equivalent in digital are only marginal for landscape. I would hold 6 X 6 in film to be the minimum for good quality.
I think the cheapest and best route for landscape is a 4 X 5 folding press camera which can be had for cheap, and a used Epson 2450 or better flatbead scanner. Pull date film is only 50 cents US (or less) a sheet and processing slightly less than that each.
I own a Zone VI 4 X 5 with an Ektar lens when travelling light, and with ready loads it takes up about the same amount of space and weight as the Canon and two lenses. To be sure I rarely carry a tripod with the Canon but in the day neither did the working press camera photographer.
Please check out my gallery. I just posted some Grand Canyon shots I made with the Leica. I made similar shots with the Canon digital for a side by side comparisons that I'll be posting on my web page in the near future as part of my digital vs film blog.
Right now you'll have to take my word for it, but for landscape I think color tranparencies still look better than digital. Color negative films usually come in a grainy second but they are far more forgiving than both. Digital colors are wildly intense (but can be tamed in the computer), skies tend to uniform in color, and clouds have no detail.
After years of dark room work and from the passing of my father (the photo lab center for our entire family) I haven't shot any black and white. For his 78th birthday my brothers and I bought him a Mac, a good scanner, and a printer. That was the end of his dark room days and he never looked back after having a dark room in the family home from 1939.
To be fair, 35 mm film and the equivalent in digital are only marginal for landscape. I would hold 6 X 6 in film to be the minimum for good quality.
I think the cheapest and best route for landscape is a 4 X 5 folding press camera which can be had for cheap, and a used Epson 2450 or better flatbead scanner. Pull date film is only 50 cents US (or less) a sheet and processing slightly less than that each.
I own a Zone VI 4 X 5 with an Ektar lens when travelling light, and with ready loads it takes up about the same amount of space and weight as the Canon and two lenses. To be sure I rarely carry a tripod with the Canon but in the day neither did the working press camera photographer.
