Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,919   Posts: 1,556,492   Online: 1268
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38
  1. #21
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Not all camera bodies focus accurately.

    Few maintain their mechanical accuracy over time (as they wear).

    Not all have precise film to lens registration.

    Few have really precise film flatness.

    With a motor drive, the speed of film transport reduced film flatness,
    and reduces sharpness.

    You don't HAVE to buy the top-of-the-line cameras,
    but you DO have to buy cameras with the right to return
    if your example is a loser.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    292
    I seem to recall that ALPA manufactured a 35mm camera that pin registered the film. It had a reseau plate and a moving pressure plate. Talk about film registration and flatness.
    Sam H.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,159
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel Hotton View Post
    I seem to recall that ALPA manufactured a 35mm camera that pin registered the film. It had a reseau plate and a moving pressure plate. Talk about film registration and flatness.
    Sam H.
    & Contax offered a vacuum back in one of theirs(ST?)
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  4. #24
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Marco S. View Post
    Yeah, I'm really contemplating picking up a nice 1N in EX+ condition from KEH. I like the feel of a solid camera in my hands, makes me feel good.
    This effect wears off after all your subjects consistently avoid the camera.

  5. #25
    Joe Grodis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wyoming, PA (USA)
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    201
    I've found the that in extreme conditions like very cold weather the cheaper cameras shutters tend to SLOW down. So, IMHO the camera body does make a difference some of the time.


    -Joe

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Essex, UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    478
    Images
    8
    All a camera body is, IMO, is a light-tight box with a metering device, a mount for the lens and a film advance mechanism. The metering device probably has most effect on your photos. The metering in the Olympus OM2n I owned years ago is probably the best I've ever experienced. That said, I used it A LOT and became very used to how it would react in given lighting conditions.

    I feel lucky to be able to afford a few cameras. However, if I were on a really tight budget, I'd buy the cheapest body that would do what I wanted it to do (in terms of shutter speed range / metering) and then spend the most I could on lenses. In my experience, lenses make more of a difference to the photo than the body - and you'll probably keep them for longer than a body.
    Paul Jenkin (a late developer...)

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Jenkin View Post
    All a camera body is, IMO, is a light-tight box with a metering device, a mount for the lens and a film advance mechanism. The metering device probably has most effect on your photos.
    Let's see.

    There's measurements to start with:
    The film gate needs to sit at the correct distance from the lens, within a few hundredths of a mm.
    The lens mount and the film plane need to be absolutely parallel.
    The lens to film distance needs to be exactly the same as the lens to focussing screen distance.
    The film gate and focussing screen need to be aligned laterally.

    Then there are the moving bits:
    The mirror needs to return into the exact position (within those hundredths of a mm again) every single time it moves up and down again.
    The shutter must work, be precise, and not bounce.
    Diaphragm, mirror, and shutter need to be synchronized properly.
    Film transport must be regular (frame spacing) and smooth (mechanical damage to the film).
    The film (also a moving bit) must be put and kept in the same position exactly, again and again.
    And the electronic or mechanical thingy (depending on the particular camera) that will be timing the exposure must work, and keep working.

    You will want to see a large, bright and easy to focus viewfinder image too. So the optics of the viewing system must be up to scratch too.
    Particularly important if the metering electronics also use the viewfinder optics.

    I will have forgotten one or two things. And more can be said about the things i have mentioned.

    But apart from that, no, a camera has very little effect on the quality of the images it produces...
    Believe that, and you'll believe anything.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    410
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    Let's see.

    There's measurements to start with:
    The film gate needs to sit at the correct distance from the lens, within a few hundredths of a mm.
    The lens mount and the film plane need to be absolutely parallel.
    The lens to film distance needs to be exactly the same as the lens to focussing screen distance.
    The film gate and focussing screen need to be aligned laterally.

    Then there are the moving bits:
    The mirror needs to return into the exact position (within those hundredths of a mm again) every single time it moves up and down again.
    The shutter must work, be precise, and not bounce.
    Diaphragm, mirror, and shutter need to be synchronized properly.
    Film transport must be regular (frame spacing) and smooth (mechanical damage to the film).
    The film (also a moving bit) must be put and kept in the same position exactly, again and again.
    And the electronic or mechanical thingy (depending on the particular camera) that will be timing the exposure must work, and keep working.

    You will want to see a large, bright and easy to focus viewfinder image too. So the optics of the viewing system must be up to scratch too.
    Particularly important if the metering electronics also use the viewfinder optics.

    I will have forgotten one or two things. And more can be said about the things i have mentioned.

    But apart from that, no, a camera has very little effect on the quality of the images it produces...
    Believe that, and you'll believe anything.
    Well I've been buying lenses off the bay and getting some cameras thrown in, so far in 6 months have MTL3, two canon av1s, two canon T70s, OM10 and OM20, T90, FTb..........three P&S Nikon, Canon, and Minolta for £1 each from boot sales........and they all take excellent pics so it can't be that difficult to get it right.....whether you can see the difference in say a 5X7" print from a spot on manufactured body to a one that is very close (because it's worn or cheaply made) is debatable, as in theory there must be a difference.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Stavanger or Trondheim, Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    771
    Images
    24
    Everyone seems to be discussing technicalities here. What about ergonomics, feel, what you are comfortable with? I have had a couple of Canons (7E, 1V) and just never felt comfortable with them. On the other hand, all the Contaxes I have ever used (RTS III, Aria, G2, 645) sit very naturally in my hands and all the controls are exactly where I want them. Of course this is subjective, but I notice that I get significantly more keepers from cameras that feel right.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    14
    I think people have it right - image quality is less of an issue within the realm of relatively modern, relatively well-kept bodies. I guess it comes down to 'extras' (metering, flash sync, blah-blah), personal taste, and, at least as important in my view, ergonomics. It doesn't strictly effect image quality, but in an indirect way, if a camera is good in the hand and intuitive to change settings, you're more likely to get the shot you want...

Page 3 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