Photography Lesson

“I know there have been other photography threads out there but I got some questions. I need a lesson on cameras.
I currently own:
Canon T50 35 mm. The only lens I have for it saysCanon Lens FD 50mm 1:18. What does this mean? It works good for snap shots. I don't have a flash for this (we inherited it from my father-in-law).

Olympus SuperZoom 2800 28-80mm What does this mean? I'm not real pleased with the photos from this one all the time.

Should I invest in lenses and flash for the canon? It is 15 yrs. old. I'm not looking to be a professional photographer but would like to have something that takes a clear crisp photograph.

A few cameras I am currently looking at:

Pentax 10249 IQ 200 Zoom 35mm Camera $ 299.90

Olympus 102490 'Stylus 140' Zoom Camera $ 233.33

Minolta 'Vectis 300' APS Camera $ 174.69

Whatever I do, I would like to be able to take it with me on the trail with ease.
All opinions are welcome.”

“baume 66, I have a full kit of pro gear (it was work for me for a long time) that I hardly ever touch. I hauled it to the other side of the world with me and ended up taking 90% of the photos with a little Olympus Stylus pocket camera. Why? It was unobtrusive and took great photos.

The goal is to find a camera that is good quality and that you learn to use inside out. A quality glass lens, sturdy construction, ease of use, easy to carry at all times, and in this day and age, something that does not draw too much attention. Do you need a zoom? Not really. On the powered cameras, it is a big battery drain. Better to have a slightly wide-angle lens, as many non-zoom pocket cameras have. My favorite lenses for my pro bag were a 100mm portrait length tele and a 24mm wide angle. I could shoot almost any assignment with those two on separate bodies.

Oops, gotta go to a meeting with the boss. I'll be back.”

“pekka, would a slightly wide angle lens work good for shots other than scenery? Like snap-shots of family and pets? I know that 24mm is wide angle but what does the 24mm tell me? Is it distance compared to something? Is 35mm the actual and the other numbers a comparison?What is being measured? I am asking this out of lack of knowledge, not to question what you are saying. Thank you.”

“baume 66: The 35mm designation on a camera refers to the film format. 35mm on a lens refers to "focal length." The focal length determines the size of the image on the film, so a 35mm lens on 35mm film gives one level of magnification (actually quite close to what the human eye perceives), while a 35mm lens projecting onto larger format film, say 70mm, becomes quite a wide angle, or projecting onto smaller film (say 16mm or 8mm) would be a telephoto. A 50-55mm lens that comes on a typical 35mm-film interchangeable-lens still camera is called a "normal" lense, but really is a slight telephoto. If you compare lenses, you get a sense of what they will achieve. If your camera has a 50mm lense, then a 100mm will give you twice the magnification and a 24mm will give you half the magnification. Why did I love those two lenses? Because as a photojournalist I was able to shoot in very tight spaces with the 24, and stand back a bit with the 100 without being out of touch. And I knew what their field of view was going to be without thinking when an event was unfolding.

Usually a 50mm lense came into play because a lot of design effort went into making them "fast." That's the other number on the lense, such as f1.4, which would be the largest working aperature, which translates as the most light transmission for that particular lense. A 1.4 is "faster" than a 1.8, or a 2.0, or a 2.8. When I went through college photo-journ. school, all us camera jockies were very hot on being able to shoot "available light." You wanted that fast lense because film was horribly slow and grainy by today's standards and flashes were finicky and drew a lot of attention. We were willing (some of us) to invest the bucks in getting a "fast" 24, say, like mine which is a 2.8. I presume they have faster 24's now, but I stopped paying attention a number of years back.

On zoom lenses, there mayl be two "f" numbers, just as there are two focal length numbers. If you have a 35-100mm zoom, the "f" numbers might be 3.5-5.6, which tells you that the lenses fastest working aperature at the 35mm setting lets through more light than the fastest aperature available in the 100mm setting. I'm getting hazy on my optical physics here, but it is a mathematical principle.

The other issue with focal length and f-speed is that big aperatures reduce "depth of field" or the zone in focus, as do long focal lengths. So a very wide angle lense, say a 20mm, set at its smallest aperature, say f24, will have pretty much everything in focus, near to infinity. You can set an estimated distance, hold it over your head in a crowd and take a picture without focusing it by eye. A 400mm set at its largest aperature, say f2 if you've got the bucks to buy all that expensive high-transmission glass, will have basically just the exact plane it is focused on in focus. (It will also be more subject to camera shake since it is magnifying movement as well as image.) Which of course explains how photographers use different lenses to "edit" reality in the camera as they shoot. You can drop out a foreground and background, or you can include them. Pictures almost always "lie" about reality by the nature of mechanical versus human optical perception.

The good news for a current camera buyer is that the film speeds and quality have gotten so good that the need for super fast lenses has diminished. A truly quality pocket camera, which doesn't cost as much as such a machine once did, can take great pictures even though the lense is relatively slow. How well it handles low light and flash is mitigated now by an onboard computer chip which knows the full capabilities of the lense and film.

The hard thing currently is finding a small 35mm film camera that doesn't have a zoom lense. The original Olympus Stylus is no longer made, though zoom versions such as the ones you mention are. Olympus (which I'll admit I am biased toward -- all my cameras are Olympus since 1975) makes quality products, though not all models are equal. Check out how they feel in your hand(s), how their control buttons and switches feel and are accessible, how fast the camera comes into operating mode when opened, how fast the zoom works (since you won't be able to make it go any faster than it wants to), how easy it is to open and load -- is it intuitive, and does it use easy-to-find batteries? And make sure that if you get bad photos with it, that are clearly the camera's fault -- such as poor exposures or focus, which are mostly the camera's work anymore (read the manual to know how you might screw up its thinking) -- that you can return it.

Another concern since you're an outdoors person is whether it is "weatherproof" at all. Some can handle a bit of spray or drizzle, some can handle a bit more than that, including sand and grit, and some are actually waterproof. The more waterproof, the more likely that it will be more involved to change film. And even if it isn't weatherproof, judicious care when traveling (such as a good ziplock bag) can protect it from many threats. Camera cases are a big problem since if a camera is in a case, you WILL miss good pictures.

The latter remains the argument for the good ol' days when mechanical, metal body cameras were the pro's tools. They could take a beating and an experienced photographer could "guestimate" light levels and manually set the camera if the meter had died. I can't speak for the modern digital cameras in that regards, but I would consider them now that their resolution has advanced. The stuff I see done by a PR person here at school and a reporter for the local paper is pretty amazing. They use Nikon Coolpix models, I believe. For that type of reproduction (typical publication use) the results are very acceptable -- and correctable on your PC in some sense. But they are electronic. Yikes. I never had to worry if my OM-1's would be affected by a lightning storm unless they actually attracted the bolt to me.

The next step is to go to Amazon.com and search photography instruction books, with attention to reader reviews on their clarity and usefulness. Don't go for something that gets cutsey. Look for a pragmatic, clear, foundation book that could be used by someone who has a goal of becoming a photographer, not a snapshooter. In otherwords, a book that treats the subject as one with potential for growth rather than as the latest fad the reader is going through. Find one that explains about focal lengths and lens speed and see if it makes sense. You'll be more informed on why your pictures look like they do, even if the camera is handling all the settings.

Hope this helps. And if anybody out there sees some egregious mistake in my photo theory recall, please correct me. I haven't done a photo lesson in a while. Good luck and good "shootin' " but remember to look with your eyes, too. I saw a lot of events over a lot of years through camera lenses, and it isn't always reality.”

“Pekka, Thank you for going over that stuff for me. Seems I have a bit of homework to do before making a purchase. Thanks again.”

“Holy samolikers, is Pekka a reincarnation of Orbitmanifesto?

Baume, I just have a simple $80 point and shoot. I would love to get into photography sometime, but this works just fine for me. I take it just about anywhere I go (trips, vacations, family get togethers etc.). The nice thing about it is that it is small enough I can put it in my pocket. That and the low weight are probably the best reasons for a point and shoot vs. a fancy big-assed camera when backpacking. I suppose for high quality photography though one of those fancy things would be the way to go. $.02”

“BTW, I never counted the weight of my cameras when I went backpacking, but I still tried to go with basics. From my first to my second Isle Royale trip (about 20 years ago) I cut to one body and a 35-135 zoom. It was a compromise in several ways. Today I'd keep it even lighter -- a weatherproof automatic probably. But I do get bugged by the little whine of the electric motors as it focuses and zooms. On the otherhand, if you find you really really like taking high quality photos in the backcountry, you will have to learn to tote a certain level of gear.

For family photos, you just can't beat the better small 35mm automatics.

Looking back at some of your earlier questions, when it comes to taking scenics, such as landscapes, it seems wrong, but you are better off using a zoom or tele to tighten up your shot rather than a wideangle to spread it. Details attract the eye more than sheer panorama of a typical wide shot. Those panorama settings on some cameras simply pre-crop the bottom and top of the frame and require englargement in the lab to bring out the details. So the film better be really fine grained for the pic to look good.

Have fun.”

“Yeah Oldie, buried in there somewhere is just what you said. Course I'd die for a good Leica rangefinder with a Carl Zeiss lense, but that is just gear lust of the photo sort (still they are cool and functional). My fallback is my palm-sized Stylus for "street" shooting. Remember, all things considered, film is cheap. Shoot lots of pics and learn from your mistakes -- and don't include your mistakes in your photo album or slide show!”

“Hey pekka, it's great to know that there are other Olympus fans here at Trail Talk. I love my old OM2-n; simple to use and small. My favorite lens is my Zuiko 24mm/f2.8. I also have one of the older 50mm/f1.4 lens, a macro 50mm, and the 75-150mm.

Baume66 my advice is to study prices on used cameras of the brands you like and then go to eBay and buy from a seller with a high rating.”

“solitary, yeah, the Olympus cameras always were a much better fit in my hands. And lighter. I started with an automatic exposure Olympus Trip 35 when I went to college, moved to an low-priced, high value East German Exacta that didn't even have a meter, but was a MACHINE, then a Ricoh Singlex with a great 50/1.4. After graduating and getting a newspaper job, I skipped eating and other minor details to save for gear. I just missed out on the last of the Olympus 1/2 frame little beauties. But, voila, up popped the OMs. My 24/2.8 Zuiko is sweet, even as it gathers dust. You're gonna get me all fired up again. I'll probably drag my camera bag out of the gear room and fondle my trusty little antique babies. I have two low-vis pro-black OM-1 bodies (black bodies used to mean something when cameras were metal), the 24, the 50/1.4, the 100/2.8, and 200/4 in Zuikos, and an off-brand 35-135/macro that was a mixed blessing. Even with the smaller, lighter Olympus gear, that was a lot of weight to drag around, but I did it for years. How these guys with those super teles do it these days, I don't know. One of the first valuable lessons when I got serious was to learn how to get the most out of the lens that comes with your camera before you spend any money on more lenses. When you look at some of the street work of Cartier-Bresson, it shows that the eye is in the head, not screwed onto your camera.”

“Yo Solitary Hiker
Olympus OM-10 fan. Right Here!!”

“I would say that to two most important features on a camera body are manual control and interchangable lenses. There are SLR cameras that have fully automatic and manual modes. This lets the camera grow with your skills.”

“pekka and walkin ..... I need another camera like another hole in the head, but you know what? Everytime I get my new B&H catalog I turn back to the Olympus section and drool over the OM3Ti. They say that when you fire the shutter on the OM3 it sounds like a Ferrari starting up. Now that's a camera!”

“I know what you mean about Olympus SH.
I went to buy a point & shoot camera a while back. I only looked at Olympus. Got me one too.”

“baume 66 - I recently found what I feel is the perfect backpacking camera. It is the Yashica T4 Super Weatherproof. It takes great pictures, is lightweight and compact, and (as the name implies) is weatherproof. It has The Zeiss lens that pekka mentioned. This camera has quite a big following among professional photographers, and it is very affordable. You can get one for under $200. The website is here http://www.yashica.com/site.html If you cannot find one in your area (you will probably have to go to a specialty camera shop) B&H Photo stocks them and is an extremely reputable online dealer. They are at http://www02.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/FrameWork.class”

“m-nutz, thanks for the tip on the Yashica. It pretty much fills the bill, doesn't it? Now I want it, too!

Deathmarch, you make very good points about being able to grow with a camera. My OM-1s are all manual and mechanical with metering prisms. Some say obsolete, but I say controllable and dependable.

But a manual, interchangeable lens SLR is a commitment to technique and skill development. Some want that, others just want better photos. As you can see above, when I went into detail to answer Baume (who did ask for a lesson on rather esoteric details), Oldie thought it was a bit much for a posting. However, I think a camera such as the above Yashica has an important place for someone who is just starting to contemplate taking better photos, and for those of us who question carrying all our "better" gear around. A check of the specs on the Yashica reveals several features that allow the operator to override or influence the auto focus and exposure electronics, which is probably why it gets such a high rating and is popular with pros. From my own experience years ago, I started with a fairly primitive auto exposure and grew, because of its limitations, to more sophisticated gear

Aren't gear discussions fun? Now that it's midwinter, my whitewater catalogs are arriving, too!”

“Hey, baume66. I think you should learn more about photography. Get a book at the library, read and soak it up. Some things might be confusing, then go to your local shop and ask. Or join a local photographers groups or roam at an internet photography site.

When you start asking the questions you're asking, it's time to start learning for yourself.

I did that in the early 80s. Self-taught from the library shelves. Then I was immensely helped by getting into newspaper work, where we critiqued each other's stuff all the time... more learning.

I am still rotten at trying to figure out such stuff things as a fill flash ration (or a flash rating)... but it pays to know there are such things... and to know WHO you can contact that will help.

Your hobby sounds ready to take a few steps forward. Learn and enjoy it more.

(That said I can't tell you quite what 24 or 28 mm wide angles refer to.... I'm guessing angle of view. BUT... I know what effects they will have on a photo. And that's the important thing. Good luck!)”

“Let me add, it's what YOU know that makes the look of the photo work. There are all kinds of cameras that will provide a quality product. (This was the purpose of the pass-around camera. And many people had really nice shots on those disposables.)

It's knowing how to work the angles... and the mechanics.

Best to you in your photography!!!”

“Baume, one of my Comp. II students just showed me his new Canon EOS Rebel. Very lightweight (no metal) SLR. In the moment I looked at it, I couldn't tell if the 35-80/f4-5.6 zoom was removable; if not, it's a limitation. (Noticed one other thing to watch for: opposite where it told focal length and max aperature on the lens front was another number, 55mm -- that tells you the size of screw-in filters the lens barrel takes. Details details as the Lesson expands!) The zoom works fairly smoothly, though like plastic on plastic which would worry me for longevity. Seemed insubstantial, but who knows. He said he would let me know how it holds up to his typical rough handling. As you learn more, start cruising camera shops that have used equipment and start handling different models to see what the differences are.

And as Lizs said, read read read. Interrupt the technical books with other photo related materials, like Robert Capa's biography. Pour over quality photo books that collect one photographer's work or a style of photography.”

“Great info here, guys. I inherited a great camera and am still playing around with it. (Olympus OM-10)
It is so great when you are able to get the feel for your camera with all of the intricate settings. Before this, I had only done point and shoot photography...
this is a whole new world. :o)”

“AmyG, the OM-10 is a nice model.
Baume, It's probably a good one to look for used, in good condition. About on the feature par with Canon AE-1's if I remember right. Very functional and a lot of them around from the SLR boom times. Probably in a lot of drawers and closets, so you might find a deal from a neighbor or relative.”

“Funny you mention it, I had one, an Olympus, I bought used, a few years back (10?). It was all manual. Anyways, it broke not long after I started getting to know it (can't remeber what) and I didn't pursue anything more at that time. I have been searching high and low around here and can't find it. I had a few lenses with it, one was a zoom of some sort. The Canon T50 I mentioned above is a SLR and does take nice photo's. I don't have an instruction book for it. You think I could get one of those still? Thanks for the input everyone. I certainly do plan to read up on photography, I do on everything that catches my fancy, and will make an informed decision. It helps to get some information, thoughts and input from you folks too.”

“Baume, if you find the camera, let us know. It may be one worth getting fixed if it was all manual/mechanical and isn't severely damaged. As for instruction books, some manufacturers may have old manuals. Go to their website and e-mail an inquiry.”

“baume 66 - The T50 manual is still available from Canon, but the following site contains most all the info you need for the camera
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/t50/index.htm”

“Thanks for the link m-nutz.

pekka, I let you know if I find the camera”

“Well, I found the manual for my missing camera, its an Olympus OM 10 fc. It was in a pocket of the camera bag, which we now use for the video camera. Is it worth it for me to keep looking? My wife says she didn't discard it so I'm certain it is around here somewhere.”

“Baume, I suppose the issue will be what went wrong with it. The OM-10 was a nice affordable unit, but not as robust as the OM-1, The autoexposure components could be an issue electronically, or there could be a mechanical problem. Only way to tell will be if it turns up. Good luck.”

“Thanks again pekka. i appreciate all of your input.”

“baume, when I got home last night, I did get out my old camera bag because I thought of something else to check on a camera that's been stashed for a long while. Sure enough, I hadn't taken the batteries out! Neither had leaked, but one was showing signs it was imminent. So if you find that OM-10, check the battery compartment.

Another thing I noticed, on the lenses the little "f" comes before the focal length (e.g. 200mm) not the speed (e.g. 1.4). Shows it had been awhile since I looked closely at my gear. Memory, what a wonderful thing.

Looking forward to seeing photos from one of your hikes.”

“Alright, Ive been reading and reading and studying webpage after webpage. I've decided that the point and shoot that I have, Nikon One-Touch 70 AF Zoom QD is more than adequate to haul around in my pack. I've read a book on pkotography and have decided to get an SLR so I can start getting a little more serious. Would I be better of with something like The OM 2000 or FM 10 to start with or should would it behoove me to spend more and get something like an Elan or n70 or n80 to start with? I would really like as many opinions on this as I can get. Question, lens quality between Canon, Nikon and Olympus. I do realize that there are high quality lenses made by all and there is a cost associated with these but is there a large price difference between comparable quality lenses for each type camera? What makes the diffence in the quality of lenses other than how fast they are? Example: Canon has EF and EF USM. Where do companies like Tamron, Sigma, Quantra and others fit into the quality picture? Do they have a large range of quality also? What about Minolta or Pentax? These last two seem to have a large mix of reviews as for quality so I haven't really considered getting one of them. Should I rethink that? Once again, all opinions are appreciated.”

“I have NEVER had a bad Nikon product. I have the Nikon FM2, (manual everything), and am quite happy with it.

Wish I could afford a medium-format camera!”

“Here are a couple of websites you might find useful:

Camera Review

Photo.Net”

“i must rewrite this whole post because my English teacher wife is proofreading it at the moment.”

“66, I was in your same position two years ago, I wanted to go beyond my point and shoot camera. I started taking my film to Wolf Camera because a guy at work knew the manager and that the manager could help me take better pictures and help me figure out if an SLR was right for me.
After about a month of talking about price ranges, what I wanted to take pictures of, how involved I wanted to get, rugged vs. weight, etc I bought a Nikon N60 and a Tamron 28-300 zoom lens.

I bought Nikon because 1) it's reputation, 2) 2 people at work have multiple Nikons each, so I could borrow lenses, 3) the ability to eventually upgrade to high end proffesional Nikons and still be able to use the first lens I bought.

The Tamron 28-300 had just been released and I liked the idea of one lens with a huge range to eliminate carrying multiple lenses while hiking and to eliminate dirt getting into my camera when changing lenses.

Two years have past and now I'm looking to upgrade once more. I have my eyes set on a Sigma lens and the Nikon N80.

Tamron, Sigma, Vivitar, all make high quality lenses for all the big camera brands, they just use different mounts for each brand.
Nikon lenses are out of my price range.”

“You're gonna find everyone lauds what they use. I have an older Canon and an autofocus (with manual ability too, of course) Canon EOS Elan II. Their lenses are not interchangeable, FWIW.

I saved the approximate $50 and did NOT get the Elan IIe. That little "e" means it has a focusing mechanism you can set to follow where your eye looks on the autofocus. Otherwise you can pick manually from one of three focusing points. It works for me; you get used to where you need to push the button and turn the dial, yes, even under pressure of fast changing conditions. But I also know people who love the eye-control (people I chat with on www.photo.net, as China Chas mentioned. A lot of very, very good photographers there. However, in their chat room people are very friendly and willing to help you out. More high-end amateurs in there.)

I've had the Elan maybe 5-6 years now. It's great. My model is a step up from the Rebel line. They have plastic mounts, I believe, whereas the Elan has metal for durability. Speaking of that, my camera once fell out of my backpack while I was jogging on gravel. Yes, it hit gravel full force from approx. 4 ft. in height. Yes, the Canon still works fine.

I have a 28-105 Canon EF lens. I can't remember what the EF USM is...... I know it costs more. I was thinking that might be the models with the stabilizing device in them??? Have never used that, although I'm sure it's NICE. (but expensive). It that is NOT what it is, it might have something to do with how fast the camera will autofocus. In which case the EF USM would be faster. Not sure which it is, if either. HELP?!?!?

Any of those third party lenses you mention are supposed to be pretty good. I think the order of "understood" quality level is, top to bottom, Tamron..hmm... and I forget which is considered second-best, Tokina or Sigma. (HELP AGAIN??!?)

For distance I have a Tamron f2.8 (read that as a "fast" lens which you can use in lower ilght handheld, NOT with a tripod. You can probably shoot 1/60th to 1/30th of a second handheld and not get blur -- if you're standing good and still, that is). OK, Tamron f2.8 70-210 zoom. Due to its being a "fast" lens it is HUGE! Knowing now how I shoot, I think a "slower" zoom of the same focal lengths would have been adequate -- and lots cheaper and lighter weight to boot. I say this cuz I also use a tripod on 90% of my shots. So the low light factor is not then an issue.

That lens cost around $900. To put it in perspective, the similar Canon lens cost $1,500. Of course, the Canon is supposed to be much faster on autofocus... and I'm sure it is. My Tamron waivers back and forth sometimes on setting the exact focus up.

OH, Reptiles, I'd like to know how big a lens your 28-300mm is... BIG and heavy, or not?

More questions, baume 66? I see you wife let you off the hook. Must have 3rd grade or better reading/writing abilities.......heheheehe!!!”

“Two camera's, it's the way to go. Take the 35mm out when you don't mind the weight and want exceptional pics, take a point and shoot for those outings when it doesnt matter. I have found that I will look at the pics of the point and shoot and will make a trip back to a certain site to take a better pic with the 35.
good luck it is an interesting and rewarding hobby.”

“baume 66, back on the photo subject I see. And Lizs proves I'm not the only one who posts long on the subject. Once you go to SLR, just get the best body and lens you can. As I said a while back, make sure you know how to get the most out of your first lens (a fast 35 mm rather than a 50mm makes sense in many cases, but often it's a 50 that comes with) before you buy another. Working with a fixed focal length lens before getting involved with the zoom will keep you centered on learning to frame by position, rather than dithering over the zoom process. To many beginning photographers try to stand in one place and zoom all around them. You have to learn how to move in relation to your subject. You will learn alot about point-of-view.

I have always wished I'd bought a better zoom, an Olympus Zuiko for my OMs. The one I have (Tamron?) has always proved a compromise compared to my Zuikos.

You won't go wrong with Nikon, Canon or Olympus as long as you stick to their flagship lens line. Pricey but worth it.”

“Someone mentioned Wolf developing.
A local TV station did an experiment with photo finishing. Criteria included price, service, quality, etc. Wolf came in DEAD LAST!
The winner?
(drumroll, please)
WalMart!”

“I have 2 cameras, both are Mamiya M645's. These are medium format cameras. The film that I use is a 120mm compared to 35mm that is found in most point and shoots and SLRs. The lenses that I have are 45mm, 80mm, 120mm macro, and a 300mm. It's true that this is not light weight gear but the quality of the negatives makes the extra effort worth it to me. My cameras are totally manually operated, it does have a light meter but other than that there is no auto-anything. This is the way I want it. I'm in complete control of my pictures and I tell the camera what I want the outcome to be instead of relying on the electronics to decide for me. To be a good photographer, you must first learn the basics of photography. With point and shoots and total auto cameras you are letting the camera make the pictures for you. By doing this, when a picture comes back bad you're clueless as to what went wrong and you may have no idea on how to keep it from happening again. I not knocking these cameras and trying to say they're not good. I 've see some really great shots come from them. I'm just saying it's better to learn to make a photograph than to just make snap-shots.”

“First of all, let's clear up something here. The "quality of the negatives" in regards to medium format vs 35mm or any other format has nothing to do with the format you are shooting. Does medium format equal a better picture? Nope. Larger negatives are not of a better quality, they are merely larger. How does this equate in the real world? It will allow you to make bigger enlargements without degradation of image quality. I shoot everything from APS to 4x5, and have some great images from each of them. I love my Mamiya 645, and my RB67, but I must admit, the camera I use most is my Nikon F5.

Why Nikon? Well, for me, it was Nikon's reputation for excellent optics. All other things being equal (a camera body is really merely a light tight box in which to hold your film) the quality of the optics is the one thing that stands out as most important in image quality. Which brings to mind one question: Why buy a Nikon body only to put a Tokina or Sigma or Tamron lens on it? My prejudices are showing here, but in my opinion, if you are going to spend the bucks for a Nikon camera body, don't compromise on the optics.”

“Pekka....... oh yeah, I can write......and write.......and write.....and write.

Kinda like the Energizer bunny. Editors LOVE me......LOL!!”

“Hobbit, I completely agree with you about better enlargements from med. format negs. This is what I really meant to say. I guess I just chose to wrong words to get my message out there. I'm not trying to degrade anybodys choice of gear. Actually most working pros are working 35mm. This shows that there is nothing wrong with it. If I ever get another 35mm it will be a Nikon. They are super cameras. I also agree with you about the choice of lenses.A top quality lens is the most important piece of equipment you purchase. I hope I haven't offended anybody else by my opinion, I just like my Mamiyas.”

“No offense taken here..... merely wanted to clear up the point about neg. size for those that may have questions in their minds. Now...... how much do I have to save up for that 5X7 that I've got my eyes on? *grin*”

“baume 66, listen to Hobbit. He echoes my concern about compromising with lenses. Down the road you'll wish you had held out for top-notch glass. And banjobobby makes a very good point about being in control of the exposure. That's why I'll never get rid of my OM-1's; they are all manual, except for the light meter. That makes choices my responsibility. Still, there are times when my little Stylus is the appropriate choice, but I also know how to manipulate its controls a bit. And it has a glass, not plastic, lens.

Hey banjobobby, my first newspaper job had me using Mamiya twin-lens-relflexes with big Honeywell strobes, even for sports. That was weird, but the negs were easy to proof.”

“OK, now for the other side of the expensive lenses issue. Maybe I'm missing a lot with my Tamron, but I really don't think so. The optics seem just fine.

If someone wants to sit down with me and show me the major differences between a photo shot with my Tamron lens and a Canon lens on my camera is more than welcome to. BUT.. I think that is exactly what you would have to do to see the differences. And that is getting pretty exacting with your lenses.

I don't understand the hype on manufacturer's lenses. As I mentioned, I think the manufacturer's lenses will autofocus faster, which helps in taking pictures, but can be overcome with practice.

Also, if you really do want that manufacturer's lens, you can always get your Tamron or Sigma or Tokina and a couple years down the road when you have more money, GET what you think is a better lens. There are many places that will trade for your old lens.

So don't be afraid to buy a non-manufacturer's lens. My ole Tamron was responsible for a landscape shot that ran two-thirds of a two-page spread in a regional magazine. (The enlargement percentage written on the slide was something like 1100!!!) Seems its optics were good enough for that.”

“I think there's a bit on inflation for manufacturer's lenses. I don't doubt that they are better, but for the money, it's not economically intelligent. If I was a professional and I could afford it or had sponsers, then yeah I'd buy Nikon lenses in a second.

Lizs, I don't think my fiance would like me revealing how big and heavy my zoom lens is :O.
It weighs just under 3 lbs. and is probably around 6" compacted. It's a "fast" lens and I've gotten so I can take a 1/10th of a second shot standing up(at 28mm zoom). The one really cool feature to it is that it can be locked at 28mm so it doesn't extend while hand carrying it.”

“Have any of you picked up a Canon Rebel 2000 with lens and battery? That thing is so light, it's scary! I thought it would be very fragile, but reading what users on the Photography Review website have to say proves otherwise. Anybody own one?”

“I hope nobody who owns third party manufacturers lenses took offense to my opinions expressed here. ESPECIALLY my darling Lizs. All of the lenses made today are far superior to anything cranked out 20 years ago, no matter who made them. Yes, even Carl Zeiss. Computer designed lenses with space age coatings and low dispersion glass is hard to compete with no matter who made them, and I'd never cast stones at anyone's award winning photos regardless of the type of equipment used. Hell, some of my images on my photopoint site were made with a disposable. Betcha can't guess which ones. Those independant testers who get to decide who's lenses are best use some pretty tough tests and some pretty big enlargements, something few photographers are rarely called upon to do.”

“Hobbit........dahling........you are tooooooo sweet to ranty lizs! :-*

Reptiles.........thank you for sharing your..uh....."lens" information. And "lens envy" -- well, we all know it is a well-known, much-researched condition. BUT BIGGER ISN'T "ALWAYS" BETTER!!!”

“All right, I bought a brand spankin new N80. Now for a lens.”