Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: wj cody
Page: <<prev 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 208 next>>
Sep 22, 2017 09:42:30   #
okay, here's the deal. having gotten some folk's dander up with my contax 645 and 2 lens purchase, exceeding $5k, i would like to clarify something.

every photographic instrument, film or digital, has limits. working within the instruments' limits and using that instrument to 100 percent of its potential, will turn in excellent results. so, portraits, street scenes, stable subject matter in daylight taken with an instamatic or brownie hawkeye will turn in excellent results. but for handling subject matter such as micro, landscape, action or available dark photography, then they are out of their operational parameters. SS was correct, used correctly, and within limits, any photographic instrument will provide excellent results. it is simply a matter of deciding on what you want your camera and lens selection to accomplish.
Go to
Sep 22, 2017 09:29:02   #
BIG ROB wrote:
Please tell me what issues you can remember the original Nikon F Photomic FTn having? I'm curious and would appreciate hearing of any that you
could still recall; of course, I have one and love it! Thanks allot.


i never had problems with my nikon f bodies, but then, i never used the meter housings. the one change between the f and f2 was the battery compartment in the camera body, rather than the meter housing. i thought this a bad move, as the body compartment could suffer corrosion via owner neglect.

we were so suspicious of the f2 that nikon had to continue a 2 year run of f bodies before we became believers in the f2.
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 17:58:57   #
ChrisT wrote:
Terry Hayden, WJ?


originally out of east hartford connecticut. cut his teeth with an 8x10 at big sur, before settling on 5x4 and 5x7 for his landscape work. probably, in my non objective opinion, the finast black and white film printer of landscapes in my generation. photography consumed his entire life. great person, genius and a pain in the ass to go photographing with! start in the morning dark and finish at midnight, then on to the darkroom, no lunch, supper, snack, no! we must develop the film!!! long and short of it, 3 days later we leave the darkroom like 2 moles coming into sunlight. we got our prints and he's ready to go again, and i just wanna die.

we had a lot of fun in our young years hanging out, photographing everything, everyone and everywhere and sitting around wooden tables with a bottle of the creature between us. laughs, great negatives, and we navigated some memorable areas of conflict, with smaller formats, of course. he had a great heart and i miss him.
that's Terry Hayden.
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 17:13:08   #
yup, i get it, that's for certain. and i agree with the nikon f100 film camera. that is/was an incredible little engine that the kogaku folks put out. good as the f6 and easier to use. and of course my rolleiflex 2.8 xenotar. wanted one of those simply because it was not a planar,which i had on my hasselblad. currently on the workbench for a rebuild. great tlrs, cannot beat them.
good luck with your work, it sounds very interesting!
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 16:32:10   #
wrangler5 wrote:
I switched to digital when I rented a Canon digital outfit that (roughly) matched the Nikon film outfit I normally used at my daughter's horse shows. The digital deal was closed first night, when I put the CF card in my laptop computer and had digital "contact sheets" from the equivalent of 10 rolls of film, ready to print (when I got home) in a matter of minutes instead of the 3-4 nights I would have spent in the darkroom making contact sheets with film. I came back from that weekend and ordered the then-new Nikon D100 and never took another frame of film. Once I'd gone for a couple of years without even thinking about pulling out a film camera, I sold all of the film cameras (Minox, Nikon, Leica, Hasselblad, Rollei, and Graphic), all but the Nikon lenses, all darkroom developing and enlarging equipment and almost all of the tidbits that went with all that stuff. (I kept the Gossen flash meter for some reason, although I never use it, and the radio remote triggers that worked with the Nikon digital cameras.) The darkroom is now where the photo printers live.

I remember the film days, and darkroom work, fondly, but would never go back to it as long as I can afford to stay digital (which, despite the free "film" seems a lot more expensive than I remember film capture and output being.) The near-limitless roll of film that is a 32GB SD card, the instant review of exposure and composition if desired, the immense flexibility of image editing software and the ability to safeguard the originals by merely copying to an additional storage device or two, plus the power and quality of photo printers - I made ~1,000 8x8 B&W prints that went into bound books as gifts for about a dozen family members last Christmas, which were done WITHOUT having to stand up for hours on end in a darkroom, on ever-ageing feet - means film is going to remain a memory I can visit when I choose, but don't have to endure any more.
I switched to digital when I rented a Canon digita... (show quote)


i certainly understand your finding digital to be an excellent match for your work. i think that's pretty neat. i've used the leica monochrom cameras and they provide excellent results, but i still have my teenage affection for film, and so continue to use it for my work.
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 15:43:42   #
slermj wrote:
It is a Nikon F2S. I have one that needs gaskets.


well, get it to a tech and have new light seals put on - then go use it!!!
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 15:42:46   #
ChrisT wrote:
Yes ... and I miss mine, too ...

Seven pounds, was it, Goofy?

That really IS heavy .... I always used the 127 on mine ... switched to 65 when I needed wider ...


me also on all counts. it accompanied me when i was immersed in a blackberry bog, along the the late, great Terry Hayden, on a nice hot, humid summer day in Marlboro Connecticut. there are reasons i remember this, but without a bottle of good single malt, i will not indulge the, ahem, details.
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 15:39:43   #
let me second that! i really believe, along with a whole lot of other folks, that M3 was the ultimate M model. years later they tried to duplicate it with the MP, but couldn't. i keep looking for another, even though i don't need one!
i also, have had the M4 and 6, and as you say, besides the canted rewind crank, there is not much more to recommend them over the M3. i do hope you still have yours!
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 15:14:39   #
asiafish wrote:
I used a Yashicamat 124G, decades ago. It was basically a Japanese copy of a Rolleiflex, a 120 format twin lens reflex.

I remember the image quality being incredible, not to mention the camera being quite fun to use.


absolutely. that 3.5 yashinon taking lens was really something else. and is still the best way to go rather than the expense of a rollei, unless you plan on using it professionally. i'm currently playing with my old rollei c 2.8 planar. a lot smaller than the contax, and quieter too!
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 15:11:27   #
wrangler5 wrote:
Well, it was a long time ago (late '60s, 1970 at the latest) when I bought the M3 - new in box with the collapsible Elmar 50/2.8, in a small camera store in Northern California (not a hotbed of Leica users) - and IIRC the Summaron with eyes was THE way to go if you wanted a 35mm lens that automatically "fixed" your viewfinder when you put the lens on the camera. They were readily available, at least when I looked for one. The 35mm f/2.0 Summicron was the sexier alternative, but that extra stop of speed cost a lot AND you had to buy the separate viewfinder, which was also expensive and (compared to the big clump of Summaron with eyes) easier to lose.
Well, it was a long time ago (late '60s, 1970 at t... (show quote)


oh yeah, never got a brand new leica, all mine were used by the time i got around to getting them. the m3 and the 50mm 2.8 elmar was such a cool combination, and the end results showed it to be an excellent lens. if only the m3 had the 35mm framelines! just think, we could have done without the spectacles!
Go to
Sep 18, 2017 14:59:52   #
Mark Bski wrote:
Does anyone know what model Nikon this is?


nikon F2 with the tn meter housing and flash attachment. the best nikon ever made other than the original F. still using both daily.
Go to
Sep 14, 2017 13:55:53   #
ChrisT wrote:
I'll say, WJ ...

Can't go wrong, there, huh?


i have been lucky in that, and am grateful to whatever gods have looked out for me.
Go to
Sep 14, 2017 13:54:48   #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
No pain.
Everything went well.
Free and for a friend.
Yes, you read that right- two things people advise against here.
And I bounced flash to.... gasp!... off-colored ceilings! (the horror!)
They loved them.


good for you!!! nothing like appreciation from the client, as you know, on a shoot, there are no friends!
Go to
Sep 14, 2017 13:52:55   #
ChrisT wrote:
That's one mean machine, there, WJ ... a Contax 645 ... wow!!!

I'll bet you had to hunt some to find that ...


'twas a long search for one that had not been flogged to death. i do like it, but for ultimate printing results you really cannot match the mamiya 6 or 7 medium format rangefinder cameras. that rear element sits so close to the film plane that it just gives marvelous results. the contax, for me is easier to compose with and oddly the ergonomics of the body and grip are very nice. i was pleasantly surprised at that.
Go to
Sep 14, 2017 13:47:55   #
ChrisT wrote:
Would the 135 be on that 645, then, WJ?


yes - a nice focal length for either 645 or 6x6, but a little too wide, i think, for 6x7 or 6x9.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 208 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.