where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
NikoDoby said:
Why don't you sell all your digital cameras and only shoot film? Or better yet sell your film cameras too and just make your own pinhole camera out of a can of Campbell's chicken soup? Then you won't have to worry about any of this technology nonsense.
LOL, how many times have I mentioned about switching to film now? I wouldn't mind it, as long as I had a roll of Kodachrome or two... :^D
Rangefinders went out of style not because they were inferior, but because SLRs had far superior sync speeds (in comparison to the Leica or Contax), were more securely sealed to the elements, and because they gave exact views of the scene. Rangefinders have never fallen out of use, they are just a minority among photographers. Leicas have always commanded high prices, and the Olympus XA was a milestone rangefinder camera due to its extremely compact size.
The rangefinder camera is in use by more professionals than amateurs, because SLRs are marketed to amateurs. The Mamiya 7 and 6 are phenomenal cameras, unmatched by others in terms of flexibility and size in their class. The Plaubel Makina 670 is a great camera as well. Others include the Fuji G690/980/670/645 series, the Zeiss Ikonta, the Voitlander Bessa II, the Voigtlander Bessa 667, the Bronica 645RF, Hasselblad Xpan, Polaroid 110A/110B, and more.
And let's not forget the new Voigtlander R series cameras and the reincarnation of the Zeiss Ikon.
I still believe the EVF is a cost cutting feature whose place will remain in entry level and lower end, non-professional camera systems.
Yeah Chris I know, I've been there and done that long before you were born! That's exactly why I love using all kinds of cameras. Like the "BS" lomography and Polaroid stuff and why I haven't sold off all my darkroom equipment. I get it. It's wonderful old school stuff. But like a lot of things in life you've got to move forward. I love classic cars too but would I give up the modern amenities and advances in my current car? HELLS NO.
To me a "pro" style EVIL camera with a D3S sensor is more desirable than a manual focus "commemorative" Digital SP with just a digital sensor thrown in. A digital SP is great for nostalgia's sake but I prefer my technology to advance and not be stagnant. Digital photography has evolved more in ten years then I ever remember film doing. Advances in Film cameras happened at the rate of decades not months!
Oh I certainly wouldn't want Nikon to bring out a flagship digital SP, but they should pay attention to the fact that multitouch and contextual dials aren't the best solutions for everything. Tactile feedback is half the battle, and recent cameras seem to fail pretty epicly in that respect.
ChrisLange said:
Rangefinders went out of style not because they were inferior, but because SLRs had far superior sync speeds (in comparison to the Leica or Contax), were more securely sealed to the elements, and because they gave exact views of the scene. Rangefinders have never fallen out of use, they are just a minority among photographers. Leicas have always commanded high prices, and the Olympus XA was a milestone rangefinder camera due to its extremely compact size.I still believe the EVF is a cost cutting feature whose place will remain in entry level and lower end, non-professional camera systems.
This is not what I recall. The main reason SLRs took over is lenses, lenses, lenses. In the 1960s 300 - 400 - even 800 mm telephotos became practical thanks to the SLR. The 1st advantage of SLRs is TTL viewing not the last. Sync speed, weather proofing came long after the decline of rangefinders.
And calling EVF a cost cutting feature is strange. It will add to the cost over any optical viewfinder.
astrophotographer said:
This is not what I recall. The main reason SLRs took over is lenses, lenses, lenses. In the 1960s 300 - 400 - even 800 mm telephotos became practical thanks to the SLR. The 1st advantage of SLRs is TTL viewing not the last. Sync speed, weather proofing came long after the decline of rangefinders.And calling EVF a cost cutting feature is strange. It will add to the cost over any optical viewfinder.
Ah yes, the lenses too...
I know, it sounds weird to me, too, but at this point I think it's cheaper to stick a tiny screen into something than to construct a mechanical mirror mechanism, incorporating focusing screens and coated surfaces...
I'm pretty sure it's easier and more cost effective to manufacture a single EVF module and use it various cameras then to grind and coat specific glass for just one model.
I totally agree with you on the tactile feedback though Chris!:^) I had a hard time letting go of the aperture ring :^( But I'm so use to the command wheels now that I no longer give it any thought :^) I'm very happy with more buttons and dials instead of scrolling menus however!
aperture is always at the tip of your fingers if you're using a camera that utilizes it too. In fact the Nikkormat cameras were designed with this very idea in mind.
Well, sort of. Except my left hand may be preoccupied on the focus or zoom ring, while my hand around the grip is being lazy.
Kids these days, they just don't like to do things manually. Then again, all this talk of going to film kind of makes me sad, I was happy to leave it behind. I cannot imagine how many rolls of film I would have gone through if I was doing the kind of shooting I do now. With the cost of all the film I would have needed, I'd still be stuck shooting with a kit lens today. That said, if I got a new battery for our FE, then I would be very tempted to take it out and finish the last few rolls of film. I love the manual feel of the older cameras without command dials, its just so simple, keeps your focus more on the photos than settings.
Well Sor-ree ;^)
I want to learn to develop film this summer. It's an era I was born into the end of, and I don't want to miss out on it.
But I absolutely HATE the feel of older film camera, no offense to my F2 Photomic, but my hand is always much more comfortable around a modern (D)SLR.
The thing I like most with the newer ring-less lenses is that I can see the aperture change through the viewfinder. I don't have to guess or look down at the lens to see what aperture I'm at. I usually shoot manual so that is very important for me and I've gotten so use to shooting that way now. I like using the command dials more now. Shutter,aperture, power, ev comp and AF lock can all be done with just one hand while looking through the viewfinder the entire time.
Thank you Nikon!
Well then I don't know what kind of crappy FSLR you were using.
The finder in my F2 Photomic shows me both aperture and shutter speed along with the meter reading. No need to look at the lens.
But I still the command dials. Like you said, "Shutter,aperture, power, ev comp and AF lock can all be done with just one hand while looking through the viewfinder the entire time." Exactly!
Thank you Nikon! :^D
Yeah, the aperture and shutter speed is shown in the older film cameras. The meter on those older cameras was a little hit and miss, but you could see the aperture through the window at the top of the finder.
Re: Older cameras and manual feel. alph, I like the feel of the newer cameras for photo outings, hands down, but there is something nice about the small, light film bodies from the 80's. After a day of lugging around the D300 with grip, 300mm F4 AF-S, 12-24mm F4, 24-120mm VR and/or 35-70mm F.28 and a tripod, you kind of miss the light weight of the old film camera with a 50mm 1.8 AIS attached!
Ah, a camera from the '80s? That I can't say anything about.
My F2 isn't comfortable to hold in the hand for me. And the only real lens I have for it is a 50mm ƒ/1.2, which is probably heavier than a ƒ/1.8 anyway. I'd rather use it on a D300 or F6.
Yes I know that but what I meant is what alpha quoted. That all the info is clearly visible and easy to change with just the thumb or index finger. An EVF would only add to that info and provide everything you see on the top LCD as well. If you want to see less then tap a button. Want to see more info then tap again. Can't do that with an optical viewfinder!
PB PM said:
After a day of lugging around the D300 with grip, 300mm F4 AF-S, 12-24mm F4, 24-120mm VR and/or 35-70mm F.28 and a tripod, you kind of miss the light weight of the old film camera with a 50mm 1.8 AIS attached!
That's why I want a good EVIL camera. Best of both worlds
The meter on the older cameras is not "hit or miss", it's a matter of knowing how to use a 60/40 or 80/20 averaged meter. I usually use the meter only as a point of reference with my older cameras, once I've defined one tone, I know what changes I should make to exaggerate certain things. My F4 is always in either matrix or spot mode. Matrix for chromes and spot for black and white.
Well, the FE had one kind of metering, CW, and our copy often over exposed by half a stop, depending on the lens used. I used it enough to know how to meter with it. Thankfully film has way more dynamic range than 14bit RAW files.
Yeah, my F2 Photomic also uses CW metering.
However, when I used it, I didn't have a clue about what I was doing. I didn't know the circle imprinted on the frame was for metering, and I certainly did not know how to meter effectively. I just pointed the camera somewhere, spun the dials randomly till the indicator centered, and took the picture. So I have no way today of knowing what the character was of my meter because my exposures are so wild anyway.
alphanikonrex said:
Yeah, my F2 Photomic also uses CW metering.However, when I used it, I didn't have a clue about what I was doing. I didn't know the circle imprinted on the frame was for metering, and I certainly did not know how to meter effectively. I just pointed the camera somewhere, spun the dials randomly till the indicator centered, and took the picture. So I have no way today of knowing what the character was of my meter because my exposures are so wild anyway.
...did you not read the manual? I certainly did for the FM2, and my exposures are pretty much spot on, that's if I've loaded the film correctly. :D
You must log in to post.
