Now go shoot those flowers in 8x10
Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh
I have a little point and shoot electronic camera that I got before joining APUG (with a Foveon chip no less), and it surprised me at its ability to make good looking close-ups of flora and fauna.
Among the closeups I shot were a few digital shots of a frog that often frequented my backyard, (I live in California Red-Legged Frog habitat)... But I took no film photos of this endangered species.
Next time I see one, I am shooting film for sure, probably 35mm so I can use either the Macro or Telephoto and crop tightly. My larger formats are better at the larger scenes. But I may have missed my chance, the frogs haven't hung out in my backyard lately....
Don't assume it's a blur. I have a Coolpix 995, which I bought new for about $700 in, IIRC, 2003 or so, plus a 1GB microdrive (remember those?) for which I paid another $385 I think it was, which was much cheaper than getting an entire GB of storage on a regular CF card. At any rate, the results still are far superior to camera phones with more pixels but tiny sensors and lesser lenses. I have 8.5x11 prints from it that look really good on the wall. I wouldn't want to go any bigger, and viewed close up (less than a foot away) you can see the noise but even that is small and tight enough that it doesn't look bad. Hanging one the wall and viewed from inside the room they look good. (I gave shots of myself that a friend took with it to my parents and they have them hanging.)
Originally Posted by Jaf-Photo
The autofocus has trouble in anything but good light and it's sure no DSLR but it's surprisingly decent. And I agree; it's particularly good for closeups.
Now art, I dunno, that's in the eye of the beholder and I admit I haven't really tried using it in B&W much or converting to B&W. It's for snapshooting, or was before I had a camera phone with me all the time.
Last edited by Roger Cole; 05-03-2014 at 11:42 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I always have a Canon S95 in my bag, in case a photo should present itself. It's 10Mp in RAW and makes passable photos if you process them a bit.
But in my opinion 35mm film beats it hands down, regardless of whether grain is discrete or prominent.
So I also have a 35mm Minola Hi-Matic 7sII, which I often carry for the same reason.
In fact, I will mainy focus on 35mm for a while now, as I have recently replenised my 135 film stock.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
It's all for fun as I see it. I like doing things the corpse says we aren't allowed to anymore.
I love street shooting with a Mamiya M645, a Brownie Hawkeye Flash or even an Instamatic 104.
At my age it's doubtful anyone would look at me like a hipster.
I have a 4x5 enlarger and some film, now I need a camera. Not likely to go larger than 4x5 though.
The problem with going larger than 4x5, as you kind of imply, is the difficulty of enlarging the negatives. 5x7 enlargers are fairly rare. 8x10 ones are the size of a small car and will often be given away if a) you're local, b) can manage to get the thing, and c) have a place to put it. Oh, and luck into it. The 8x10 conversions for the Beseler and Zone VI are not so big, but also not so common and usually much more expensive.
Originally Posted by wblynch
True enough that 8x10 allows exhibition of contact prints, but without cropping (at least if you still want it to be at least 8x10) and this would ironically mean I could make superb prints from my 4x5 negatives that are four times the size of what I could make from 8x10 ones if I did go to 8x10, at least printing optically. Of course I could scan but again, you gain little going to 8x10 from 4x5 if you are going to scan anyway, unless you print%2
Then you are a better street photographer than me.
Originally Posted by wblynch
Whenever I use the M645 on the street, everyone (almost) stops what their doing and just stares at me and my big black camera.
Not very interesting photos from that.
But when I use the little 35mm Minolta 7sII, nobody reacts to it. It also has a very sharp lens and good shutter, so it's a small marvel of a camera. (I belive it was used on some US space flights, even).
Last edited by Jaf-Photo; 05-08-2014 at 04:11 AM. Click to view previous post history.
I confess I am addicted to medium-format too... And I also have a fortune in 35 mm stuff... Phew!! I thought I was alone...
I started with medium format. Before MF, I had 35mm point and shoots. Then I was inspired by bright moonlight, and I got into photography. I still use my first MF camera, a Pentax 6x7 MLU.
While 35mm is still the best selling format (for film), my personal preference is for MF and larger. Bigger is always better, when it's film. The cameras aren't that much larger than 35mm, especially comparing them to something like the gargantuan "professional" versions.
I don't have a fortune in 35mm. OK, so I just bought a Leica M6, just to see what the fuss is about. I'm currently comparing it to my Nikon FM10 with its kit zoom lens. I expect to sell the Leica next year. Why? I just don't have a big hankering for 35mm. Not since I have MF. TLRs are light and not that large. I think the shutter on my Rollei is quieter than the Leica.
Grain is another winner with MF. Even with Delta 3200, the grain just isn't that large. I've seen a 32x40 enlargement from a 6x7, and it was beautiful! MF is just such a nice, special size.