Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,696   Posts: 1,482,518   Online: 1036
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37
  1. #11
    Ralph Javins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Latte Land, Washington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    832
    Good morning, Thomas;

    I can answer your question only from my own perspective.

    All of these comments apply to the 35 mm stuff: As with a mechanic's tools, sometimes you need something that just fits to perform the task best. Yes I do have Crescent wrenches (equivalent of a zoom lens), but for more control over depth of field, light gathering, and image quality, I prefer prime or single focal length lenses, kind of like a set of combinatiion wrenches. They fit better on the fastener, they are smaller for each individual size (but not the volume of the rolled up tool bag), and they work better. Many of my lenses are actually special purpose lenses that do not get very much use during the year. My 35 mm f 2.8 perspective control lens for my 35 mm camera is one of those. The 16 mm f 4.0 full frame fisheye lens is another one. My 24 mm f 2.0 or f 2.8 lenses are used for indoor room photography. The 85 mm f 1.7 or f 2.0 or the 100 mm f 2.5 lenses are the ones I use most often for portraits. The longer telephoto lenses are used depending on what I need to get the image size I want on the film. For example, to get a nice size image of the moon, I need about 1500 mm to 2000 mm. I use a 1000 mm lens and a good teleconverter to get that. I admit that this is a more expensive way of doing what now can be done fairly well with three zoom lenses. However, when I started with this, the zoom lenses were not that good.

    The lens selection for the MF and the 4 by 5 are not as extensive. I have only three lenses for the 4 by 5 at this time; 90 mm, 150 mm, and 210 mm. I would like to go up to 240 mm for portrait work and a 360 mm or so for telephoto work or where I want to isolate something from its surroundings. I might think about a shorter lens for wide angle, but the 90 mm has been adequate for what I have wanted to photograph so far.

    Thomas, does this answer your question?
    Enjoy;

    Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington

    When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
    just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."

  2. #12
    outwest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    312
    Images
    3
    Thomas, with only one or two cameras and all modern lenses, it WOULD be pointless. But, I like to play with different formats and to see what the old lenses can bring to the image. There are less than a half dozen lenses in the list that are less than 35 years old. A large number are pushing or older than 100 years. When I decide to take a particular camera out for exercise, it comes with its own set of old and newer lenses and the same subject may get addressed by two or three lenses just to see the differences. And, to answer an earlier post, being poor is not an impediment to accumulation. I'm a good bargain shopper with a lot of years of shopping experience and a dash of luck in finding interesting lenses for less than $50 - many for $10 or $15. I think the most I ever paid for a lens was $295 and that was probably $100 more than the next most expensive. Having a Speed Graphic opens the door for barrel lenses which 30 of the lenses are. Boys and their toys. Have fun!

  3. #13
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    So, what if I was travelling from one state in which that quantity was legal and my destination state had the same allowances. However my magic red Indiana Jones line passed through a state with gear quantity restrictions. By just which state or federal authorities might I be expected to be accosted? Hypothetically speaking, of course?

    Take life one grain of salt at a time. And if you're lucky, it will be a silver salt.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  4. #14
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,985
    Images
    279
    Hi Ralph,

    It answers the question I asked, sort of, but I believe it's a case of me never being able to understand no matter how well it's explained. It's strange, because I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum.
    I never feel the need for another lens, except and 85mm or 100mm for the 35. I just don't. I use what's on the camera and know what I'll get and just plain never wonder what a different lens might bring. I used to have a 35mm system with nine lenses, mainly because they were given to me. It's a Pentax system that had all kinds of prime lenses, and even then I'd only ever use one of them at a time.
    I couldn't bring a bag full of lenses, wondering what lens to use for each situation, because it became and exercise in choosing the lens and not so much about what to do with the scene in front of me. It became confusing. It was actually my wife that told me to just use one at a time, and my images have become consistently better since.

    That doesn't mean that I think what you're doing with all of these lenses is wrong. Just that I can't work that way... Plus I don't have to spend much money either. I'd rather buy film, paper, and chemistry than more lenses.

    Have fun!

    - Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Javins View Post
    Good morning, Thomas;

    I can answer your question only from my own perspective.

    All of these comments apply to the 35 mm stuff: As with a mechanic's tools, sometimes you need something that just fits to perform the task best. Yes I do have Crescent wrenches (equivalent of a zoom lens), but for more control over depth of field, light gathering, and image quality, I prefer prime or single focal length lenses, kind of like a set of combinatiion wrenches. They fit better on the fastener, they are smaller for each individual size (but not the volume of the rolled up tool bag), and they work better. Many of my lenses are actually special purpose lenses that do not get very much use during the year. My 35 mm f 2.8 perspective control lens for my 35 mm camera is one of those. The 16 mm f 4.0 full frame fisheye lens is another one. My 24 mm f 2.0 or f 2.8 lenses are used for indoor room photography. The 85 mm f 1.7 or f 2.0 or the 100 mm f 2.5 lenses are the ones I use most often for portraits. The longer telephoto lenses are used depending on what I need to get the image size I want on the film. For example, to get a nice size image of the moon, I need about 1500 mm to 2000 mm. I use a 1000 mm lens and a good teleconverter to get that. I admit that this is a more expensive way of doing what now can be done fairly well with three zoom lenses. However, when I started with this, the zoom lenses were not that good.

    The lens selection for the MF and the 4 by 5 are not as extensive. I have only three lenses for the 4 by 5 at this time; 90 mm, 150 mm, and 210 mm. I would like to go up to 240 mm for portrait work and a 360 mm or so for telephoto work or where I want to isolate something from its surroundings. I might think about a shorter lens for wide angle, but the 90 mm has been adequate for what I have wanted to photograph so far.

    Thomas, does this answer your question?
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  5. #15
    Ralph Javins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Latte Land, Washington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    832
    Good morning, Thomas;

    Your point is quite valid and applicable. The main point is still the photograph. Perhaps one of the differences is in the choice of where, when, and how, to make any "adjustments" in a photograph. Back in the 1960's, the Nikon people had that neat 35 mm Perspective Control lens that I could not afford then. Instead, I propped up one side of my easel when printing the photograph. Yes, I had to really stop down the Schneider Componon lens in the enlarger to keep a reasonable depth of field for doing that, but it could be done. Now, I can do it on scene with my own perspective control lens, a ROKKOR 35 mm f 2.8 SHIFT CA. In a similar way, with a longer lens, I can "crop" the image to isolate the subject from the things around it, even if I cannot walk up to it, and do it on the film instead of blowing up the negative. And, it can be done without approaching visible grain structure.

    With the telephoto lenses, I can get image sizes that would not be reasonable just trying to blow up the negative on the paper. With the long lens combination I now have available, I can get an image of the moon that nicely fits in the normal size frame on 35 mm film. There is some detail visible in those prints.

    Thomas, when I began, all I had was that AUTO ROKKOR-PF 58 mm f 1.4 lens, and I used it. There were times when I could walk up to the subject to get the image size I wanted on the film, but there were also times when I could not. Every once in a while, I wished that I could get back a bit to improve what I felt was "the perspective." With the changes in my life in recent years, I have been able to get some of the lenses and additional things I wanted for photography. Just looking through catalogs can be a frustration provoking thing. Now, I have gone to another place where I feel that I do have all of the lenses that I truly need for almost all of the photographic work I am likely to do. This is a wonderful position to have. But it has taken years to get here.

    For my digital cameras, I have only three prime or single focal length lenses. I also have four zoom lenses, and I will be getting a fifth. With the zoom lenses on the digital sensors, again I can crop the photograph right there in the viewfinder. The digital cameras are a special purpose camera system for me. They have the quality of speed of the finished product. The zoom lenses fit well with that quality, and the digital sensors do not ask that much of the lenses. I am just now starting to see digital cameras commonly available that I think are approaching the resolution capability of 35 mm film cameras. I know that I will get a response from several people on that claim, but for my standards for judging, that is what I am seeing at this time.
    Enjoy;

    Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington

    When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
    just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."

  6. #16
    outwest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    312
    Images
    3
    I give up! They are multiplying all by themselves and may soon develop AI (which is no danger in my case;-). The count is now 73. Three of the last 4 will be heading for Tonopah. I'd better get busy on that Packard shutter adapter for the 8x10.

  7. #17
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,368
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    154
    Thomas, you certainly make some beautiful pictures with your couple of lenses. I feel I must explain why I have so many.

    IT'S FUN!!

    Plus when you divide the number of lenses floating around the place into the number of cameras, it's only 8 or 9 each. My wife is a wonderful sport!
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  8. #18
    outwest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    312
    Images
    3
    Jim, I think you hit the nail on the head - Thomas has tools, we have TOYS!

  9. #19
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,985
    Images
    279
    You guys are pretty funny. Thanks for the update to this thread. As an aside, I just gave away one of my Holga cameras, and will continue to eliminate clutter...
    I'm just like you guys when it comes to collecting music, though. I have about 3,000 albums for each turntable I own.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  10. #20
    Ken N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Creston and Newton, Iowa.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    389
    Images
    8
    Come on, that's nothing. Olympus made something like 59 different lenses for the OM system. Most of them in at least two flavors. Some lenses underwent at least a half-dozen variants. I'm at 10 and counting....
    http://www.zone-10.com

    When you turn your camera on, does it return the favor?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin