Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,928   Posts: 1,585,181   Online: 709
      
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 88
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ogden, Utah USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,340
    my trip to glacier ntl park i took the leicaflex sl2 with a 24, 50 and 135 but mostly ended up using the 28-70 zoom and the Olympus XA. For the trip to Chicago I think it will be the CL, the 15mm Voigtlander, the 40 and the 90, and the XA. Still pondering whether to take a medium format other than the pinhole...

    i have a lot of these things, it occures to me...

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBob View Post
    Glad your back and thanks for the excellent report on what happened during the trip. I am surpised you took THAT big of a selection of glass with you. May I ask what specific results do you like with the 50m f/2? I see that so many people swear by them but never get to any specifics.....is B&W just got "that" look to it? Color give it the old fashioned look from long ago? Just wondering.

    My wife LOVES Prague, even with her old film P&S she got some wonderful photos. If you get any real keepers, I think we would all love seeing a few.

    Bob E.
    Bob,

    THAT big of a selection of glass, when it's almost all f/2.8, is pretty light, though I might just be a glutton for punishment. I have 3 50mm f/1.4's; 2 s'es and an AiS. But I like how the f/2 looks wide open and it's Ai so my son could use it on his digital (he used it, a lot.) I'm not very educated on the specifics but the 'look' is just something I like, and the spatial quality wide open too, especially after shooting wide angles a lot where everything is in focus. Also, it would be the cheapest to replace if stolen. I want to add here that at no time on the entire trip did we ever feel threatened or in danger or that we were being 'cased'. I did get a lot of attention because it was 'one of those old film cameras' and let's face it, if you're in the nave of a 900 year old church and you push the button on an F everyone knows it. . We might have stood out because we weren't using huge (digital camera) zooms. Fs and F3s are sweet little packages with a modest lens mounted. I carried them both; that might have drawn some attention too. I never once thought I had brought too much glass.

    I like B+W and I wanted the future to have some dog-eared B+W prints of us in Europe so my son could reminisce over them; I don't think the digital images he took will be around in 50 or 60 years. He is 16 so he could order his first legal drink, in Italy (a glass of prosecco in the Piazza San Marco, 9 euros). It was his first trip out of the country. Lots of stuff to remember when he's old like me and I want to leave him prints of it all. So, most of my work was rather personal, family stuff. there might be some 'street' stuff and if so I'll post a couple. I need to mix some new D-76 and then let it cool off for a few days.

    Not to offend anyone but I disliked Prague. Granted, we didn't have much time there and the heat and humidity was terrible. Need to go back and give it another chance. The architecture was fabulous, and all of it needed a good acid washing.

    s-a
    I photograph things to see what things look like photographed.
    - Garry Winogrand

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Yukon, OK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    277
    S-a, I figured that you were going more of the B&W way than color. I am finding that having been a color fanatic for most of my life, I am finding the lure of B&W and the classic look it gives to be more satisfying as I get older.

    Honestly, I have not explored wide open on any of my fast lenses. Now that I am starting on the home processing thing, certainly no better time than the present to start exploring the limits of my equipment.

    I also get your not exactly being a fan of Prague. I agree that if most of that architecture was cleaned up even just a little bit to bring out all that detail, it would be even more stunning. Looking back at all the photos I have of Europe's notable places (and not really knowing how to photograph well at all), the lack of detail that is hidden in the dark was and is still disappointing.

    This kind of reminds me I should pull out one of my old cameras and go "shooting" this weekend.

    Bob E.
    Nikon F5, Nikon F4S, Nikon FA, Nikon FE, Nikon N90, Nikon N80, Nikon N75, Mamiya 645 Pro, Mamiya Press Super 23, Yashica Lynx 14e, Yashica Electro GSN, Yashica 124G, Yashica D

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA., U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    228

    What lenses you pick really does depend on what brand of camera system you are using.

    Quote Originally Posted by semi-ambivalent View Post
    I'm going to be in Eastern-ish Europe for a couple weeks and I'm trying to figure out what lenses to bring. I'll be shooting almost all Tri-X, maybe some Ektachrome 100G (Bringing a Canon Powershot 630A for the "color" stuff if we have to have some snaps.) I'm traveling very light and want one camera and perhaps three lenses. I have some Nikkors and can get my hands on just about anything I don't have. I'm only interested in B&W street stuff but my wife is an architect and she'll want elevation shots and maybe details.

    What has worked for you? I'm thinking 50/1.4, 28/2.8, 20/2.8 and mmmmaybe a 105 because I can't imagine not having one. A 200/4 is pretty light, but...

    Open to any thoughts,

    s-a
    What lenses you pick really does depend on what brand of camera system you are using.
    Let me explain:

    One of the previous posters mention the Leica CL;
    there were only 2 lenses available for this system
    the 40 mm & the 90 mm lenses.

    For the Minolta CLE;
    there were 3 lenses available for this system
    the 28 mm, the 40 mm & the 90 mm lens.

    For my Contax G2;
    the original kit included 3 lenses the 28 mm, the 45 mm, & the 90 mm lenses.
    Then they added a 21 mm lens. The 16 mm lens was never very practical &
    thus didn't sell very well. It was also very high priced.
    So, I added a Voigtlander Bessa L with the 12 mm & 15 mm LTM lenses.
    It ended up being cheaper while providing more flexibility.

    Do you see a pattern here ?

    A Super Wide, A Wide, A Normal & a Short Telephoto lens.

    With a rangefinder camera, small prime lenses are the rule.

    For an SLR, you can cover a lot more with 3 zoom lenses
    & a Macro lens.

    Let's start with some kind of;
    17 - 35 mm, 35 - 105 mm, 80 - 200 mm & a 50 mm or a 90 mm Macro lens.

    Your exact mm's may vary, but you get the idea of the ranges needed.
    This system is definitely heavier than a set of primes;
    but when you're traveling, it's better to have the flexibility the " right " mm lens for
    the shot will give you, especially when shooting in film.

    You could opt for a do-all lens & a Macro lens !
    The New Nikon 28 - 200 mm G-Mount lens comes to mind, BUT, This Has It's Limits TOO.

    First, most of these aren't as sharp as the combination I recommended above.
    Second, the do-all lens will always be heavier, than the smaller zooms or primes.
    Third, the slow variable aperture is usually a problem. The zooms mentioned above
    can be had as f 2.8's. The 28 - 200 is 3.5 - 5.6. Now the G-Mount means the camera
    will force the lens to put out f 5.6 across the whole range, but that's a little slow, for
    most people to rely on.

    The Macro lens would be a 50 mm, a 90 mm Tamron, or a 100 mm. This would depend on you.

    I'm handicapped now, so my Contax G2 system with the above mentioned lenses gets more
    of a workout, than my SLR system with the above mentioned zoom lenses as per above.

    Finally, strictly from my experience, if you have an SLR & must have prime lenses;
    A Full-Frame Fisheye; 15, 16, 0r 17 mm, A 24 mm, A 35 mm & 85, 90, or 100 mm lenses.

    Besides weight the best reason to use prime lenses are for the speed &
    I would purchase them for that reason.

    Of course you can mix & match primes with zooms. That's what makes life interesting !

  5. #75

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by Vanishing Point Ent. View Post
    What lenses you pick really does depend on what brand of camera system you are using.
    Let me explain:

    One of the previous posters mention the Leica CL;
    there were only 2 lenses available for this system
    the 40 mm & the 90 mm lenses.

    For the Minolta CLE;
    there were 3 lenses available for this system
    the 28 mm, the 40 mm & the 90 mm lens.

    For my Contax G2;
    the original kit included 3 lenses the 28 mm, the 45 mm, & the 90 mm lenses.
    Then they added a 21 mm lens. The 16 mm lens was never very practical &
    thus didn't sell very well. It was also very high priced.
    So, I added a Voigtlander Bessa L with the 12 mm & 15 mm LTM lenses.
    It ended up being cheaper while providing more flexibility.

    Do you see a pattern here ?

    A Super Wide, A Wide, A Normal & a Short Telephoto lens.

    With a rangefinder camera, small prime lenses are the rule.

    For an SLR, you can cover a lot more with 3 zoom lenses
    & a Macro lens.

    Let's start with some kind of;
    17 - 35 mm, 35 - 105 mm, 80 - 200 mm & a 50 mm or a 90 mm Macro lens.

    Your exact mm's may vary, but you get the idea of the ranges needed.
    This system is definitely heavier than a set of primes;
    but when you're traveling, it's better to have the flexibility the " right " mm lens for
    the shot will give you, especially when shooting in film.

    You could opt for a do-all lens & a Macro lens !
    The New Nikon 28 - 200 mm G-Mount lens comes to mind, BUT, This Has It's Limits TOO.

    First, most of these aren't as sharp as the combination I recommended above.
    Second, the do-all lens will always be heavier, than the smaller zooms or primes.
    Third, the slow variable aperture is usually a problem. The zooms mentioned above
    can be had as f 2.8's. The 28 - 200 is 3.5 - 5.6. Now the G-Mount means the camera
    will force the lens to put out f 5.6 across the whole range, but that's a little slow, for
    most people to rely on.

    The Macro lens would be a 50 mm, a 90 mm Tamron, or a 100 mm. This would depend on you.

    I'm handicapped now, so my Contax G2 system with the above mentioned lenses gets more
    of a workout, than my SLR system with the above mentioned zoom lenses as per above.

    Finally, strictly from my experience, if you have an SLR & must have prime lenses;
    A Full-Frame Fisheye; 15, 16, 0r 17 mm, A 24 mm, A 35 mm & 85, 90, or 100 mm lenses.

    Besides weight the best reason to use prime lenses are for the speed &
    I would purchase them for that reason.

    Of course you can mix & match primes with zooms. That's what makes life interesting !
    I've never been able to get comfortable with a 24, although 20s and 28s are fine with me. I've never used zooms; they only give me an opportunity to angst about whether I need 52mm or 56mm. With the added benefit of dropping/losing all your lenses at the same moment.

    s-a
    I photograph things to see what things look like photographed.
    - Garry Winogrand

  6. #76
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    764
    Images
    7
    I'm going to modify my previous assessment of bringing three lenses. After walking around for two weeks in Japan and Hong Kong with a backpack, camera, water bottle, guide book, and snack, I've come to appreciate the "one lens is adequate" philosophy. The 50mm f1.4 pretty much handled everything I needed.

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    849
    I often find it hard to limit the number of lenses I take. Earlier this month we went away for three days. I brought a Konica FT-1 with a Nikon E focusing screen and the following odd selection of lenses: 21/2.8 Hexanon, 28-85/2.8-3.8 Vivitar, 55/2.8 Vivitar Macro and 200/3.5 Sigma IF. I thought about making the macro lens a 90 and about making the 200 a Vivitar f/3 Series 1. The f/3 lens is a little faster and focuses to 4 feet while the Sigma focuses to 4.5 feet but the Sigma is smaller and lighter. I liked the results of my selection.

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Vienna, AUSTRIA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    67
    It depends on the purpose. If I am going to photograph a lot, I take the Hexar RF with 15+28+50+90 lenses with me (did so in Iceland), if I want to go light, I just take the Hexar RF, if I want to go ultralight (hiking, etc.) I take an Olympus XA

  9. #79
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,595
    28mm and 50mm will be sufficient for Europe. If not just 35mm but loads of film.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,679
    Quote Originally Posted by baachitraka View Post
    28mm and 50mm will be sufficient for Europe. If not just 35mm but loads of film.
    If I had to go back to Europe with two lenses, the 28 (which I don't yet own) and 50 would be my choices. Three lenses, 28, 50, 105. One lens, 35.

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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