Cameras

I have a Panasonic GX7, a micro four thirds interchangeable lens camera. Predecessor to Big Country's GX85. Most of the time it has a 20mm f1.7 lens on it, also have a 14-140 zoom and a 42.5 f1.7. The best cell phones have some software tricks that can approximate some of what those lenses can do but not as well and certainly nothing close to the long end of the zoom.

Concur about the prints, once a year or so I go through the files and pic out some to print and frame.

jeff
 
I have at least one of nearly every model of Nikon film camera made. The most conspicuous absence is the FM3a, just because I refuse to pay current prices for one.

I enjoy photography as a hobby. My two main cameras are a Nikon D800 and D810 pairing. Lenses are very situation dependent, but a common combo for me is the 24-70mm f/2.8G on the D810 and the 14-24mm f/2.8 on the D800. Both of those lenses are big and heavy, so in particular I've been known to sub a 24-120mm f/4 for a "normal" zoom. I also have a cheap plasticy 10-20mm Nikon meant for DX cameras, but which works great as an FX lens at 14mm and longer. It weighs nothing, so it sometimes goes in the bag. I'm not a stranger to prime fun either, and have a handful that I'll sometimes pack either as stand-alone lenses or to supplement a zoom kit. Unfortunately, Nikon has neglected a lot of their non-exotic primes, and in many cases the zooms covering those FL ranges are better than the primes. It's a shame because all the magic that makes zooms so good now could make primes even better. That aside, I love my Df as a little lightweight camera that also works with everything(really, nearly every F mount lens Nikon has ever made aside from invasive fisheyes) and have been known to use that with nothing but the little lightweight 35mm f/2D.

I have three primary 35mm cameras I use these days. When I'm shooting digital and want something that plays nice with modern lenses, the F6 is the obvious choice. The F100 is nearly as good, but I have the F6 and might as well use it plus there are some things it does that the F100 doesn't. I have a whole lot of Nikon F2s, which is one of my favorite cameras ever, but my favorite of all my F2s is an F2sb(uncommon meter prism with a silicon cell and the same +/0/- LEDs like the F2AS, but works with non-AI lenses). The "one lens kit" for that is the 35mm f/1.4. I also will take that out with a prime kit that's usually something like 20mm f/4, 35mm f/1.4, 105mm f/2.5, and 200mm f/4. I will play with that line up as I have manual focus/AI lenses ranging from the 16mm f/2.8 fisheye on out to the 300mm f/4.5. At several points in there, I have lenses of multiple speeds, as often times the slower lenses are better but the faster lenses sure can help with 50 or 100 speed slide film. I also often carry an FM2n as a second as a second body for B&W film.

For serious business with film, though, I have a Hasselblad 500c and a Pentax 67. I like both, but they are very different cameras. The Hasselblad is a joy to use and very nimble. Of course the Zeiss lenses are legendary. The Pentax is a monster of a camera that in some ways handles like what it looks like-an overgrown 35mm SLR-but in other ways is not particular fun to hand hold. The 105mm f/2.4 for the Pentax is legendary in its own right and gives a rendering I can't duplicate with anything else.

I use my phone camera a lot, and for a lot of situations it's fine. Still, though, I like the control I can get from a "real" camera.
 
Yup on the nikon DSLRs. Picked up a manual focus series E 80-200 f/4.5, amazing lens. Works perfectly, of course. Rarely use my cell phone cameras, and can spot when others get heavy image processing. I even use my "good camera" for snapshots of the junk I sell on craigslist.

I hate, hate, hate HDR and the fake-bokeh these multi-lens camera-phones are doing now. So I guess I'm a purist.

Just came into a negative scanner... Coolscan 3. This is a freaking riot-- way more dynamic range than the prints I got back 25 years ago. And there's something about the colors and grain that are absent from the "plastic" digital photos that are 99% of what we see these days.

This 35mm shot was more than likely taken with my Vivitar 19mm f/3.8, a middle-of-the-road pretty-wide-angle lens. I can't find its DX sensor equivalent for what I'm willing to pay. Panorama mode pics are fun but I like the distortion and ability to get everything in a single click.

sunset-1998.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Just came into a negative scanner... Coolscan 3. This is a freaking riot-- way more dynamic range than the prints I got back 25 years ago. And there's something about the colors and grain that are absent from the "plastic" digital photos that are 99% of what we see these days.

The Nikon scanners have to be the gold standard of desktop consumer-quality scanners. I have a 3 I don't use terribly often just because I have to mess with SCSI and the V has a nice, works anywhere USB port.

I have a Coolscan 8000 for medium format. It can do 35mm but is such a pain that I don't ever use it for that-the III and V are so much easier to use and nearly as good.

And yes, I enjoy seeing the grain.
 
Back
Top