New here & have a question..

Z

Zakuro

Newbie
Local time
1:03 AM
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
6
Hello everyone,

just found this site, and registered. saying hi first :)

I haven't done much photography for a while, and am getting back to it. Yay!

But, then I am confused... :confused:

I really like a film photography, and like a process in the darkroom... recently just found it out that my favorite darkroom was not in the business.. and realizing that things were now most likely in digital worlds..

I like to stick with a flim photography, but am afraid that it might disappear almost completely and things will be all in digital photo world..

do you have any opinion for this...?

I would like to buy a rangefinger camera... but digital or traditional...?

Thanks!

Zakuro
 
I would say start with a film camera. They are much less expensive to buy, and you already know you like film photography. There will continue to be many sources of film-processing supplies and services... you just may need to look a bit harder.

The people on this forum will be happy to recommend products and services for you. If you specify the part of California in which you live, someone may be able to recommend good sources that are near you.
 
Thanks for quick responses! That's so encouraging..
Yes, I do love a B&W film photography. Not much interest into color...

I will explore this site more! It looks like a great place for photo people!

Zakuro
 
Last edited:
Zak

If you live in big town a poor photo shop may have 2nd hand dev gear real cheap. Real fun in dark. And yes the Ru cameras are real cheap but worse then hard drugs you fed gov should ban...

Noel
 
The quickest way to start would be getting an older rangefinder, like a Yashica GSN or other fixed lens rangefinder, get some Ilford XP2 (can be processed in color labs) and go out shooting! Then you can decide if you want to do your own film developing, get a scanner to put pictures on the web, and eventually set up your own darkroom. Check out Freestyle if you have not already done so, great for general film supplies. Some people do both film and digital, some one or the other. Have fun with it!

Nancy
 
Thanks again! I am actually working in the office (work time, I suppose!), and so will catch you up later tonight!

This site is so addictive... Zakuro :p
 
Hellow Zakuro,
Welcome!

As for your 2 questions I second Nancy's advice very much, and perhaps would add between her lines (is this OK Nancy?) another alternative, which given the conditions may work or not: Process your own film and scan either yourself or at any lab. As you know, processing film doesn't require more than a bathroom in terms of space, and few accesories. Not every one likes processing, and I do not know your taste here.

As for help in start processing, you will find a lot of support here.

But what I liked most in Nancy's approach to you, is that given your doubts, she offers both a quality and cheap start, a cautlious start. Along these lines I insert my own. Then as time and practice unfolds, you will see by yourself where the winds are heading to.

Greetings from Jerusalem,
Ruben
 
Last edited by a moderator:
*waving my hands*

where should I go to look for an old rangefinder..? How expensive would it be? I have never had one actually. All what I have now is a kind of old SLR (Nikon N60) and a compact ditial camera.. I am really a beginner... The reason why I want a rangefinder camera is because my passion goes to capture a moment of life. SLR just makes me feel so much burden to shoot...

I hope I can find a right kind of camera for what I need...

Thanx soooooo much :)
 
Zakuro,

I think a fixed lens rangefinder from the 70's era would be a good place to start. Budget maybe $35 to $100, this should get you a good working model. You may need to get a hand held light meter or use the sunny 16 rule.

This is not an all inclusive list but I would look for a Yashica GSN (GT, GS, GTN these are all variations), Canon QL-17 GIII, Olympus RC, Konica Auto S2, Richoh 500, or a Minolta 7 SII. I am not sure you will find the Minolta for under $100 though.

Here is your reading assignment for the week end:

http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm

I would not play Russian roulette to start with. You may or may not get a good Fed, Zorki, or Kiev as your first camera. I have not had good luck with them. I have actually sent a working Zorki IV by mail to another rff member and when it arrived it was not working:).. They can be fickle little beasts.

Wayne
 
Welcome to RFF Zakuro. Lots of good info here. I'm not going to tell you what to get. My first RF was a Canonet QL17 Glll. Great camera. 40/1.7 fixed lens. But spend some time learning rangefinders. Take Wayne's advice and go to cameraquest. The Voightlanders are excellent choices. Just set your budget on what you want to spend. What is your favorite lens size, 50mm, 35mm, or maybe wider? Don't jump on the first thing that comes along if you can help it.:)


Enjoy

Greg
 
Good advice here.

Read at cameraquest first. Some of the best rangefinders are just as big & clunky as your Nikon. The Leicas that many people here favor are smaller, but just as heavy.

The first place to start is your local pawn shops & thrift shops. Then, garage sales & estate sales. If you want something NOW, and don't mind spending more, look in the Classifieds here. (there's a link at the upper left of this page) As a last resort (if you are REALLY dying to get into this) is ebay. That can be a crapshoot, and when you have a good level of confidence that the camera isn't thrashed, so does every other bidder and you wind up paying too much.

I came from the SLR world too, and I haven't left. They are so good for so many things; actually much more versatile than rangefinders. But there is a certain charm to rangefinders. The ultra-quiet click, the always bright viewfinder. They're great for a certain kind of photography, not great for many others.

How much are you willing to spend? That will dictate which rangefinder you start with.

I have a Yashica GS (Electro 35). Many of us do. It has a great, fast f/1.7 lens, and top quality construction, but no full manual exposure. It is big & heavy, like most cameras were in the 1960s.

Olympus 35 RD is good too. So are the Canonets.

You can get a very nice RF if you will settle for the older ones, from the 60s. They are bigger & not as cool looking, but the quality is there. (Yashica Electro 35s , Konica Auto S2, Older Canonets, etc.)

For a small, manual, mechanical camera with lots of character, nothing beats a Rollei 35. Technically, they're not even rangefinders; they're scale (guess) focus. But those are expensive on ebay, and hard to find elsewhere. Plan on spending over $170 for a decent one.

When checking them out in the pawn/thrift shops, bring a nickel to open the battery cover & check for corrosion. Check that the apertures work, and if it is mechanical, check the shutter speeds too. 1s, you can estimate. 1/2s should be about half as fast as that. Or, bring your Nikon as a benchmark.
 
Welcome!

I would agree that a Canonet QL G-III is a good place to start. You can find them for about $50 on fleabay. You may need to replace the light gasket and swap out an old battery though.

If you like shooting black and white, I recommend sticking with film. There are just so many different looks, in my opinion, from different emulsions that can't be duplicated by digital. I enjoy the best of both worlds though, I shoot black and white film, send out to a professional lab, then scan the negatives and print on an Epson R2400 printer. I am very happy with the results.

I have used www.mylab.com and I have them process the film and provide a contact sheet. They have been wonderful to work with.

Good luck!
 
Dont limet yourself, You have access to some of the best and now inexspensive film cameras ever made, A great place to start again. Digital is just a fact of life now and no matter how film orientated people are you need a basic understanding of digital just to post pictures on the net. The reality is more and more images are being viewed over computers. My prefered method is to capture black and white images on film and then develope it myself for scanning into digital files which I do on a 20,000 Dollar scanner at the Pro Shop an hours drive from my house. They are real cool and understand my situation, I dont even cut the film but present it to them developed and dried ready to scan, I hope to do this for a few more years as I enjoy the film experiance.
 
Wow... I am now loaded with so much information.. :eek:
Let me try to digest all of it... will take a while... because I have away too little knowledge..

Also, English is my second language, and it takes time to read it..
I am Japanese, but just living in the U.S.. trying to stay ;)

I do not mind spending a couple of hundreds dollars for my first rangefinder, although cheaper is better :p I am a bit worried about trying to get an old camera... because I usually get ripped off for everything.. super gullible..

I will do a little bit of research for this weekend. Thank you sooooo much!!!!! You are super helpful people!

Zakuro ( meaning Pomegranate in Japanese *winks* )
 
Last edited:
Bryan Lee said:
They are real cool and understand my situation, I dont even cut the film but present it to them developed and dried ready to scan, I hope to do this for a few more years as I enjoy the film experiance.
Click to expand...
Bryan, if you are developing your own, but having them scanned & printed digitally, you are only enjoying less than half of the (B&W) film experience. Printing your own is the real joy. Find a used enlarger and set up a darkroom. You can still scan the negs later, but you'll find that you get more enjoyment out of making your own prints. (optically) There is nothing like it, and it is the reason that many of us are sticking with B&W film.
 
Zakuro said:
Also, English is my second language, and it takes time to read it..
I am Japanese, but just living in the U.S.. trying to stay ;)
Click to expand...
It is a challenge. My wife is Polish, and they make it quite expensive. For an honest spouse, it is not that difficult, just expensive.

Zakuro said:
I do not mind spending a couple of hundreds dollars for my first rangefinder, although cheaper is better :p I am a bit worried about trying to get an old camera... because I usually get ripped off for everything.. super gullible..
Click to expand...
You don't have to spend that much if you're patient and thorough in your camera inspection. Do you know the best way to get a working rangefinder? Find a good one for cheap locally that appears to work, but plan on spending another $100-130 for a CLA from a competent camera repair shop. Most of those rangefinders we are recommending use obsolete mercury batteries, so when you send it in for the CLA (Clean, Lubricate, Adjust) have them adjust the light meter to function properly from 1.5 V (alkaline) or 1.55 V (silver-oxide) batteries.
 
you can buy a much better film camera than a digital camera for the same money. You can buy film to match the situation, increasing image quality for the price of a roll instead of the price of a new body. Film technology is much more mature, meaning the films, lenses, and bodies of 50 years ago are capable of producing beter results than the newest digital systems. All the money you would normally spend on a digital body can go towards film and processing, and you would have no reason to upgrade your body every few years.

Film isn't about to disappear, given the number of users world-wide. It can seem by reading magazines and exploring sites like Flickr that film is already dead, but that is misleading. Popular Photography makes money off advertisers, not off hobbyists, so naturally they fill their rag with digital models and hype. There is a lot of money to be made for companies like Canon and Nikon by encouraging people to constantly buy new cameras. There was probably never all that much money to be made trying to sell everyone a new film camera every three years.

Every place that does 1 hour processing can also give you scans of your film for a few bucks. Using film isn't an either-or proposition anymore. You can have your prints, negatives, and share your images over the internet with ease.
 
Jeremy Z said:
Bryan, if you are developing your own, but having them scanned & printed digitally, you are only enjoying less than half of the (B&W) film experience. Printing your own is the real joy. Find a used enlarger and set up a darkroom. You can still scan the negs later, but you'll find that you get more enjoyment out of making your own prints. (optically) There is nothing like it, and it is the reason that many of us are sticking with B&W film.
Click to expand...
I totally agree.. I never knew the joy until I took an introduction to B&W photography class a couple of years ago.. I didn't learn how to develop a flim, but how to print it by myself in a darkroom. And, I LOOOOOOOVE B&W... Color photography never hit me like B&W one does.. don't know why.. and going to a darkroom to print is an addiction.. Fee like an artist!

40oz -- Thank you so much for telling me that film isn't disappearing :) I am not against a digital photography, because it has opened up different perspective to a photo world. But, I just like film at this moment better than digital, although I am going to explore a digital photo as well.. I am a very open minded person.. I hope :p

Zakuro :angel:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom