Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,959   Posts: 1,558,107   Online: 1119
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 70
  1. #11
    Pumalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Here & Now
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,078
    Stick to what you are used to. I have Olympus; the crystal is great. Sometimes I use Nikon F or Nikkormat. I have the complete FD System, but, oddly I never use it.
    " A loving and caring heart is the beginning of all knowledge " ~ Thomas Carlyle ~

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,215
    I only switched once from a Canon T90 to a Nikon FM2.

    I did it because I wanted a simpler camera that would last an age, I didn't realise that the lenses would be three times as much! That was in '98 or so and I'm still using the same camera now.
    Steve.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    621
    Images
    25
    I don't know about switching, I think that I have just never really "decided" on a bayonet-mount system. I will always have an M42 mount camera, but I think that I have dabbled in every modern bayonet mount system, with the exception of Olympus. It's not any prejudice about OM, just one has not managed to fall into my hands as of yet. There is good stuff in every system that I have tried, but I seem to be gravitating toward Nikon and C/Y stuff at the moment.

  4. #14
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,196
    I switched from Minolta SLR to Nikon SLR. Then I added a Hasselblad SLR. After that I added a Graflex Model D [SLR]. I find that I can still find my way out of bed in the morning without help. I can still take photographs and process film. I can still operate several kinds of computers. My intelligence has increased; my looks have improved to the point that I am now incredibly handsome; and I have even become humble! Therefore there is no downside to change from one brand of SLR to another.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    Images
    35
    I started out with m42, then switched to Canon EF film slrs, often using m42 lenses with adapters. Then a few years ago I bought a Pentax P50 to make use of a 50mm f1.7 I found cheap, and have stuck with Pentax K ever since. I like the lenses, I like the ergonomics and viewfinders of the ME/MX and P5/P50 series. I do occasionally get a yen for other systems. It's lens driven. 35mm SLRs, with the exception of collectable stuff, are generally so cheap that if I spotted a desirable lens at a cheap price, I might buy a body to go with it. But it's been Pentax K alone for half a dozen years or so now.

    I did dabble, briefly, with a Leica R body and lens, but didn't like it.

    Matt

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    965
    Images
    101
    Not so much switching as accumulating. I started with Nikon 'cause my dad gave me his F long ago. I recently got an OM-1 because I always wanted one and now they're cheap. It's a nice lighter alternative to the Nikons, but I don't think I'll ever give up the Nikons completely. Now I have a bunch of MF and LF stuff to occupy my time too.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,474
    I bought my first 35mm slr in 1975, an Olympus OM-1.

    Until now, Olympus OM's are the only 35mm film slr I have ever owned.

    I think most people stick with their original choice for life.
    - Bill Lynch

  8. #18
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,361
    Images
    20
    Speaking only of 35mm, I suppose I've been making a slow transition from Canon FD to Canon EOS, still using a few FD lenses with FD-EOS adapters (macro and the original Canon FD-EOS for telephotos) and with one or two with interchangeable mounts that can work on either system. I have no interest in autofocus, but there are some EF lenses like the four TS-E lenses (I have the 24mm-II and the 45mm) that are just greatly improved or don't exist for FD (which had a 35mm T-S), and Zeiss is offering more of their SLR lenses in EF mount than in M42, which can be adapted to FD or EF (I have the 35/2.0 Planar in M42 mount, the 85/1.4 Planar in EF mount). I suppose that at this point I could sell my New F-1, but as I've had it for almost 30 years now, I use it more intuitively than any other camera--even as those occasions are ever more rare--and the focusing screen is way better than my EOS focusing screens for manual focus.

    Part of the reason I like shooting mainly large format is that cameras don't have proprietary lens mounts, and any lens works on any camera, so long as there are no obvious physical obstacles like the lens being too large to fit on the lensboard or too heavy to be supported on the front standard or unable to cover the desired format.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  9. #19
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,602
    Images
    60
    Get yourself a Canon AE-1 with a decent 50mm lens (f/1.8 or f/1.4 if you can find a reasonably priced one.).

    Use it for a bit.

    Then decide.

    Personally, I have kept my OM stuff and added some Canon EOS film stuff. The Olympus kit (24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, 50 f/1.4 and 50 f/3.5 macro, 85 f/2 and 75-150 f/4 zoom) is all I really want. The Canon EOS stuff adds convenience (AF and motor wind and built-in flash) and lens usability on my single digital body.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    617
    Most of my 35mm film photography is done on 28mm and 50mm lenses. I have the same set up in Nikon (manual and AF), Canon FD and Contax-Yashica. Each of those manufacturers make good lenses in those focal lengths. The FD 50mm f1.4 is a lot of lens for the money, because it can't easily be used as a DSLR lens.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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