|
Krakkles posted:
Thanks for the info.
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
longview posted:Extension tubes + 35mm lens = high res super quick scanner. Well that's fine, but then you end up having to scan the photo of the photo. Anyone tried KatzEye focusing screens? I've been playing with manual lenses and I feel like the default screen in my 50D isn't the best for accurate focus. Having recently got an old film SLR the difference has become pretty obvious. The KatzEye screens are about 5 times the price of a Canon EF-S, but they seem to get awesome reviews everywhere while a bunch of people say the EF-S barely helps at all. At the moment I'm making do with Liveview and 10x magnification, but honestly I hate taking pictures through an LCD. big scary monsters fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Jul 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:00
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:Well that's fine, but then you end up having to scan the photo of the photo. I think you're doing it wrong, although I commend you for attempting to use a Pentax ME Super for everything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:Well that's fine, but then you end up having to scan the photo of the photo. Attach camera at the end, scan a roll at 35MPin 3 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I think you're doing it wrong, although I commend you for attempting to use a Pentax ME Super for everything. Can we be Dorkroom BFFs?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:22
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Can we be Dorkroom BFFs? Slattern.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
Doing some final shopping before I leave for Ishinomaki, Japan in two weeks. Was just told that due to the current situation in Ishinomaki, charging of anything but mobile phones is going to be totally prohibited, which means I need to invest in batteries. I'd really like to pick up a battery grip for my 550D and from what I've seen, there are aftermarket grips which also take AA batteries which would be really helpful. I'm just hesitant about buying a knock-off battery grip as I'm not sure of the risks involved. Does anyone have any experience with non-canon battery grips?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:35
|
|
|
ThisQuietReverie posted:Slattern. Well this is awkward...
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
longview posted:Extension tubes + 35mm lens = high res super quick scanner. Get a piece of antinewton glass and gaffer tape the negs to it, or get two pieces and sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:55
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:Well that's fine, but then you end up having to scan the photo of the photo. I bought my Nikon D60 used with a split prism screen already installed, although not from Katzeye. I can tell you that it's invaluable for focusing, it's much easier to focus with it on my D60's lovely, dark viewfinder than the much better finder on my D300 that lacks a split prism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Can we be Dorkroom BFFs? we need to make a Pentax ME Superposters gang tag.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:20
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:we need to make a Pentax ME Superposters gang tag. I would pay real life money for this. Probably about 5ɱɛ (five Pentax ME Supers).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:28
|
|
|
Can I play, too? Pentax ME Super by Execudork, on Flickr I'd kick in for some ME Super tag action. Also, I have been planning to do a compare-and-contrast review of 2 pairs of cameras. The first pair up would be my ME Super vs. my MX. Same lenses, same film (APX 100, methinks, since I've got a bunch in my freezer waiting to see some light). Is there anything anybody is particularly interested in seeing in such a comparison?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:47
|
|
|
The Pentax ME Super + SMC 50mm 1.4 is my favorite thing to shoot with, and that's out of like... 15 cameras or something including small/medium/large formats and digital. Ellen and a Tree by iantuten, on Flickr ~`*BOKEH*`~
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:~`*BOKEH*`~ I think old 1.4 bokeh might be my favorite thing about photography.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:
Not photo-related, but holy poo poo that shirt <3
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 05:35
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Not photo-related, but holy poo poo that shirt <3 Wait till you see her rad-rear end "Moo! I'm a goat!" shirt with a picture of a giraffe on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 09:24
|
|
|
TQR, that was a creepy post to read until I saw who it was, then I was like "oh it's just my bro TQR."
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 15:02
|
|
|
xpost from canon thread:whereismyshoe posted:Anyone had experience with the Tokina 16-28 2.8 ultrawide? it gets better reviews than the twice as expensive 16-35 2.8L but i've never had experience with third party stuff before
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 16:55
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:xpost from canon thread: If it is anything like the Tokina 11-16 2.8 it will be great! And Tokina's build quality is usually fantastic. The only downside I can see with the 16-28 is the bulbous front element means using filters is out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
There's the usual QC issues and the weird AF, but their lenses are well built (just not always well aligned).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
I picked up an old M42 Tele-Takumar 400mm f5.6 (the owner re-mounted for it Nikon) for under $20 yesterday. It still allows for infinity focus and is surprisingly sharp for such an old tele. None of that new fangled "Auto-Diaphragm" nonsense either.   
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 00:04
|
|
|
I have a Pentax MX, I feel like I'm on the wrong boat. But I like my boat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 00:12
|
|
|
Miko posted:I have a Pentax MX, I feel like I'm on the wrong boat. I have an MX, too. That's the other half of the shootout pair I'll do as soon as the motivation fairy pays me a visit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
The MX seems like a great camera if all manual is your thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 02:21
|
|
|
Actually, I'm kinda curious. Wikipedia says the ME was solely an Av camera, unlike the ME Super, or the MX. Why buy an ME, than? I mean, I have an old Av/manual Minolta and I think it's awesome, but I don't know that I'd want an Av-only camera. What's the deal? e. Am I missing something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 05:48
|
|
|
ME is a tiny camera, all said and done. It's Av only but has a dedicated 1/100 mode so you can still shoot s/16 with ISO100 film I guess. There's really no reason to buy one over an ME Super. Then again if you're the kind of photographer that lives in Av mode 100% of the time it might not be a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 06:00
|
|
|
Is it actually smaller than most '80's SLRs then? Because I can't imagine fitting mine into a coat pocket without a pancake lens or something. I mean, I guess if you could convince the shutter to go fast enough, you could s16 400 ASA film or something, but I haven't found a place here that'll sell 100 film. It just seems a somewhat silly recommendation for the dorkroom to me, but what do I know? Hell, I wish my Minolta had a mechanical mode. drat thing sat in a kitchen cabinet for over a decade due to dead batteries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 06:12
|
|
|
Its definitely smaller (and lighter) than the fujica I have. Here is one next to a d5000 and an STX-1.   I think the OM cameras are about the same size though. Not sure of any other 35mm slr's that size though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 06:27
|
|
|
The ME Super and the MX are both pretty small, but the MX is slightly smaller. I don't (yet) have an ME. 35mm SLR collection 1 by Execudork, on Flickr  35mm SLR collection 3 by Execudork, on Flickr I also have some advertising for the MX that came with mine. It claims the MX is "The world's smallest, lightest, most complete, full-featured 35mm SLR" I don't see a date anywhere on this pamphlet, but it's got to be circa 1980. It mentions the ME but not the ME Super. I also have the owner's manual for the MX, it claims: Body size: 135.5mm x 82.5mm x 49.5mm Body weight: 495 grams. I've got to scan these pamphlets in, they're full of really interesting stuff. I particularly like the comparisons to cigarettes in the MX propaganda. "The Pentax MX itself is a mere 135.5mm in length. ONly slightly longer than a 120mm cigarette! Its maximum height of 82.5mm is no taller than the average normal sized cigarette!" How difficult is it to change the aperture or shutter speed while holding a lit cigarette in the same hand?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 06:54
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:The ME Super and the MX are both pretty small, but the MX is slightly smaller. I don't (yet) have an ME. Cumbersome, but not impossible with the two pentax lenses I have. They have pretty stiff aperture rings compared to my yashinon lens though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 07:06
|
|
|
On F3 It was no problem at all. The trick is to put the ciggie as close to the palm as you can. PS: get better cameras you fukken plebs
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 11:38
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:On F3 It was no problem at all. The trick is to put the ciggie as close to the palm as you can. Whoa, whoa, whoa, there is no reason to get all pentaxphobic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 14:57
|
|
|
A cigarette? No serious photographer would ever smoke anything other than a cigar: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:we need to make a Pentax ME Superposters gang tag. Count me in
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:Count me in Protip: It's never going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
KEH is having a 10% off sale on all film cameras through the end of the month.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
Here's an actual gear question: I bought a 5DII a year or so ago when I had too much money and thought a camera would make my feelings better after getting dumped. I've had a nifty 50 on it for a year, occasionally subbing in the 28-135mm (which I could borrow from school). Having graduated, and possibly looking to make some money from freelance photo, I'm considering what my options are for expanding beyond the 50. Basically, I'm looking for a good all around lens for a 5D that isn't going to destroy my wallet. Most of the freelance stuff I'm looking for will be event type stuff, so a general purpose lens seems ideal. Any advice?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 23:30
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Here's an actual gear question: I would think 24-70 f/2.8 L would fit your needs exactly? There is a newer and older version I believe, and I'm sure you'd be quite happy with the older version. edit: That looks to be about $1300 used on Craigslist. There is a new Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 that has IS [tamron calls it VC] that looks to be getting pretty positive reviews which you can get NEW for the same price as the used L glass [which doesn't have image stabilization]. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007SNP02K...&hvptwo=&hvqmt= tijag fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Jul 20, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
tijag posted:I would think 24-70 f/2.8 L would fit your needs exactly? There is a newer and older version I believe, and I'm sure you'd be quite happy with the older version. Hm yeah that Tamron looks pretty great. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 23:57
|
|