Thanks so much. Started on my dad's Spotmatic with a Weston Master II. I do love a lot of photos I've shot with my 1965 Minolta Autocord 6x6. It's faster than anything else I've ever used...mechanical leaf TLR...trips right away. I've always wondered about a 6x9 but right now don't really have the time to play with anything else...and my wife would kill me if I did. She says I already have wayyyyy too many toys I don't play with...and magazines...and tools...and projects. :)

I love my Pentax 645NII...all MF lenses except for an AF 75/2.8. I sure wish I had had a 645 in high school when I was using my X-700. I look back at some of the stuff I did and love it...just would be so much better with the contrasty glass and higher resolution!

I'm very interested in the weed photo. Please post the data on it from the original size. Also, when shooting at those long focal lengths everyone is right...you definitely have a dof and front focus issue. Do try the test I gave you on the floor...it will really show you how the camera focuses vs how you focus. I didn't mention, but for the AF you may have to put something small on the ground next to the 18 inch mark vertically to have the camera focus on for AF. I shoot with glasses and I'm a +7 prescription. I shoot MF and my latest camera is AF (have many MF lenses for it, a Pentax 645 NII but only a prime AF lens) and it had a matte field screen....I changed the screens so that I would get the split prism focusing. So, send the data and do the floor test and let me know what you find and then we can go from there. Also, try the spot focusing rather than field focusing.

:) I'll keep that in mind. I do shoot much slower than most on here....I only get 15 shots per 120 roll ;)

Did you ever have similar results with your old camera? Have you always has these results with this camera? This is a very interesting problem. The first thing I would check is the lens calibration. Put the camera on a tripod and about 6 feet away on the floor put a yardstick down so that you look at it longways through the lens. The camera should be looking down at about 45 degrees. Put the camera in Aperture Priority and open it all the way and focus on the 18 inch mark in AF. Take a photo at each aperature setting as you close the lens. The start over in MF. When you look at the photos there should be even distances on either side of the 18 inch mark that are in focus. So it should be in focus from 17 to 19, 16 to 20 15 to 21 etc as you close down the diaphragm. Each lens may be different but they should all be close. So, if for a single lens it's correct for AF, but not MF then it is likely a camera body issue. If the results are the same in AF as MF but they aren't balanced then it's likely a lens issue. If all the lenses are the same in AF and MF then it's probably a camera body issue. The reason to do this test is to check the calibration of the focusing in the body. If they are blurry and you focused spot on in MF and the focus didn't change with AF as you look through the viewfinder and they are still blurry, then you definitely have a sensor alignment issue that could be causing this. I just want to see if the problem is in your AF system or in the sensor.

Refracted light as in a straight lens is always much sharper than reflected light from a mirror lens. This is because you are trying to capture an image off of a mirror and depending on how it is made you not only get the definition you want, you also get scattering effects. If you look at astronomy the best telescopes in the world are refractors.

Also, the larger you intend to blow up your image the worse this effect will be.

It all depends on the types of lamps you are using and the ambient light associated with them...you want to get an even light over the faces and behind them to avoid the shadows...sometimes a small booster lamp below the camera helps...and one small tip is to look down on them just a hair to help with multiple chins and a little tilt to the eyeglasses.

No, but it looks almost identical to mine, except mine is going to be tangerine when I finish it...took it apart in 1997 and haven't worked on it since 1998.

My name is Frank and I'm really enjoying this forum. I've been shooting since elementary school about 27 years ago. I've always loved photography and graduated from 35mm to MF about 10 years ago. I find that I learn something new about the practice everyday whether it be from reading here, imagining scenes as I walk around or from reading books. I really enjoy reading the older books because they are very technical. Even if you have never shot film, they provide valuable insight into the capturing of light to create an image...the basics.

I'm an engineer by trade and I have a BS in Chemistry and Master's in Systems Engineering. I work on optical communications systems. I also spent eight years working on Porsches in college and graduate school. I am married with four young children.

Some of the sharpest shots I've ever taken were with my 50 1.4 in the sweet middle aperture range. I've found they have much much much less flare than a zoom at the same focal length.

Sorry if I seemed harsh. OT you are correct...it should be a separate thread. And the soft porn itself didn't bother me, it was the combination of that with under aged girls.

Dan- Excellent point. Make sure to get a quote from the repair facility first. You may be able to get a replacement body, or upgrade to an X-700 body for the same price as the repair, with the repair already completed.

I still do my own B&W processing, and the smell of fixer and stop bath is very comforting. I do love going to the track and smelling that leaded gas too.

I have the Manfrotto (Bogen) with a ball head and it's great. You can get extra plates for the head as well.

What about a used D80? Just a little over $400 for a LN- one at www.keh.com

Yes it can, but you will lose depth of field. If you shoot RAW and you have a camera with a high resolution then you should be able to shoot at the higher ISO without difficulty if you are not creating very large prints. The best thing to do is experiment for the building. Go to church and set the lighting like it is in your services (empty of course) and put a subject with well defined edges in the area where you usually have a subject. Then go to where you shoot. Experiment with different ISOs, flash and white balance. Since you are shooting in that setting you may not need as fast a shutter speed and could use a tripod with a cable release. Make notes as you take the photos to remind yourself of the settings (although your camera should record that data in RAW mode) so that when you look at the converted images and compare the sharpness of your subject you know what you did to get the picture.

Like I said at the beginning, the main item you will deal with when making that change is the depth of field.