|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 31, 2015 12:24:56 GMT -5
The original Asahi Pentax introduced in 1957 is a compelling piece. This is a pic of my Asahi Pentax that I inserted into the ad from a 1958 Modern Photography magazine. I wish I had the black version of it! This is a great writeup on it -> Stephen Gandy's Camera Quest - Pentax Original
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 31, 2015 12:13:59 GMT -5
So, you like F3's then ey??? Got a few myselve, never got one for Christmas though... What I would give to get one of those film backs for any of my camera bodies!
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 30, 2015 22:35:23 GMT -5
I have heard that there are some outstanding classic camera stores there. Also, Fuji only sells Natura (ISO1600 C41) and Fortia (ISO50 E6) films in Japan. Are there others?
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 30, 2015 3:13:48 GMT -5
Welcome aboard and that is a well made website you have. Also beautiful cameras of course!
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 30, 2015 2:49:01 GMT -5
I don't own any Pentaxes Can you tell us what you like about them? Click on the image for larger version. The Pentax MX is the smallest fully manual SLR with the largest magnification full info viewfinder of any camera - past or present. Size comparison to others. A size comparison you might be more familiar with. I had Canons at the time I first got an MX. The Pentax LX is the smallest interchangeable viewfinder PRO SLR and has the widest selection of viewfinders as well as range of magnifications available with most having built-in diopter adjustment. Among it's many other attributes, it also has the widest exposure range of any camera - or for that matter any lightmeter, from EV -5.5 ~.EV 20. Along with this, it is the only camera - past or present, that can aperture priority autoexpose a scene for as long as it takes - or batteries die, all the while monitoring the scene for lighting changes and adjusting exposure accordingly. I have accurately - and repeatedly, autoexposed scenes hours long. Size comparison to it's peers.
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 28, 2015 14:18:49 GMT -5
I love my new camera: a Nikon F3 HP with a Nikkor AiS 50 f1.8 Also got some film to go with it: You must have been nice to deserve all that . . . Some one once said: "A photographer takes pictures with his cameras. A collector takes pictures of his cameras". Very astute observation. As I dig out half-forgotten cameras and pieces of photophernalia over the next few months I'll take some pictures of them and post them. But they are such great looking pieces of industrial art that I have to get other cameras to use to take pictures of them! This one taken on Kodak Gold 100
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 13, 2015 13:07:06 GMT -5
Yes, the FG. Consumer camera but from feeling it comes closest. If I put it between OM 2n and OM 10 it is much closer to the OM 2n. Of course close and feel are relative terms. Although an FG is nice - feature filled due to the few years development time it had over the OM2, it is not like an OM2 or any single digit Olympus OM for that matter.
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 12, 2015 16:25:15 GMT -5
Hello: Most of my SLRs I regulary use are Nikons from the 70ies and the 80ies. Last weekend I shot my first roll of film in an Olympus OM-2n. I really like the handling of the camera, its size and the bright image in the finder. Now I asked myself the qustion which Nikon can be compared to the OM-2n with focus on handling and using. Not technical data. I found my answer allready, but I'm interested in your opinions. Hannes Is your answer the Nikon FG then? I don't believe there is a Nikon comparable to the OM-2 since all Nikon's have tiny viewfinder magnifications which are ideal for those who wear glasses. The FG may have similar features to the OM-2 with it's aperture priority, 1/1000th shutter speed and TTL flash, but it is the cheapest entry into a Nikon mount and therefore nowhere near the build quality of the Olympus top of the line single digit OM's. As with all Nikon viewfinders, it too is less then that of the OM-2's.
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 12, 2015 11:30:45 GMT -5
I haven't got an OM 4 but i like my OM2 spot and i hate it for the same reason people complain about OM 3's and 4's and that's the battery consumption. On both the OM3 and OM4, you can tell if you have the upgraded electronics that doesn't eat up batteries by using the battery check. If after 30 seconds the beep stops then you have the new board. Both of mine do. I don't know if this applies to the OM2 spot.
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Dec 7, 2015 0:31:12 GMT -5
Not much dimensional difference but there are huge differences in control layout and viewfinder display. The MX has traditional control layout while the OM1 is not so traditional. The MX has full info available in the viewfinder using LEDs while the OM1 shows none and uses the needle. The MX can also use the focusing screens of the LX producing a bit brighter display. Please consider that none of these are factory new so variations in condition/feel/sound as well as lens "practical sharpness" is likely limited to your samples. As far as practical sharpness is concerend, I just tested some of my old used lenses using Kodak Techpan at ISO25 developed in Technidol under ideal conditions and I can comfortably say that they they are good for use with digital sensors >50MP. I am glad I don't have to pick between one or the other . . .
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Sept 25, 2015 10:44:14 GMT -5
The Minolta Hi-Matic 9 was my introduction to "classic cameras" as prior to that I was fully autofocus digi. I was so impressed that this late 60's camera was in such great shape and fully functional that it led me down the road to more Minoltas. I too covet the Minolta SR-2!
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Sept 17, 2015 23:48:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Aug 29, 2015 19:12:06 GMT -5
Definitely eclectic, chic, and very cool!
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Aug 29, 2015 17:25:35 GMT -5
Haha, maybe just a bit. Sure, some of them are about a basic as you can get. Plus I'm sure some, if not most, take really crappy photos. But I guess for me, I love all the different shapes, sizes, colors, designs and even art deco you find with the cameras. "Crappy" photos that would take considerable photoshop work to emulate otherwise . . . I also look at mine as pieces of industrial art and are display worthy. In fact, most of our visitors want to get their pictures taken next to them. Invariably they ask me if they work and they are amazed to know that they do!
|
|
|
Post by lesdmess on Aug 26, 2015 11:51:55 GMT -5
Today most cameras have som kind of metal curtains? But earliercameras used some kind of fabric. What kind of material did they use, did all camera makers use the same material. I have heard of nylon type materials. How about those russians, did they use a different material than Japanese cameras? Today's camera curtains are apparently not some kind of metal curtain. For instance even in all of Canon's pro cameras such as the EOS 1V or EOS 6D, the manual states not to point the camera towards the sun with mirror lockup as it can scorch or damage the shutter curtains. In Nikon's development of the F, they specifically selected titanium curtains so that this will not be a problem -> Vol. 10. History of the Nikon cameras and shutter mechanisms (Part I)Interestingly enough, the Canon New F-1 has titanium curtains even though it doesn't have mirror lockup. I am not sure when they transitioned away to a different material. I know that the Nikons F, F2 & F3, Minolta XK and Pentax LX all have titanium curtains. I believe that all of the vertical travel shutters of the manual focus camera era were all metal.
|
|