A technology rant

[Milfmog]

...(I) really want something closer to my F3 or my late grand-dad's Nikkormat -- a good through-the-lens viewfinder, a simple light-meter, a split-prisim focus point, and a depth-of-field preview. I really need, or particularly want, little else. Call me a troglodyte if you wish...

If you're going to live in a cave Carl, you might like to add a decent flashgun to your kit bag .

Just a thought...

Have fun,


Ian.

[crfriend]

Carl, try the Nikon D-90. It's a wonderful SLR, and does a lot of stuff with knobs, dials, etc. You can see exactly what your exposure will be by looking at the top of the camera. Yes, it also does point-and-shoot. But get over that and just turn it off if you don't like it.

Thanks for the tip, and I'll be asking around at work of some of the other blokes who have decent camera kit.

I read some of the specs and reviews of the D-90, but really want something closer to my F3 or my late grand-dad's Nikkormat -- a good through-the-lens viewfinder, a simple light-meter, a split-prisim focus point, and a depth-of-field preview. I really need, or particularly want, little else. Call me a troglodyte if you wish, but I like to be close to my technology.

I know it's bad form to quote one's self, but I feel that some context is needed.

Thanks to Elizabeth for the pointer to the Nikon D90. I've asked around at $PPOE (a "perl-ism" for "present place of employment") and have found two chaps who are quite happy to point me in assorted directions -- one with a Nikon D300 and another who's a passionate Canon guy. I took a Canon out for a quick jaunt this noon at lunchtime, and it does OK; with luck I'll be taking it sailing this weekend and can push it a bit. The next day it's nice and there's interesting stuff to shoot around the campus at work I'll ask the other chap to bring his Nikon in.

However, I've handled both, and find them somehow lacking.

This evening I hauled my trusty old F3 out of my dresser and hefted it; it felt like I was holding an old friend -- all the controls immediately fell to hand, the viewfinder is enormous, bright, and instictive to focus in with its split-prism in the center of the field of vision. If I'd had film in it I could have used it, even though the batteries are flat -- it's got a manual release at a fixed 1/60th of a second, which with an off-board light meter is perfectly workable.

I also hoisted my late grand-dad's Nikkormat to my eye, and understood why clockwork-cameras are so wonderful -- I had complete control over the camera with everything controlled by rings about the lens-barrel. The on-board light meter is inop due to (1) the battery having been flat for 30 years and (2) the type not being available any longer, but an off-board meter would solve all that. I'm not fond of the fixed 50mm lens, but the fixed 135 is nice (my F3 has a 70-210mm zoom fitted to it, which points up my general scope of photographic interest).

I should find batteries for the F3 and some film. There are lighthouses out there that need proper shots!

Ian -- thanks for the flash crack. I'll see what I can do to produce an interface between the camera and a detonating arrangement for proper flash-powder. I think it'd be pretty cool to mix 20th and 19th century tech. Besides, I rather suspect one'll get more photons with flash-powder than an electronic flash. The genius will be in the sync!

[Big and Bashful]

I still love my Canon 350D digital SLR, many years old now but is still a brilliant camera. Full point and shoot, ap priority, shutter priority or full manual control, as well as another couple of modes. It has auto focus, or manual proper focussing with rings on lenses etc.
I am thinking of replacing mine with a higher resolution camera body now, but only because I have had the 350D for many years. I would like to try out a newer body with my lenses to see if there is an improvement, or if my money would be better spent upgrading a lens or two.
Having never played with Nikon kit, I would recomend Canon, but then I would, wouldn't I?

[crfriend]

I still love my Canon 350D digital SLR, many years old now but is still a brilliant camera. Full point and shoot, ap priority, shutter priority or full manual control, as well as another couple of modes. It has auto focus, or manual proper focussing with rings on lenses etc.

The one I borrowed for evaluation is an EOS "Digital Rebel", and I put it through its paces pretty well by exercising most of the modes. My primary complaint is that I found it difficult to use in fully-manual mode, not least because the viewfinder is simply "frosted glass" without any of the more advanced focussing aids like split-prism or micro-prism arrays; a secondary gripe is that I am not used to "wheels" that adjust things, but that's a matter of just learning how to deal with it.

I noticed that whilst the EOS "Rebel" got the auto-focus right more often than it botched it, when it botched it, it botched it in spades yielding a useless image. Exposure was usually spot on, and was easily controllable. Digital post-processing (the modern equivalent of "darkroom technique") helped make that right, but getting it spot on at exposure time would have been nice.

Having never played with Nikon kit, I would recomend Canon, but then I would, wouldn't I?

That's completely and absolutely understandable, and I would not think of faulting somebody for staying within their "comfort zone". I forget the maker of the little rangefinder camera I first learned on, but once I was into my teens I was routinely using Nikon kit, and had one of my own when I hit 23 or 24. So, I'm a bit biased in the other direction but that's likely down to inertia more than anything else -- and a visceral sense of loss now that Kodachrome (which I did some positively spectacular work with) is no more. Bloody bastards.

Whatever happens, I need to either beg, borrow, buy, or steal some proper kit (and film for my elder gear) before early July. Some of the results from this past weekend's experiements are visible in the "Personal Stories" section; 'tis a pity that the atmosphere did not play nice on Saturday. If things are nice on that trip, the "heavy lifting" will be down to chemistry not bits.

[skirted_in_SF]

You've said you have a collection on Nikon equipment Carl. Just to make your decision if you want to go digital more complex, you should know many (or maybe all, I haven't researched extensively) of the new Nikon bodies will not auto focus your old lenses. The newer bodies don't have focusing motors.

I was in the camera store a couple of weeks ago buying a close focus (mico in Nikon speak) lens for my circa 2006 Nikon D50 and the sales person demonstrated the lens on a 5100 body. I told him that happened to be a model I was thinking of if/when I decide to buy a new body. Since he had sold me my original D50 kit which came with a 70-300 full frame (film style) lens, he warned me I would have to manually focus it on the 5100 body. He also said the newer imagers have a greater dynamic range than the ones from six years ago. This would be good for me since I tend to blow out the highlights in some of the pictures I take.

Yes the viewfinders don't have split images like the older cameras (I had a Fujica 801). But you will learn to watch in the viewfinder to see what focus spot the camera is using. My D50 has five focus points (user selectable) and the 5100 has 11. There is definitely a learning curve in moving to digital. On the other hand, I banged out about two dozen shots of the Golden Gate Bridge 75th anniversary fireworks last night bracketing as I went, something I never would have done with film.

[crfriend]

You've said you have a collection on Nikon equipment Carl. Just to make your decision if you want to go digital more complex, you should know many (or maybe all, I haven't researched extensively) of the new Nikon bodies will not auto focus your old lenses. The newer bodies don't have focusing motors.

Indeed, all that stuff has moved into the lens-body itself as motors have gotten smaller and servos better and faster.

My Nikon stuff dates from the early 1980s (1982, for my gear I believe) and late 1960s (my grand-dad's Nikkormat and lenses), so auto-focus wasn't even a concern then.

Yes the viewfinders don't have split images like the older cameras (I had a Fujica 801). But you will learn to watch in the viewfinder to see what focus spot the camera is using. My D50 has five focus points (user selectable) and the 5100 has 11.

The Canon I had on my sailing trip on Saturday has seven, and you get to either manually set which one you want to use or let the machine make up its own mind on the matter. I am still set in the mode where the photographer mentally selects the depth-of-field he wants, focusses on the desired target, sets exposure, slews away if need be, and releases the shutter.

In defense of the Canon, its auto-focus was frequently better than what I could do with only a frosted-viewfinder, but when it botched it, it botched it in spades.

Hopefully sometime in the coming week or so I'll get to play with a pal's modern (read, "digital") Nikon and then I'll make up my mind what I want to do. I found a couple of camera shops in Boston that sell film, however, so my good old "chemical camera" will accompany me when I go to Provincetown in early July.

There is definitely a learning curve in moving to digital. On the other hand, I banged out about two dozen shots of the Golden Gate Bridge 75th anniversary fireworks last night bracketing as I went, something I never would have done with film.

That must've been quite the party! I have very fond memories of Sapphire and I walking across that bridge back in the early 1990s and watching the sea lions frolicking in the channel beneath the middle of the main span. And, yes, digital has it all over emulsion when it comes to disposability of mis-exposed (or otherwise botched) images!

[Big and Bashful]

Yep, my Canon does not have a split microprism. One of the few things I don't much like about my Canon is the fact that focussing takes priority if you have autofocus switched on. It will not take a shot unless it has locked on, so you get very few out of focus shots but miss the occasional shot if the camera hasn't locked. Higher up the range you get to choose whether to wait for focussing or just to shoot loads of blurry shots.
I soon got used to the controls for AP mode, (my favourite) or for fully manual exposure control. For nighttime shots I do miss a remote shutter release, but found ways around that problem.
The EOS 350D and all other Canon EOS camera bodies will take the lenses from film EOS cameras, but it has a couple more contacts for stabilised lenses. I was stunned to see how light these motorised zoom lenses with autofocus, aparture and stabilising motors built in are and how well they work.
I also like the auto-bracketing, the high sensitivity, the set-up of the controls and the incredible battery life of these cameras.
I still have an EOS film camera, but it doesn't seem worth selling it these days, it will be another of my museum exhibits I think!

[Kirbstone]

I fly Canon EOS too. Ostensibly for my intra-oral photography I went digital a few years ago and got an E0S30D with a fixed focal length 60mm macro lens for that purpose. I also invested in a serious zoom lens which seems to do everything else 28-200mm. I find the rapid 5-a-second fire very useful for showing up rowing technique foibles in my crewmates, when I am out of the boat & on the bank criticising everyone! But it's a bulky beast.

For everyday and sailing I use a little Canon PowerShot SX210 IS. I can write that down 'coz I have the thing right beside me. It has 15 Mil. pixels & a 14X optical zoom, but its 'rapid shoot' is too slow for rowing shots.

T.

[skirted_in_SF]

Yep, my Canon does not have a split microprism. One of the few things I don't much like about my Canon is the fact that focussing takes priority if you have autofocus switched on. It will not take a shot unless it has locked on, so you get very few out of focus shots but miss the occasional shot if the camera hasn't locked. Higher up the range you get to choose whether to wait for focussing or just to shoot loads of blurry shots.
I soon got used to the controls for AP mode, (my favourite) or for fully manual exposure control. For nighttime shots I do miss a remote shutter release, but found ways around that problem.
The EOS 350D and all other Canon EOS camera bodies will take the lenses from film EOS cameras, but it has a couple more contacts for stabilised lenses. I was stunned to see how light these motorised zoom lenses with autofocus, aparture and stabilising motors built in are and how well they work.
I also like the auto-bracketing, the high sensitivity, the set-up of the controls and the incredible battery life of these cameras.
I still have an EOS film camera, but it doesn't seem worth selling it these days, it will be another of my museum exhibits I think!

I finally took a look at the memory card I shot last night, turns out I took 30 images. A book I have recommends shooting fireworks at f8 and 1 second. I turned on auto bracketing and ended up with images at .5, 1 and 2 seconds. The 2 second ones had a tendency to be blown out at he center of the display.
I hadn't shot fireworks for awhile and was concerned for a moment when the AF hunted for focus in the dark. Then I thought to turn AF off on the camera body, set the lens to infinity and was ready to go. I have an infrared remote release for the camera, but ended up standing behind the camera (mounted on a tripod) and pushing the shutter release whenever there was a display I wanted to capture.

[crfriend]

Much to my joy and surprise, I found today that 35mm film is still being manufactured and is still for sale. This brought great joy to my heart today I as wandered eastward toward Boston Harbor for a sail and stopped in at a camera shop to see if the commodity was still around.

Yes, I got looked at like I had two heads (although that may have been the skirt talking to the salesguy who was primed to sell high-end digi-cams), and when I selected the slower of the two speeds available (200 -- I wanted 100) one could sense a palpable air of disdain. Don't these children have a sense of history? So I have two rolls of colour print film to take with me on the "big voyage" in early July (so long as the weather isn't like it was today; more on that later) to feed my "elder kit" with. I am, in a word, a "happy camper".

I didn't really bother to read the package until I got home, and that's OK because I only natively read one language out of the eleven on the box, some of which I don't even recognise! But the important part is there, in print so tiny I cannot read it without my reading spectacles: "35mm ISO 200 135-36 24x36mm Process C-41". Even more amazing is that the stuff is actually manufactured here in the USA! It seems that everything else comes from China. There was one telling line however: "EU contact: Kodak Limited, Headstone Drive, Harrow, HA1 4TY, UK". "Headstone Drive"? Ouch.

RIP Kodachrome. Bastards.