Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 21, 2012 11:10:01 GMT -5
Unique ... especially the 110 one. Cool  |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 21, 2012 9:33:52 GMT -5
Me too  At least, I learned, that it is possible to replace the subjunctive form by simple forms as well. Interesting. That is also true  |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 21, 2012 8:42:40 GMT -5
Would it be insolent, entering the discussion as a non-native English speaker ? Remembering my English lessons 30 years ago, both "were" and "was" are sounding strange to me ... just from feeling. Shouldn't it be "If I would have been you", considering, that something happened in the past, still having an effect on the present or "If I would be you", if it would be something, happening in the present and having an effect on the future ? At least I would expect the subjunctive word "would" as I can never be anybody else than myself. But of course ... native speakers should know it better and I just hope to learn something |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 20, 2012 7:37:05 GMT -5
I just used an old Canonet ( the very first model ) as a camera with inbuilt selenium light meter yet. It even has a selenium meter based auto exposure function and it works surprisingly good. I shot about 10 films during my holiday last summer and the success rate has been >90 percent. That's something, considering that this camera is made in 1961 and not using any battery. I think, those cameras have truly been technical marvels.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 20, 2012 7:14:26 GMT -5
I will get a Vito CL by chance this week. A friend of my mother wanted to through it away. So it will find a better home now  Oh ... and I found a Konica EE matic in a junk box of my favorite 2nd hand camera shop today. That would be a camera, fitting into the described category. No idea, why it landed in the junk box. Haven't shot a film with it yet, but I couldn't find anything wrong about it yet. No other ideas ? There should be many more ... or not ? |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 19, 2012 11:21:22 GMT -5
I think, modern digital cameras do have enough pixel ... but the sensor size is still too small. I still miss the chance for getting a "decent depth of field" in wideangle shots. There are still just a few super expensive Full Frame cameras available and that is just what people had on ( 35 mm ) film for decades.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 18, 2012 21:24:50 GMT -5
Thanks, Colray !!!
I am not even sure, if I use fixed or multigrade paper. I bought one of Fujifilm ( WP FM2 ). There have been different contrast types of it and I chose a quite contrasty one. The ISO is actually surprisingly high ... and what still causes some problems to me, it seems to be different in bright sunlight and shadow situations. From the exposing experiments, I did so far, the ISO should be app. 20 in bright sunlight and app. 10 in shadow situations. There is something written on the package: ISO speed P500, ISO range R110 ... but I do not really know, what that could mean.
Can't complain about the low image quality though. I think, it is fantastic. Even at super huge enlargements, it still doesn't show any grain.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 18, 2012 3:01:44 GMT -5
Looks like that  Some cameras need to rebuilt from a few others. I bought three Canonets for getting one good out of them. But that's more an option if you are really into camera repair, but as you mentioned, that your eye sight is not that good anymore, I would just go for cameras, which are already working. |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 15, 2012 6:19:59 GMT -5
I could finally continue my photo paper experiments. I needed to invent some construction for mounting those ancient cameras on a modern tripod ... and I bought two lenses, which do have an inbuilt shutter. Even photo paper is actually too sensitive for opening and closing the lens manually and an ND filter would have caused too long exposure times. So here my first attempt in this matter after a while. A spontaneous portrait of a friend, which I met in the park by chance. He has been on a walk with his dog and the dog is also the reason, why he is slightly out of focus  Dogs do not have much patience for large format photography and it was constantly tearing However ... not that bad for a first test Fujinon 150 mm lens at 1/30 sec and F:5.6 on a sunny day. |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 13, 2012 6:19:06 GMT -5
Yep Mik, here we go ... interesting stuff !!!
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 12, 2012 7:22:58 GMT -5
Thanks Dave !!! My English lessons are dated back 30 years ago and I have actually never been in any native English speaking country in my life However, I have been really lucky, that I had a very strict British lady as a school teacher for four years ( we even had to stand up when saying something, which was very unusual in Germany at that time ). I knew the basic rule about building plurals, but not that exactly (vowels/consonants). Much appreciated !!! BTW, most difficult for me are still prepositions, indicating locations ... in, at, on. Couldn't find a proper rule yet  And ... languages are changing. Even German has been simplified. When I went to school, it has been wrong to say "plurals" for example ( the German and English word is the same in this case ). It should have been "plurali", because it is a latin word ... but I don't know, if this rule ever existed in English. |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 12, 2012 2:52:00 GMT -5
Great story, Mickey !!! Enjoyed that read I think, I also need to go back to my favorite 2nd hand camera shop here. I hope, I can at least take a spy picture of the spy cameras, I saw. I have never seen those brands and some looked pretty old. Maybe I will get one of those some day ... but they have been all at about $100. Not so cheap stuff. Some are so small, that I can't even imagine, what type of film has been used. Need to check it again, but I think, there also has been a plate camera in the size of a matchbox ... incredible. Spys must have had a tough job, considering the capabilities of those ancient tools. |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 11, 2012 10:42:18 GMT -5
I wonder, what kind of rangefinders have been made, still having a leaf shutter but already having a coupled but still selenium based lightmeter.
I only own one ... the classic Canonet from 1961. I like this type of camera and wonder, if there are others ... or even better ones ?
What is YOUR favorite one and experiences with it ?
Berndt
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 11, 2012 9:09:05 GMT -5
I remember those kind of cameras, which we called "Pocketkamera" in Germany. 70s ? I had one, when I was a child. However, I also remember, that the quality has been pretty poor.
The question, which comes up to me, is also: Who will process those films later ?
A dedicated project, but I am not really sure, if it will ever happen.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Mar 10, 2012 21:22:52 GMT -5
Wow Mickey ... that's a piece of technology !!!
|
|
At least, I learned, that it is possible to replace the subjunctive form by simple forms as well. Interesting.
Some cameras need to rebuilt from a few others. I bought three Canonets for getting one good out of them. But that's more an option if you are really into camera repair, but as you mentioned, that your eye sight is not that good anymore, I would just go for cameras, which are already working.
Dogs do not have much patience for large format photography and it was constantly tearing 