The camera thread.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/09/24/070924fa_fact_lane?printable=true

This piece makes it almost seem worthwhile to dev and scan the negs. And M-series bodies seem much cheaper than they did pre-digital. But I still doubt the existence of the "Leica glow", except in the eyes of people justifying a £2500 lens.

I'm going to be naughty and print that NY article for consumption on the train home.

In Lens News, I now have a Hanimex 28mm f/2.8 (£12 on eBay) which...isn't going to do my kit lens out of a job any time soon and a 80-200mm f/3.5 zoom/macro beast by the same manufacturer which the vendor bunged in for a fiver when I turned up to collect the 28mm. The latter seems a bit better value. Perhaps I'll get more out of the 28mm on a film body with a nice, big, bright viewfinder. Came with a couple of 52mm-dia filters, which is nice.

I'm wondering whether the search for a cheap, manual, wide-angle lens that does what the kit lens does but, like, better, is kinda pointless. The Zeiss Flektogons are too expensive, the sub-£20 stuff seems fairly hopeless. Thinking about Tamron Adaptall gear next (28mm f/2.5 has a good rep), but that's another adaptor...

Oh, and then there's the tantalising world of IR photography. Get a Hoya filter from the Far East for coppers + big P&P or a Kood filter from the UK for £12 + small P&P?

I used to spend ages fiddling trying to get the right exposure on IR, until I worked out you can just show the red channel in photoshop and convert to gray to get much the same effect.

80-200mm f/3.5 zoom/macro beast
For a fiver! Nice one. Is it any good?

I've yet to really test it out (that moon pic on Flickr was taken with it, some flower shots in Golden Square the other day, that's about it). I don't think it's as good as the Zeiss but the 1:4 Macro might come in useful. Very heavy and long - not likely to be taken out and about much. There are hilarious manhood compensation jokes to be made when I attach it PLUS the extension tubes to the 300D. I don't know if anything of worth came out of that particular session of mucking about...

That Lane piece is eh... he's a little too into the fashion aspect. The whining about viewfinder blackout is a bit dodgy as well - it's a few tenths or hundredths of a second, can you even register small details you might be missing?

I have a Leica, purchased with gambling winnings when I was younger and stupider, and it is a wonderful thing (though the ergonomics, frankly, suck - there's a reason every modern SLR has a big grip for your hand) and if I had a darkroom I would shoot nothing but Tri-X until it was just me, Keith Richards and the cockroaches left.

But I don't. And I hate scanning film, even if I had a scanner that could do the Summilux justice.

So I'm selling it, I think. I will probably regret it someday, but for the ~$4000 I stand to take in (a couple hundred more than I spent, actually), I can buy either a 40D or 5D dSLR and actually get to shoot as much as I'd like.

That's the thing, really. I mean the trade-off is immense. I had a whole darkroom at my disposal, with a minilab to dev the film, free film and a top-end scanner and I still couldn't be arsed and got dust all over the negs.

It's only when I look back at scans from the color negs I realise just how wildly much more dynamic range C41 has compared to digital, which is a pisser.

Most fun I ever had was making darkroom c-prints from 4x5 negs.

For all digital's compromises, it is at least painless. Scanning film is torture.

At my first newspaper job, the scanner would choke on neg strips any more than 5 long, so we first had to cut the rolls by hand, then manually align each frame on screen, adjust the wildly crazy colour settings by eye, then scan it (which took about 10 minutes). It nearly drove me insane.

The whining about viewfinder blackout is a bit dodgy as well - it's a few tenths or hundredths of a second, can you even register small details you might be missing?

It kinda matters.... Kinda. It really comes down to how you shoot and what you're trying to do -- if you're stalking a group of six people, you want to be able to see when all their eyes are opened.

I seem to have a skill for getting eyes shut. I've taken self portraits where it turns out my own eyes are shut, ffs.

Thinking about getting back into film (Pentax body for me M42 lenses or Canon EOS body for me, er, single EF lens [EF-S kit lens not backwards compatible] - not sure yet; or maybe just *find* Pam's FtB, buy a cheapish Canon FD zoom and away we go...).

Now, Photo CDs from 35mm film processing as offered by yr high street photo labs - any experiences? I believe Boots only offer 800x600 images (which isn't even the right aspect ratio for 35mm negs) AND you have to pay £2 per film (despite the fact that, at that resolution, you could pack loads of films on a single CD). Does anyone provide high-res TIFFs for this service? And any comments on quality of the scans? Better one would hope, than taking yr negs/prints home and doing it yourself on a general-purpose A4 scanner.

Oh, and another question - didn't Boots offer those Ilford film mailers at one time (about £7 for a pack of ISO400 B&W plus processing by Ilford)? I assume they're still available somewhere?

I know, working in Soho, that there are probably tons of very good pro labs around but I'm curious about the best of the cheap alternatives.

I bought a digital camera recently.

Canon 40D + the 17-55/2.8 IS zoom
vs.
Canon 5D + my trusty old 50/1.4

thoughts?

5D's full-frame and the 40D isn't so yr old 50mm would be an 80mm (in terms of FoV) on the 40D. Doubt the 17-55 is as good at the long end as yr old, fast prime and you'd miss that. Dunno though... Need to catch a train, I'll have to think about it...

I see yr dilemma - the 5D is the better camera, no doubt, but will it leave you any cash add to your 50mm prime? And 5D and L-series glass go so well together...

The 17-55/2.8 IS looks nice but I wonder about the resale value of these EF-S lenses. They can't be used on old EOS film bodies (or the 5D/1D/1Ds) and, who knows, five years from now maybe the cost of making 36x24mm CMOS sensors will have fallen sufficiently that full-frame D-SLRs become the norm rather than the exotic high-end. Where does that leave all the APS-C-optimised gear? Of course, if this is the last upgrade you ever make, you won't care cos you'll have taken thousands of pictures with yr 40D/17-55. (Do short zooms really need IS, though?)

Maybe someone who has actually handled these cameras (I fumbled around with a 30D once) can offer some insight.

I've got a 20D, but used a 5D for about a month once, and it's a fantastic camera.

The 40D kit seems a bit dead-end to me: the lens is only going to work on the APS bodies, so in future when you eventually get rid of the camera you're back at zero, unless you go with another cropped sensor. But when the 5D goes, your lens(es) will be good to move on with you.

Milo - you mentioned having a Leica upthread (which I guess you're selling to fund the Canon D-SLR); the 50/1.4 you spoke of isn't the Summilux, is it? I assumed it was a Canon EF lens; if it's the Leica it changes things a bit!

The 5D is a beast. Ask yourself if you really need (or REALLY REALLY REALLY want) that much camera.

If it's the Leica lens, what about the digital Leica body?

They've just whacked up the price of the M8 by a few hundred quid, haven't they? Much more expensive than a 5D anyway. (Unless you meant the Leica SLR - R9 or something - which needs a digital back). It's been beset by problems, the M8; weird colour casts caused by omitted the IR filter in the body (Leica had to supply screw-on filters to customers, which sort defeats the point of having a Summilux or Elmarit on there). Great for B&W, I understand.

The 50/1.4 is an EF lens, the Leica is a 35/1.4.

While I would possibly hire out as a hitman for an M8, I couldn't justify $5000 no matter what. $2500 is really only justifiable since I'm selling a bunch of stuff.

stet's thinking is basically where I am with the 5D/40D - the 17-55 is really the only reason I'm considering it, I like using that lens better than any Canon I've gotten to try. A full-frame equivalent w/ the IS system would be hott.

They've increased the price of the Leica? O wow. I suppose there's always the Epson R-d1s, but I don't know if that's even still on sale. Or any cop. I might just go and read a review.

Also keep in mind that Nikon just released a FF DSLR (those douchebags arriving 2 years too late)

Clearing out the smallest bedroom and the shed over the weekend and we rediscovered a wonderful cache of old cameras (as well as a box of negatives from Pam's 1989 European vacation!) that have been boxed up for 2 years:

Pentax K1000 w/Pentax SMC 55mm f/2
(late '70s; if memory serves the battery compartment needs resoldering)
Canon FTb w/Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 SSC + Vivitar 70-150mm f/3.8
(early '70s; our main camera pre-digital - we've put about 70 rolls through this though the last couple were suspiciously overexposed and with very shallow DoF which suggests that the 50mm isn't stopping down properly...or we were just being sloppy)
Minolta 16 II w/Rokkor 22mm f/2.8 integral lens
(early '60s; sub-mini 16mm "spy" camera - even have some Minolta cartridges for this, all with expiry dates in the mid-'70s!)
Olympus XA-2
(mid-'80s; my main camera after my AF-10 died - a great little compact that I managed to leave behind in a drawer when we moved out of Brixton flat in '99 [new occupants contacted their landlord]; flash unit is missing, needs new battery)
Canon Ixus L1 APS
(late-'90s; photo labs would charge extra for two of the three sizes of prints this could produce! Still, it recorded Millennium Eve for us. Died on a trip to Edinburgh, spring 2002. Bonus: Canon remote was in there with it and that operates my EOS 300D!)
Also: Ricohflex, Kodak Duoflex and Brownie cameras, loads of (probably expired) film and about four varieties of Polaroid (iZone, Joycam, etc).

All of which has dampened my ardour for grabbing a film SLR on eBay (Pentax SPs seem to be going for 2x as much as six months ago; not much point getting an EOS without the kit lens [at least] as the EF-S won't fit it and I can only afford the body-only auctions; Praktikas and Zenits are still cheap but I don't think I want to lumber myself with one of those), seeing as we've now refound two of the buggers. Let's get some Ilford HP4 and go nuts.

Can you still get HP4? I've got a few rolls in my fridge edging towards their dates that I bought when I heard they went bust.

Yep, Ilford was revived by some of the former managers when it was about to fold completely.

B&W 35mm is actually cheaper today than it was two years ago for some reason. Both Ilford and Kodak products are very reasonable ~$3.75US per roll.

That's good to know. I doubt I'll ever be keen enough to set up a proper darkroom again, but I'm still nostalgic for big white boxes stamped ILFORD and the smell of ripe fix.

I haven't been in a darkroom since I was a physics undergrad doing x-ray crystallography; I can still smell those chemicals though.

I think I'd trust Ilford to do a better job of developing their own B&W film than I would Boots/Snappy Snaps/Jessops but that's not based on any first-hand experience; those Ilford mailers are about £11 online.

I need to find a manual for the FTb online as I've sort of forgotten how to use it; I know there's a little switch to lock the mirror up but last night I seemed to invoke step-down metering with it (the match-needle went dead and the viewfinder image went darker with each aperture ring click) which I can't recall doing before...

three new toys that arrived today:
Kodak Retinette 1A - guess-focus, clean lens and shutter that sounds right-on - a whopping $9
Polaroid SX-70 Sonar - unmodified, and the re-manufactured SX-70 film (Polaroid Blend) is $2/shot plus shipping, so I doubt I'll be using it much
another SX-70 Sonar, but modified to use the current 600 film

I've got an old Agfa Click and an Isola coming from the Netherlands.

The last darkroom I was in was above the archway at 60 Pleasance, Edinburgh, about 10 years ago now; its list of rules included "Do not have sex in the darkroom - we have had complaints." I'd love to have space for my own.

I also still have: fixer-stained jeans somewhere at the back of my wardrobe.

Yes! I've ruined a pair or two like that.

Our college darkroom was crazy for discovering exotic activities

Cor, has this thread really been dormant for so long?

Anyhoo, me & the missus have taken the plunge into medium format:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3033/2579050056_919ca4e2a9.jpg

Since that picture was taken we've replaced the plain prism finder with a metered one and added a Polaroid back. Anxiously awaiting the results of running some (expired*) Provia 400F and Astia 100F through it. The Polaroids have been variable in quality (using 690, which requires a bit of exposure compensation - it's all I could find on a quick lunch-hour trawl round Soho). This stuff is crazy cheap on eBay now - we paid £26 for the ME prism; they used to retail for about 20-25 times that.

* - part of a set of 41 rolls of expired 120/135 slide film we got on Freecycle; and if that didn't get us back into shooting film, acquiring the below - also for nothing - a week or so later definitely did:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2297/2374962333_04fef02c44.jpg

(The 430EZ Speedlite didn't work terribly well with my EOS 300D and now has a new home; I have a 420EX flash now, another eBay bargain).

I was only talking about getting into medium format with some flickr pals last week. I love the - well I'm not sure of the word, but maybe 'depth' is the right one? - that you get. Quite apart from the fact that the cameras look cool.

Looking forward to seeing your results.

Sitting in a friend's garden on Sunday, I took the prism off and was kinda amazed at the clarity and three-dimensionality of the image coming through the focusing screen. You can see why waist-level finders are so popular with these cameras. Surely we can find one of those for a fiver?! But then we're back to guessing the exposure...

Love my old Bronica SQ-A, haven't used it in some time except for a few slides since I don't have darkroom access or a scanner. But oh how I miss 6x6.

I prefer the waist-level finder and guessing exposure - with color neg or B&W, you've got plenty of leeway. Or you can pick up an incident light meter cheap ($25-100), meter a patch of light that's similar to whatever you're shooting (assuming you can't meter directly at your subject).