Anyone into cameras?

[CatalinaWOW]

No one has mentioned the obvious suggestion for a member of this forum.  Use those lenses, with those camera bodies, modified to use a digital sensor.  A hack conversion to DSLR. 

Just because it isn't practical (lots of issues from image size to controls to ....) or make economic sense, think of the wondor!

[ElektroQuark]

I have rather complete EOS system (EOS 1n, EOS 3, EOS 650, and some lenses).

But mainly I use one of those:



And when I have time this:



Developing film at home is very fun.

[ez24]

I mean I got these manual focus film lenses for nothing, so why not?

I went this route and in hind sight - I regret it

[willb]

Photography is another hobby. I shoot digital for 99.9% of what I do (Nikon D700), however the Mamiya does come out for very very special occasions. I keep the camera in its box in my bedroom closet. I used to shoot professionally between 2005-2008 and it was my main source of income for those years, however doing it for a living day in and day out really killed the passion I had for it. I'm happy I kept most of my equipment as I enjoy it once again during my free time. I've had the Mamiya for 8-9 years now, it's a long story on how I got it...

[Cubdriver]

That looks like some nice Nikon glass you have there.  Photography is another of my expensive pastimes as well.

-Pat

[Circlotron]

I've still got an old Pentax SP1000 I bought back in 1974. Haven't used it for many years. The thing is, it has a 55mm SMC Takumar lens, the one it came standard with. What I want to know is, have lenses improved all that much from this lens, a moderate quality one? We recently got a Sony DSLR and it takes absolute ripper pics and the camera is really nothing special. And what about the tiny tiny lenses in smartphones? Some of them take unbelievable pics for their size.

[GK]

I'm currently procrastinating over buying a Pentax K-50 DSLR or a Pentax K-S1 DSLR. I've found a OZ wholesaler that will do the former for $499 and the latter for $599. The 50 have 16 megapixels and the S1 has 20. Do I really need 20 megapixels over 16 megapixels?


 

 

[Cubdriver]

Unless you're planning to make huge blow ups of the images, you likely won't notice much difference between 16 and 20 Mpix.  I'm not familiar with either camera (Canon guy here), but are there perhaps other features that might make the more expensive one worth the premium? I wouldn't buy it based on 20 vs 16, but better low light performance, additional features, etc. might tip the scales.  I'll try to look at both online today and see what else is different between them.

-Pat

[Kilrah]

You should indeed look at the features and image performance rather than the pixel count, especially with the difference between 16 and 20 being basically negligible. It's good to read some detailed reviews for both.

[Cubdriver]

Ok, I just took a quick look at both online, and if it were me, I'd go with the K-50.  Bear in mind that I say this mainly as someone who's familiar with using DSLRs, and base this preference mainly on the fact that the K50 appears to be a fairly 'conventional' style DSLR, with a physically larger body (easier to handle and get a good grip on).  The K-S1 seems to be more 'flashy' for no good reason - I simply can't understand the purpose of the LEDs they put on the grip of the camera (covered by your hand when you're holding it), and fail to see the need for a lighted ring around the shutter release button.  It falls naturally under my finger when I'm holding the camera, and when it's in use I can't see ANY of these lights.  Not sure what they do other than drain the battery somewhat faster.  I prefer the physically larger, more traditional design over the more compact, 'fashion accessory' camera with decorative flashing lights on it.

FWIW

-Pat

[willb]

That looks like some nice Nikon glass you have there.  Photography is another of my expensive pastimes as well.

-Pat

Thanks! I've always invested in glass more than bodies. My D700 is almost 10 years old and has well over 120 000 shutter actuation's but it does everything I ask it, and the image quality is still stunning IMO. 12 megapixels is also plenty for what I do. I shot for years with a D2Hs with only 4 megapixels and the resolution was never really a limiting factor for me. The 36 megapixel D800 does not do anything for me. The RAW files must be huge!

I have the following (all Nikon, no Sigma/3rd party stuff here)

300mm F2.8 AF-I, with a TC-14 II if required
70-200mm F2.8 VR-I
24-70mm F2.8
16-35mm F4 VR (probably my favorite lens, insanely sharp!!!)
105mm F2.8 Macro VR
85mm F1.8D
50mm 1.4D

[Cubdriver]

Agreed!  Good glass is definitely a good investment - bodies come and go, but glass stays around.

I've heard nothing but good about the Nikon 16-35, and some of the Canon guys on the POTN forum talked a few years ago about switching over for that lens alone.

I discovered a camera/lens rental place in TN that, after a certain number of months of ownership or cumulative rental time (whichever comes first) sells their gear as used for a reasonable discount.  It's very well taken care of, and conservatively rated.  I've amassed a nice collection of Canon 'L' glass from them, the POTN buy/sell forum and occasional new stuff when there were discounts/rebates over the years (14, 24, 35, 50 & 135mm primes, 100 & 180mm L macro, several of the tilt-shifts from the rental place, others new or used from the forum or NY camera houses)  I'm shooting with either a 7D or a 5D II; I also still have my old 20D but it needs a new shutter (I wore it out doing time lapses a few years ago).

Some one of these years I'll find time to go out and shoot, rather than using a few pieces of kit in the house to photograph old electronic gear to post here!

-Pat

[ez24]

A year or two ago, I read a survey of professional photographers that asked what was their back up camera and it was ----  iPhone  (I was surprised)

Practice with you phone first to see what you cannot do with it so you know what you need to buy.

[cloudscapes]

Some old lenses are still comparable to modern lenses. The kiron 105mm macro is a classic worth seeking out even for adapted mirrorless cameras. And definitely keep an eye out for old zeiss/contax SLR/rangefinder lenses. Much cheaper than leicas, but comparable image quality.

[ez24]

The kiron 105mm macro is a classic worth

+1  it was my go to macro when I was selling some coins years ago.  Now if only I can find it.

[GK]

With 400mm 1:9 (200 * 2x coverter) you will see almost nothing in viewfinder and also will not be able to take photos without having whole thing on heavy tripod and without your breath at hold (not because excitement, but due to shake from air moving over the camera) 

I must have ninja camera handling skill and bionic vision then, because even at max zoom with the 2x teleconverter hand-held stability isn't an issue and the image in the view finder is perfectly clear and bright as daylight. 

I've just unboxed my new Pentax camera and have had a quick play after putting 20 minutes of charge into the lithium battery. Crappy overcast weather outside right now, but good enough to confirm that the Pentax DSLR works perfectly fine with the 200m lens alone. However when the x2 teleconverter is put in-line, even so the image is perfectly clear in the both the viewfinder and on the LCD ("live view" electronic viewfinder mode), when a frame is snapped the resultant image is all white and blurry. Don't currently know if there is a setting work-around to get the teleconverter operating correctly; I've got a thick manual an a million settings and options to familiarize myself with.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I ended up getting the K-50 body from ebay-store seller/photography wholesaler "DCxpert"; $499 and free postage. Yes the $100 more expensive KS1 is pimped a bit. In addition to the 4M-pixel resolution advantage the KS1 also has a GPS for "geotagging" photos and it is capable of continuously auto focusing in video capture mode. Specified battery life for the KS1 is actually little better than for the K50, besides all those funky LEDs and control illumination. Besides all that though it's pretty much a draw from a technical standpoint. I don't care for the pimped styling of the KS1 however and the K50, which is about 10% physically larger, is heavily ruggedised and dust/splash proofed, which is what sold me in the end (considering where I'll be taking this camera).

@35mm (min.) Hydhl Sicor lens, Hoya UV(O) filter:

 
@200mm (max.) Hydhl Sicor lens, Hoya UV(O) filter


As above but at @400mm with x2 teleconverter in-line 

[GK]

I must have ninja camera handling skill and bionic vision then, because even at max zoom with the 2x teleconverter hand-held stability isn't an issue and the image in the view finder is perfectly clear and bright as daylight. 

You don't. The built-in anti shake deserves most of the credit. You will need to provide higher resolution images in order to make a definitive judgement.

That was a joke.

Don't rely on the dust/splash proofing.

What it has is better than nothing and of course I'm not going to take it into the swimming pool.

[GK]

Here is a small crop of the previously attached 200mm-zoom grevillea photo, in full resolution. OK I think, for a manual focus from several meters.

[singapol]

Congratulations to GK on your Pentax K50 ,not many cameras even in this price range from the big boys have weather sealed ( water resistant ) body. Pentax is the only camera company that kept it's promise that all it's old legacy/film camera lenses can still be used on their digital SLRs except without autofocus but still have stopped downed aperture metering.If you have old Pentax film autofocus screw drive lenses then all the better because then you can have autofocus as well as full aperture metering. Nikon only put it's old legacy lens usability ( backward compatibilty including metering) only on it's high end models.

The old manual lenses that you have are not highly desired even by manual lens users on digitals but it's hard to condemn them because if you are not fussy about image quality it's usable. I would not recommend
using the 2X teleconvertor as it degrades image unless you use an original teleconvertor from Pentax or another one from a reputable brand like sigma or tamron who are 3rd. party manufacturers.

Your pictures lack contrast because of the teleconvertor and overexposed. You could probably correct or enhance them with a suitable image processing software like Lightroom. Getting correct metering takes practice and knowledge of camera functions and photograpy knowhow.Please keep at it  as it will give you
intangible satisfaction when you look back at your old photos.Pentax is a brand that offers value in photographic terms although all brands can do similar things. Just to let you know what a top Full frame
Pentax that was recently released...the K1 ,here is a review that might encourage you on. 

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1615366&p=9338892#post9338892

[Cubdriver]

With that one that's all blown out, it looks to me like the aperture control signal isn't getting through the teleconverter to the lens diaphragm, so the lens isn't stopping down. 

Try shooting something with the teleconverter, but manually vary the shutter speed (shutter priority).  Start at a relatively high shutter speed that needs the lens to be wide open (smallest f/ stop number), and then make a series of exposures of the same subject, slowing the shutter speed a click or two each time.  If things are working properly, they /should/ all be good exposures.  If the lens isn't stopping down, the first will be good, and the following ones will be progressively more overexposed as the shutter slows.

-Pat

[GK]

Yeah, all of those photos were taken in "MF" (manual focus) mode, but in "Auto" sensitivity(ISO)/aperture(value)/shutter(speed) mode, with the lens aperture ring set to the "A" position. So the exposure as singapol noted is (way) off. Auto exposure mode doesn't seem to be 100% compatible with the teleconverter. In fact it doesn't appear to do a very good job with my manual focus/aperture lenses even without the teleconverter.

I've since setup/programmed the camera for proper full-manual lens operation following the instructions here:  http://support.us.ricoh-imaging.com/node/1536

Basically "Use (lens) aperture ring" is now set to "enabled" and "stop-down" metering for the shutter speed (as per the manually set aperture value on the lens) is configured for the manual exposure mode. I can now make grainy photos of spots on the wall at 200mm x2 through the teleconverter here at night in my study, but I'll have wait 'till tomorrow when the sun is shining outside to try it out properly.
 

[EntropyWizard]

You could also try removing the filter and adding a lens hood or shade for testing, some of your image softness may be from flare.

[singapol]

Yeah, all of those photos were taken in "MF" (manual focus) mode, but in "Auto" sensitivity(ISO)/aperture(value)/shutter(speed) mode, with the lens aperture ring set to the "A" position. So the exposure as singapol noted is (way) off. Auto exposure mode doesn't seem to be 100% compatible with the teleconverter. In fact it doesn't appear to do a very good job with my manual focus/aperture lenses even without the teleconverter.

I've since setup/programmed the camera for proper full-manual lens operation following the instructions here:  http://support.us.ricoh-imaging.com/node/1536

Basically "Use (lens) aperture ring" is now set to "enabled" and "stop-down" metering for the shutter speed (as per the manually set aperture value on the lens) is configured for the manual exposure mode. I can now make grainy photos of spots on the wall at 200mm x2 through the teleconverter here at night in my study, but I'll have wait 'till tomorrow when the sun is shining outside to try it out properly.
 

Strange according to the link you posted if your lens has the A setting on the aperture ring you can use K50 auto modes like Tv,Av (shutter or aperture priority) so it's semi auto.Is the A mark locked to the index line
indicator? If the lens don't have the A setting then you need to do what the link says..Enable "using aperture ring" and E- dialing programming to asign the green button to stop down aperture ,camera will measure exposure and automatically set based on that measurement. (This is an improvement over older models where it is you have to mimick film camera metering "centering the needle" analog meter, that is adjusting until viewfinder indicates correct setting).

The "use aperture ring" merely unlocks the shutter firing protection for newer autofocus lenses that have electrical contacts on the lens mount base..those round contacts. About the metering...if using manual lenses I don't think selecting matrix metering or whatever Pentax call it will work because of the missing electrical contacts so camera will default to center weighted meteing.Do check users manual for clarity..you may need to select manually from settings menu?

Do also know that the camera's metering system is not foolproof as it will measure and exposure to a grey
colour reference so for extreme bright or dark lighting sitautions the meter will be fooled so compensate
according. Do read up on photographic exposure and you will get more good photos.

[helius]

Old mechanical lenses that were called "auto" had two separate linkages: switching from fully open to the desired aperture; and sending the actual aperture setting to the camera. This was complicated to do mechanically, and extension rings, bellows, or TCs needed to be very carefully designed to pass on those movements. When the linkage is broken, you must use soi-dissant "stop-down metering", where you manually turn the aperture as the picture darkens and registers the correct exposure.

[GK]

Strange according to the link you posted if your lens has the A setting on the aperture ring you can use K50 auto modes like Tv,Av (shutter or aperture priority) so it's semi auto

My big 200mm lens with the "A" setting on the aperture ring works OK on all exposure modes (with the ring set to the "A" position), but it will not work on full "auto" with the teleconverter in-line; I just get washed out white images as per the example I posted earlier. Some aspect of the teleconverter must confuse the cameras metering.

It works fine though on full manual or semi-auto exposure. Attached is an uncropped grevillea picture taken ~15 minutes ago (still a bit overcast outside) at full 400mm-teleconverter-amplified zoom from a standing distance of 10 meters (I measured it). This was taken in Manual exposure mode with "TVshift" light metering to correctly set the shutter speed for the set lens aperture (ring not in "A" position). According to the photos histogram (brightness distribution) the exposure is OK. Stability isn't an issue at all, but the teleconverter does really noticeably knock back the image resolution/clarity and it does require a lot more sun light. So yeah, the teleconverter should only be used when you are desperate to zoom into something really distant, but even then the apparent reduction in resolution is that high that you might be better off just snapping at x2 less zoom and cropping the image. I have some more experimentation to do here.

@400mm, Hydhl Sicor lens + x2 teleconverter.