hoot
green behind the ears
Is it possible to have the XA's ASA setting dial reprogrammed? I use the XA a lot indoors and in the evening, and at its maximum setting of 800 ASA I usually find myself shooting wide open and still getting exposure times that are much too long to handhold. It would be very practical to have everything bumped by one stop, so that the XA's top setting is 1600 rather than 800.
Does anyone know whether this is possible? And if not, let's hear it from the XA users on how you face this problem, or which camera do you use instead of the XA in low light conditions.
Does anyone know whether this is possible? And if not, let's hear it from the XA users on how you face this problem, or which camera do you use instead of the XA in low light conditions.
furcafe
Veteran
Since the XA is aperture priority automated & the shutter is electronically controlled, the best solution to your problem would be to take it to an Olympus tech to get the meter re-calibrated, but that would probably be too expensive (@ least equal to the value of the camera). The XA has an exposure compensation setting to force to over expose by 1.5 stops, but that doesn't help you. If you like to tinker, I recall that the meter on the XA is not TTL, but on the outside of the lens & that the aperture changes for the meter by increasing & decreasing a mask that 's on top of the meter opening; thus, if you took the camera apart, you might be able to change the size of the mask.
I personally don't use the XA in true low-light conditions, as the RF patch is difficult to see anyway. If I do find myself in low-light conditions w/the XA, I just deal w/the slow shutter speeds as best as I can (the XA is very easy to hold steady, IMHO), e.g., this shot was probably something like 1/2 sec.:
http://photos1.flickr.com/1275687_392b37db27_o.jpg
I personally don't use the XA in true low-light conditions, as the RF patch is difficult to see anyway. If I do find myself in low-light conditions w/the XA, I just deal w/the slow shutter speeds as best as I can (the XA is very easy to hold steady, IMHO), e.g., this shot was probably something like 1/2 sec.:
http://photos1.flickr.com/1275687_392b37db27_o.jpg
hoot said:
bmattock
Veteran
Hi, hoot! I suspect that furcafe's answer is the correct one. I would add my suggestion that I would probably not want to use a camera with a speed (or aperture) adjustment that I had no control over in a low-light environment. With a camera that allows you full control over shutter speed and aperture, you have a couple of distinct advantages in low light situations:
1) Use faster film (as you suggested). ASA dials don't matter when you can use your own external light meter and set whatever speeds / apertures you want.
2) Underexpose, but push the film (overprocess).
3) Use a tripod with a remote shutter release. Well, this is specific only to the XA - since it has no remote shutter release provision. But that's another way to overcome available light required slow shutter speeds.
I love the XA, don't get me wrong! But it may be the inappropriate tool for this particular situation.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
1) Use faster film (as you suggested). ASA dials don't matter when you can use your own external light meter and set whatever speeds / apertures you want.
2) Underexpose, but push the film (overprocess).
3) Use a tripod with a remote shutter release. Well, this is specific only to the XA - since it has no remote shutter release provision. But that's another way to overcome available light required slow shutter speeds.
I love the XA, don't get me wrong! But it may be the inappropriate tool for this particular situation.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
hoot
green behind the ears
Thanks, guys. I agree with both of you. The thing is, when I'm shooting in low-light conditions, it's usually a subway or a bar, and in both of these cases I want to be as discreet and unobtrusive as possible. Roman loaned me his Bessa R for a week, and I ran a roll of TMax 3200 through it. The problem is that the Bessa R is too big and too loud, and the red lamp that lights up in the viewfinder can be seen on the front of the camera. All of these things have discouraged me from buying this camera. What do (or would) you guys use?
bmattock
Veteran
Olympus RC would be a good (inexpensive) choice. Ricoh GR1 and the models that followed it would be a good (expensive) choice. Then in between those, there are cameras like the Rollei 35S and so on. In fact, this link is a good resource:
http://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm
My favorite would be the Oly RC, though. Very small, very quiet, not expensive, and you can shoot it manually.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
http://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm
My favorite would be the Oly RC, though. Very small, very quiet, not expensive, and you can shoot it manually.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
furcafe
Veteran
Assuming you can't or don't want to spend the cash on a system RF like Leica, Contax RF, Canon & Nikon RF, all of which are @ least a little quieter than the Bessa, your best bet would probably be 1 of the '60s-70s fixed lens RFs like a Canonet, Yashica Electro, etc. A modern fixed-lens RF alternative would be a Hexar AF, but that's not cheap (cheaper than Leica, though) & has autofocus, which may not be your cup of tea.
hoot said:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
bmattock said:
The problem with the RC for low light (as much as I love it!) is that the maximum shutter speed is 1/15, I think. Combined with a maximum aperture of f2.8, it is actually not as capable as the XA. Also, the RC has a 42mm lens, and I think the 35mm on the XA is better for many interior and street-shooting situations.
A better low-light camera would be the Olympus 35-SP (and its variations), but it is not as small and unobtrusive as an RC, much less an XA. The shutter is louder, though I don't find it objectionable. A black body (if you can find one), might be preferable for stealth.
I would really, really like an all-manual XA, as the combination of its size, handling and the electronic shutter make it a great stealth camera.
I would guess that John Hermanson at Camtech (Zuiko.com) could comment on whether or not an XA could be recalibrated. A CLA for an XA is $79. If the ASA can be adjusted, I would bet John could do it as part of the CLA.
Trius
wilt
Well-known
Minox 35 GT-E: small, discreet, very quiet, sharp lens with nice tonality. Long shutter speeds and a max ASA setting of 1600. Downside: 2.8 speed (same as your XA, but worse than many of the fixed-lens rangefinders).
bmattock
Veteran
Trius said:
I see your point, and I'm not married to the RC idea - but 1/15 should be plenty fast enough, given 1600 ISO or faster film, yes? Again, since you can set aperture and shutter speed manually, you can use any film speed you wish. Besides, hand-holding at less than 1/15, while do-able, can be iffy. I know lots of people can do it - so have I - but not really preferable, I'd say. The SP is a very capable camera, but as you say, larger - and much more expensive, especially given the black one you refer to. RC maybe what $20? SP black - upwards of $150. For just a bit more than that, you could go with that sweet little Ricoh with AF. You know the one, right? Can't think of the model number now. Nearly bought one a few years ago - prolly should have.
But if you're gonna go with the SP, then the RD would be good choice too. In fact, I prefer it over the SP. Just my choices, though!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Bill: I wouldn't expect to get an RC for $20 unless it needed a CLA, new felt, etc. But if one can, it's a bargain. I'm not sure the ASA goes up to 1600 on an RC, and I'm too damn lazy to go upstairs and check! ;-)
I've seen sharp shots from an XA at 1/4sec.
The RD would be a good choice, but I didn't mention it because I don't have one, haven't used one, so really didn't want to comment. An RD from that auction site nearly ALWAYS requires a CLA, as they are prone to oily shutter blades, and the prices are more than an SP. I'd say $150 for an SP is a bit high. With patience you can get a good one for $100 or a bit less.
Wilt: I've always wanted to try a Minox, and that one sounds like a goo candidate. Is there any manual override or exposure compensation?
Trius
I've seen sharp shots from an XA at 1/4sec.
The RD would be a good choice, but I didn't mention it because I don't have one, haven't used one, so really didn't want to comment. An RD from that auction site nearly ALWAYS requires a CLA, as they are prone to oily shutter blades, and the prices are more than an SP. I'd say $150 for an SP is a bit high. With patience you can get a good one for $100 or a bit less.
Wilt: I've always wanted to try a Minox, and that one sounds like a goo candidate. Is there any manual override or exposure compensation?
Trius
bmattock
Veteran
Trius:
Reference your statements...
1) I've got two RC's - think I paid $20 apiece for them, but perhaps not. Memory, you know.
2) No, the meter doesn't go to 1600 - but manual speed/aperture, remember? Doesn't matter. Well, unless you're hung up on using internal meter - myself, I don't trust 40 year old internal meters much. Use an external most of the time. Small ones available.
3) Sharp shots from an XA at 1/4? Since you can't set the shutter speed, uh...how do you know? Sound?
4) RD - you're right, mine got a good CLA to free up the blades and fix the wrecked aperture blades. Cost was $135, worth it.
5) $100 for a BLACK SP? Haven't seen to many of those. But it could happen.
6) Minox - yes, I'd love to try one myself someday.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Reference your statements...
1) I've got two RC's - think I paid $20 apiece for them, but perhaps not. Memory, you know.
2) No, the meter doesn't go to 1600 - but manual speed/aperture, remember? Doesn't matter. Well, unless you're hung up on using internal meter - myself, I don't trust 40 year old internal meters much. Use an external most of the time. Small ones available.
3) Sharp shots from an XA at 1/4? Since you can't set the shutter speed, uh...how do you know? Sound?
4) RD - you're right, mine got a good CLA to free up the blades and fix the wrecked aperture blades. Cost was $135, worth it.
5) $100 for a BLACK SP? Haven't seen to many of those. But it could happen.
6) Minox - yes, I'd love to try one myself someday.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
DougK
This space left blank
I have a Minox 35GL and there is an exposure compensation switch next to the hot shoe. It's scale-focusing and aperture-priority only though with a max aperture of f/2.8, same as the XA, which might or might not meet your needs.
I've never really gotten comfortable with the Minox so that probably colors my opinion to some extent. The Minox is fun to shoot with and very pocketable but somehow the XA just feels easier to shoot with and seems less fiddly overall. The XA can be tricky focusing in low light conditions but I've not run into any major issues holding it still. I usually just carry a flexipod in my other pocket and use as directed. I haven't used or needed to use the flash as yet and I mostly only shoot 100 and 200 speed slide film, if that tells you anything.
I've never really gotten comfortable with the Minox so that probably colors my opinion to some extent. The Minox is fun to shoot with and very pocketable but somehow the XA just feels easier to shoot with and seems less fiddly overall. The XA can be tricky focusing in low light conditions but I've not run into any major issues holding it still. I usually just carry a flexipod in my other pocket and use as directed. I haven't used or needed to use the flash as yet and I mostly only shoot 100 and 200 speed slide film, if that tells you anything.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Bill: I don't doubt you can find RCs for $20, and maybe even a "clean" one, but it likely wouldn't be on that horrible, awful auction site... ;-)
Yes, I was thinking of the internal metering, and assuming that a CLA, if needed, would get it working proper.
I know you can shoot manually (with or without handheld meter), and everyone states that manual mode on an RC is "unmetered". But what I have found on the RC (undocumented in the instruction manual), is that depressing the shutter half-way in manual mode results in a meter reading in the viewfinder. I have not tested conclusively for meter accuracy, but it looked good to me.
Can't see the shutter speed in an XA? Does my memory fail me? Or my eyes?
You certainly aren't likely to find a black SP on ePay, but if you can find a $20 RC at something like a thrift shop, then .... If I found a non-functional but reparable Black SP, I'd snap it up. I would pay up to $50 (hopefully a lot less), and pay the $80 or so for the CLA. OT: I do need to retrain myself to work with EVs so I can use the SP more efficiently in manual mode.
Trius
Yes, I was thinking of the internal metering, and assuming that a CLA, if needed, would get it working proper.
I know you can shoot manually (with or without handheld meter), and everyone states that manual mode on an RC is "unmetered". But what I have found on the RC (undocumented in the instruction manual), is that depressing the shutter half-way in manual mode results in a meter reading in the viewfinder. I have not tested conclusively for meter accuracy, but it looked good to me.
Can't see the shutter speed in an XA? Does my memory fail me? Or my eyes?
You certainly aren't likely to find a black SP on ePay, but if you can find a $20 RC at something like a thrift shop, then .... If I found a non-functional but reparable Black SP, I'd snap it up. I would pay up to $50 (hopefully a lot less), and pay the $80 or so for the CLA. OT: I do need to retrain myself to work with EVs so I can use the SP more efficiently in manual mode.
Trius
bmattock said:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
dkirchge said:
I had that suspicion about the Minox. It just doesn't look like as comfortable/efficient a shooter as an XA. But I have heard that at least one model has a better lens than the XA. Can't remember the exact details, but maybe slightly better distortion characteristics?
Trius
bmattock
Veteran
Trius said:
I believe that is where I got mine (grin).
Mine both appear to meter correctly. Their foam is horrible - but I haven't detected light leaks causing problems, so I've left it be. Again, I seldom refer to or depend on the internal metering, but they look about right.
I'll have to try that!
No, you're quite right. I wear eyeglasses and can't really see the speed reading in an XA, but it is there, over to the left. On mine, the speed setting is not actually the speed it is taking, though (as guessed by correct exposure when my external meter says radically otherwise). I guess I just stopped looking at it. My bad!
I found my black SP on eBay, and paid quite a bit for it in good shape. Sold it to another RFF'er. I *did* like it - but I liked my RD better, and the spotmetering doesn't really do anything for me - since again, I don't depend on meters in vintage cameras unless I have to. Some say the SP has a better lens - I didn't really see any difference in my examples.
In terms of size, it is the XA as tiny champion, then the RC, the RD, and finally the SP. As it relates to the original thread - there are really lots of smaller cameras that still offer manual control. There is no doubt that the SP is a fine camera, however. There are always tradeoffs - but I'd still grab one of my RC's for stuffing in a pocket and hanging out at a bar for some available-light low-impact shots.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
dnk512
Well-known
I had an XA but I do not recall if by pressing and holding the shutter half way down holds on to the exposure reading (so you can re-compose your frame). If you can do so, read the exposure on the palm of your hand (for 1 stop underexposure) -or- carry a white page of paper and read it (for 2 stops underexposure). Lock your exposure on your palm or the paper, reframe on your subject and take the picture!
bmattock
Veteran
dnk512 said:
The XA has an exposure compensation switch on the bottom of the camera - something like 1 1/2 stops, as I recall. You can't press half-way; on this model, there is no half-way. Little red momentary-contact electrical switch covered by thin red plastic. Unfortunately, no exposure-locking capability.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
aizan
Veteran
The rf patches on the XA and RC aren't so great in low light. Not sure about the RD, SP, or Minox. If you can swing it, a scale focus Rollei 35S has manual controls, ISO range of 25-1600, quieter shutter and film advance, and the sharpest lens.
DougK
This space left blank
I think they both have very good lenses but I haven't got any shots from my Minox handy to do a side-by-side comparison with the XA.Trius said:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Bill:
$20 on ePay for RCs? You dawg you!
You are quite right about the size... the SP is not a compact, shirt-stuffing, stealth machine. Me, I LOVE the spot meter on it, and have found the metering to be quite accurate on the first of my SPs. The other one I do not know yet.
dnk: As Bill said, half-way is not a possibility on the XA. It is a bit of a hair-trigger release.
aizan: I agree that the XA patch isn't that great in low light, especially if the camera has not been treated to a CLA. The RC is a bit better, in my experience. The SP is better yet.
I've thought of the Rollei as another solution, but the ergonomics might be hard to get used to. Other than that, I'd love to have one, but the CDFO would frown on it. ;-)
Trius
$20 on ePay for RCs? You dawg you!
You are quite right about the size... the SP is not a compact, shirt-stuffing, stealth machine. Me, I LOVE the spot meter on it, and have found the metering to be quite accurate on the first of my SPs. The other one I do not know yet.
dnk: As Bill said, half-way is not a possibility on the XA. It is a bit of a hair-trigger release.
aizan: I agree that the XA patch isn't that great in low light, especially if the camera has not been treated to a CLA. The RC is a bit better, in my experience. The SP is better yet.
I've thought of the Rollei as another solution, but the ergonomics might be hard to get used to. Other than that, I'd love to have one, but the CDFO would frown on it. ;-)
Trius