L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29366 posts, RR: 62 Reply 12, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3892 times:
Actually I went around Hatcher Pass today with it and was surprised that the shots in that roll of film I took actually came out. It was a pretty nice day for it, except for the smoke.
I was shooting a roll of 200 speed Fuji print to see what the camera would do and to check and see if I had any idea of what the hell I was doing before a start burning Kodachrome in it.
After turning it over to Wal-Mart I was pleasantly surprised to see that all of my shots came out.
I won't however claim to understand how the shutterspeed and the F-stops work together. When I do, that will mean that I will have better techically knowledge of photography then these guys with the $2500 digitial camera(before lenses) bodies....
Which reminds me of another thing, I am only about $350 into this setup, which includes my two bodies (The Pentax and a Zenit) and lenses in the following sizes, 28, 55, 58 and 200 mm respectively.
So that leaves me with about 2150 left to spend on film.
Who says digitial cameras are more economic.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3899 times:
What is this? a post to put down people with digital cameras? and in particular DSLR's?
Who cares whether your camera can produce better quality thatn a D30/60. Although quality is important, you have to remember, as has already been said glass is very important and much more important, the photographer!
Alot of the guys here with DSLR's, gary watt, chris sheldon, jason taperell, andy hunt, joe pries, dean barnes, etc are all excellent photographers so you can just say my camera will produce better photos than a d30/60.
Less talk, more action! lets see your shots from this camera
oh and econmics are not the sloe reason for the purchase of a DSLR.
When I do, that will mean that I will have better techically knowledge of photography then these guys with the $2500 digitial camera
Strangely enough, most of the advice in that thread was provided by these very guys with the $2500 digital cameras! So maybe they learned their trade on less sophisticated kit before buying the big ticket items.
I am only about $350 into this setup... So that leaves me with about 2150 left to spend on film.
Well maybe. Over the last few years I've spent on average around $1000 on film and processing each year, so the digital will have paid for itself in two and a half years at worst. I can live with that
Shawn Patrick From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2588 posts, RR: 18 Reply 16, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3857 times:
L-188, I really have to laugh at the fact that you do not know how aperture and shutter speed work together, or what effect they have on a picture. I know another film photographer who has been shooting all his life and who only just now understands the concept after I talked to him.
You talk trash about us and our digital cameras, but in the end, no matter what equipment you have the better photographer will *always* bring home the bacon, especially the photographer who knows his aperture and shutter speeds.
Just for some trivia, do you know how focal length affects DOF? How it affects perspective? Do you know what DOF is?? Do you know how subject distance affects DOF? Do you know which aperture setting for your lens produces the highest quality image?
In fact, learning all that stuff and their effects on the picture is the very first thing I learned, lol.
Another thing, you say you've only spend $350 on your equipment (two bodies and four lenses). I would say you got some very crappy equipment.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29366 posts, RR: 62 Reply 17, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3833 times:
do you know how focal length affects DOF? How it affects perspective? Do you know what DOF is?? Do you know how subject distance affects DOF? Do you know which aperture setting for your lens produces the highest quality image?
Actually forcing myself to learn was part of the reason why I got that camara.
As far as the costs, nobody respects the russian equiptment and nobody shoots screwmount equiptment anymore. That is why the cost was so low.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Alaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 17 Reply 18, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 3788 times:
Shawn, if you want really high quality images you will need a lense that will cost a bit more than quoted. I have a 80-200 f2.8 and a 1.4x converter for my tele shots, I love the results! But the lense cost just under a grand. I first bought a 70-300 f4/5.6, what a mistake, it cost me $150 brang new, but the results weren't that appeasing. Well, photography does cost money. I have about $4000 invested in my film SLR, plus anoth $1400 for my scanner. Well I am happy with the results, and am learning step by step.
The key word is: Listen to the guys who know what they are doing and accept all critisizim! It pays off in the long run!
We should get together some time to do some spotting.
Yeah, and any reply to when the new RWY will be ready?
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12426 posts, RR: 40 Reply 20, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3763 times:
ok, how can the age of the equipment not really matter, when you need to clean your camera, and it has scratches on it caused by wear and tear??
I started using my Grandads fully manual camera, ages ago. Damnit that was frickin difficult and I never got to grips with it. So I moved on to a more automatic camera that had manual features (best thing in the world, MANUAL FOCUS, if your lense is a twist to focus, quicker than AF). This was great but you have to remember that the digital version of your photos will suck in comparison to that coming from a DSLR. Not to say that, the version you have in your hand will, but you are comparing to entirely different things by saying that 'I have no doubts that the quality of the photographs with be superior to anybody with a D30 or a D60', especially when it seems you know jackshit about photography anyway.
And... If I were you I wouldn't start using Kodachrome in such a difficult camera to use, I'd start with print film... It will save you alot of time and energy as it is alot more forgiving to any mistakes you make (focus, shutter speed, aperture, etc etc etc). But, if you want to jump in at the deep end, go ahead!!!
Dan (digital owner, and proud! Learnt alot more using his digi-cam than he ever did with that fully manual thing).