View Single Post
Old December 14th, 2012, 02:02 PM   #32 (permalink)
Bob Maxey
Senior Member
 
Bob Maxey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,837
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 381
Thanked 811 Times in 641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davdi View Post
Still got my German Praktika with:
f1.9/50
f2.8/30
f2.8 135
and a generic swivel-head flash.
Also a 1950's cheap TLR 'Ensign' f5.6/60 - lens, takes very atmospheric shots, very good with B/W crap with colour.

Digital is Fuji S5700 & S9500 Bridge cameras plus the cameras on my WFS and XperiaU. As with Film I always try to get it right in camera and avoid post-processing if possible.
Let me tell you about old cameras. There are many cameras available on eBay or elsewhere that are capable of creating images that are vastly superior to anything produced with a top of the line Nikon or Cannon.

In fact, if you look at an older Hasselblad Superwide, the fixed lens is a theoretically perfect lens. This means (according to Carl and the gang at Zeiss) a more perfect optic is not possible. Mind you, the SW had a fixed lens; that is, not interchangeable and designed for one camera. I tend to believe Carl, by the way.

No matter how costly or good the modern cameras are, there are better cameras out there waiting to be bought, adjusted, cleaned, loved and put to work.

I have a 6 x 9 Voightlander Bessa. The best Bessa ever made and probably the finest 6 x 9 folder available. It creates large negatives that are tack sharp. No pro would be caught dead using one because my theory is many pros do not consider that there were some amazing cameras made eons ago that can flat out do the job.

And secondly, it is not digital. Here in Utah, the labs leave lots to be desired when it comes to processing and printing seldom seen formats. This is why I still develop my negatives in a small Kodak Apron tank in the bathroom.

Barring scratches, I know my negs are as perfect as possible and processed to my specs. I never feel comfortable handing unprocessed film to a lab I do not trust.

Great negatives printed by a crappy printer usually yield crappy prints but they create great prints in the lab of an expert. OTOH, bad negatives are hard to print even by those wth darkroom skills. You can alwaus reprint, but it can be hard to salvage bad negs.

I use Minox 35s, a Leica CL and I have shot "professional" assignments with a Kodak Retina. All cheap cameras these days but superior in many ways.

Consider the lack of a super fast shutter. I use to shoot auto races for a local sports writer named Dick Rosetta. I never needed a fast shutter. I know how to pan, so 250th was plenty fast. I can shoot kids on swings at a 125th or slower.

Fast shutter speeds mean you need wider apertures which mean a loss of depth of field. another tech talk perhaps. Lets just say it can be important in some cases.

BTW . . . there is nothing wrong with a Pratika. Not one darn thing.
Bob Maxey is offline  
Reply With Quote