dmr
Registered Abuser
For those who have been following the neverending story of the new life of the QL17 GIII (and for those who haven't) 
I had a free evening in Las Vegas last week and I took the opportunity to play with it a bit. A few of the photos are in the gallery, and the lead-off one is:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/10132/sort/1/cat/500/page/1
Overall, I was very pleased by the way these came out. These were some of my first rangefinder photos in over 30 years.
A few comments and observations here ...
Overall, I love the QL17 GIII! The only thing I don't like is the lack of the ability to do a match-needle exposure, where it's easy to treak an intentional under or overexposure.
I do like the semi-wide angle 40mm lens. I always thought the 50/55mm prime lens was just a bit constraining. This seems to be a great happy medium between a 50mm and a 35mm wide angle.
In some cases I found myself forgetting to focus. I'm too used to the Olympus point and shoot and the autofocus.
For some reason, I don't seem to notice reflections (glass, windows, etc.) in the viewfinder as much as I do in the developed film. In a couple cases it was so distracting that I *KNOW* I would have changed my position if I had noticed it.
I have *NO CLUE* as to how accurate the meter is. I take half of that back, I have half a clue that it's somewhere in the ballpark, since my first test roll and the 2 real rolls did seem to have normal density. I do know that it has the wrong battery of an unknown age. I should probably check it against a known good meter or camera.
I used the technique I often do on the Olympus when doing signs and things of metering on a brighter part of the scene and hoding it and then composing. Yes, some of the highlights are washed out, like they often are in night shots, but they're not totally blown out like on a digital.
On my test roll I may have been a bit overconfident (or excited) as to how steady I could hold it for slow speeds, as some of my available light shots had unacceptable shake.
But overall, I like the way it handles and the way it performs.
I had a free evening in Las Vegas last week and I took the opportunity to play with it a bit. A few of the photos are in the gallery, and the lead-off one is:http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/10132/sort/1/cat/500/page/1
Overall, I was very pleased by the way these came out. These were some of my first rangefinder photos in over 30 years.
A few comments and observations here ...
Overall, I love the QL17 GIII! The only thing I don't like is the lack of the ability to do a match-needle exposure, where it's easy to treak an intentional under or overexposure.
I do like the semi-wide angle 40mm lens. I always thought the 50/55mm prime lens was just a bit constraining. This seems to be a great happy medium between a 50mm and a 35mm wide angle.
In some cases I found myself forgetting to focus. I'm too used to the Olympus point and shoot and the autofocus.
For some reason, I don't seem to notice reflections (glass, windows, etc.) in the viewfinder as much as I do in the developed film. In a couple cases it was so distracting that I *KNOW* I would have changed my position if I had noticed it.
I have *NO CLUE* as to how accurate the meter is. I take half of that back,
I have half a clue that it's somewhere in the ballpark, since my first test roll and the 2 real rolls did seem to have normal density. I do know that it has the wrong battery of an unknown age. I should probably check it against a known good meter or camera.I used the technique I often do on the Olympus when doing signs and things of metering on a brighter part of the scene and hoding it and then composing. Yes, some of the highlights are washed out, like they often are in night shots, but they're not totally blown out like on a digital.
On my test roll I may have been a bit overconfident (or excited) as to how steady I could hold it for slow speeds, as some of my available light shots had unacceptable shake.
But overall, I like the way it handles and the way it performs.
dmr
Registered Abuser
Hmmmm ... new spinoff of Sunny 16, huh? Didn't think of that. Thanks
Didn't think of that. Thanks zuikologist
.........................
I like the Las Vegas shots. They have an old style look (not sure if it is the camera, film or scanning), very inviting, almost like an old holiday brochure.