 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / November 2006Just lost an old friend
Sold my Nikon FE and three lenses on ebay this weekend. Hopefully t good homes. I'm still shooting film, and used the FE once in a whil on business trips, but with digital I've moved to Canon lenses an flashes, and have an EOS-3 for film work. I kept the 105mm portrai lens with a Canon adapter though, that little thing is just too good t let go. Pointless thread, I know -- MASL > Sold my Nikon FE and three lenses on ebay this weekend. Hopefully to > good homes. I'm still shooting film, and used the FE once in a while [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Pointless thread, I know. Not pointless at all...I've only recently picked up a very nice FE with a 1.8 Series E lens...for a song. Thanks to the digital evolotion (or revolution), I've been able to pick up quite a few Nikon, Nikkormats and Olympus OM 35's over the past few years very reasonabably. I'm glad that you were able to sell your FE rather than let it collect dust in a closet. They are too nice not to be in the hands of a photographer that has use for them. > Sold my Nikon FE and three lenses on ebay this weekend. Hopefully to > good homes. I'm still shooting film, and used the FE once in a while > on business trips, but with digital I've moved to Canon lenses and > flashes, and have an EOS-3 for film work. Social climber. >> Sold my Nikon FE and three lenses on ebay this weekend. Hopefully to >> good homes. I'm still shooting film, and used the FE once in a while >> on business trips, but with digital I've moved to Canon lenses and >> flashes, and have an EOS-3 for film work. > >Social climber. I'm nearly in the same camp. I'm down to one partly-functional FE, an 8008, and a handful of lenses for same. The DSLR is a 10D. I'm biding my time for purchase of a 5D, but I know I'll need another (new) lens or two when I take that step. rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com > I'm nearly in the same camp. I'm down to one > partly-functional FE, an 8008, and a handful of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > rafe b > www.terrapinphoto.com Canon... I think their glass is poor on the basic side compared to Nikkor and Asahi, and their CMOS cheaper_to_make_"chips" make images that look coated and plastic-like... strangely vague loss of detail and depth, good actual color though. You should go with Nikon or Pentax. With Canon, concerning their SLR dept. It seems to be business marketing based on "idealism of design for production", not very impressive in the world of photographic art. I had mountains of FD equipement and wound up feeling like a fool with the grainyness of the images I had made (except for one FD mount two touch zoom that was seriously sharp, and SSC breechlocks are great). Nikon and Pentax images are crisp. And to get images as good with Canon ya have to buy "L" lenses for more than the cost of basic glass from the other two. SORRY I just had to say all that. Any arguments or flames and burning poison DARTS?  Signature}<)))*> Giant_Alex cravdraa_at-yahoo_dot-com +-t my site: http://www.e-sword.net/ > I had mountains of FD equipement and > wound up feeling like a fool with the grainyness of the images I had > made (except for one FD mount two touch zoom that was seriously > sharp, and SSC breechlocks are great). Lenses cause grain? Wow, I learn something new every day! >> I had mountains of FD equipement and >> wound up feeling like a fool with the grainyness of the images I had [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Lenses cause grain? > Wow, I learn something new every day! The old FDs were a decent lens in their day. I had a bag full of them and they served me well. If only Canon made a compatible mount or an adapter to use these on an EOS I would have been able to enjoy that lovely "grain" they produced. Rita >> I'm nearly in the same camp. I'm down to one partly-functional FE, an >> 8008, and a handful of lenses for same. The DSLR is a 10D. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > look coated and plastic-like... strangely vague loss of detail and depth, > good actual color though. Pretty cool that Nikon uses a CMOS in the D2x, then, isn't it? I keep hearing this accusation about Canon images, and have yet to have anyone actually demonstrate it. >You should go with Nikon or Pentax. With > Canon, concerning their SLR dept. It seems to be business marketing based [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > images as good with Canon ya have to buy "L" lenses for more than the cost > of basic glass from the other two. SORRY I just had to say all that. Well, the lenses aren't responsible for grain, dude, and I'm sure you know it. And you don't have to buy L glass to get good images from Canon's digitals, there is a plethora of excellent non-L glass available, from the $70 50mm f1.8 through the $600 70-300 f4.5-5.6 IS USM, including the 28-135 f2.5-5.6 IS USM and a bunch of fixed focal length lenses like the 100 f2 and 85mm f1.8. Nikon makes some not so great ones, too. I haven't heard to many good things about the DX lenses, for one thing. And Pentax doesn't have the deep lens lineup that either Nikon or Canon has. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >> Canon... I think their glass is poor on the basic side compared to Nikkor >> and Asahi, and their CMOS cheaper_to_make_"chips" make images that >> look coated and plastic-like... strangely vague loss of detail and depth, >> good actual color though. > > Pretty cool that Nikon uses a CMOS in the D2x, then, isn't it? "NO" ...lol I keep > hearing this accusation about Canon images, and have yet to have anyone > actually demonstrate it. Roll through www.pbase.com then, look for "FD mount" and "S.S.C Breechlock" lenses in their camera database. > >You should go with Nikon or Pentax. With >> Canon, concerning their SLR dept. It seems to be business marketing based [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Well, the lenses aren't responsible for grain, dude, and I'm sure you know > it. Havn't you ever shot with a lens like a K-Mart Focal? Grainy choppy results (great for rough "art" sts Rita), let's say Canon's 80's line of FD (non breechlock) common lenses are pretty bad that way but not as bad as Focal. Why would Canon's line of today's common lenses be any better? Because companies usually stick with their own principles related to their own way of economics. It's almost like this non-challant attitude that only feeds "business", and nothing else. And you don't have to buy L glass to get good images from Canon's > digitals, there is a plethora of excellent non-L glass available, from the > $70 50mm f1.8 through the $600 70-300 f4.5-5.6 IS USM, including the 28-135 > f2.5-5.6 IS USM and a bunch of fixed focal length lenses like the 100 f2 and > 85mm f1.8. > Nikon makes some not so great ones, too. No doubt in China and Thailand (6006). I haven't heard to many good > things about the DX lenses, for one thing. And Pentax doesn't have the deep > lens lineup that either Nikon or Canon has. Sadly true about Pentax, very odd company. There's always Tamron, if they don't get any stupider than they have. The idea I use is an averaging. Very basic quality of 'common market' lenses added to a CMOS design that's just not all that sharp, not like a good CCD, so I wouldn't do it. Or to Rapheal: "I wouldn't upgrade with Canon If I were you". Thanks for the reply. Signature}<)))*> Giant_Alex cravdraa_at-yahoo_dot-com not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/ Annika1980 Wrote: > MASL wrote:[color=blue][i] > Social climber. ;-) ....when I bought the 10D it felt like a step down the "phot society", and lens compatability almost kept me in the Nikon world (no that an FE was a real photographer's Nikon). It was a very fun an light camera (by today's standards). The EOS 3 is in a differen class, but it is some 15-20 yrs newer design so that's all expected. -Mar -- MASL > Sold my Nikon FE and three lenses on ebay this weekend. Hopefully to > good homes. I'm still shooting film, and used the FE once in a while [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Pointless thread, I know. Not pointless. The biggest photo mistake I made was almost 30 years ago when I bought my Pentax 6x7. The MF Pentax wasn't the mistake... the way I funded it was the mistake... I sold my entire Nikon F Photomic FTN system to do it. I've come back in time to 35mm again and I use an Olympus OM2 and OM10 with various lenses. But nothing is the equal of that Nikon F. SignatureMichael | "He's dead, Jim." >Not pointless. The biggest photo mistake I made was almost 30 years ago >when I bought my Pentax 6x7. The MF Pentax wasn't the mistake... the >way I funded it was the mistake... I sold my entire Nikon F Photomic >FTN system to do it. I've come back in time to 35mm again and I use an >Olympus OM2 and OM10 with various lenses. But nothing is the equal of >that Nikon F. What could you do with the Nikon F that you cannot do with the OM-2? ... apart from hammer 6 inch nails into hardwood ... ? ;-) >>Not pointless. The biggest photo mistake I made was almost 30 years ago >>when I bought my Pentax 6x7. The MF Pentax wasn't the mistake... the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > ;-) Get *exactly* 100% finder coverage for a start. How many other cameras do that, even today ?... Chris >I sold my entire Nikon F Photomic >>>FTN system to do it. I've come back in time to 35mm again and I use an >>>Olympus OM2 and OM10 with various lenses. But nothing is the equal of >>>that Nikon F. There are Oly enthusiasts who claim that the small number of premium Oly lenses were at least equal to the best of the Leitz and Zeiss glass. - ----------------------------------------------------------- les clark / edgewater, nj / usa ----------------------------------------------------------- >>>Not pointless. The biggest photo mistake I made was almost 30 years ago >>>when I bought my Pentax 6x7. The MF Pentax wasn't the mistake... the way [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Chris The only ones I know of are the Canon 1 series digitals. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >> Not pointless. The biggest photo mistake I made was almost 30 years ago >> when I bought my Pentax 6x7. The MF Pentax wasn't the mistake... the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > ;-) Your joking comment is not so much of a joke. The camera was built like iron. But what could I do with the Nikon F? the view was 100%. The OM's are not quite that. And the optics are just plain better. Looking at 30 year old Tri-X negatives they are just plain sharper and better contrasted. And that is no dump on the OM2 and OM10 which are optically excellent, mechanically excellent cameras. They are just not the Nikon F, which was the best. SignatureMichael | "He's dead, Jim." > the Nikon F, which was the best. Ah, the first love, everything else seems pale after that ... SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.nolindan.com/da/index.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com > Not pointless. The biggest photo mistake I made was almost 30 years ago > when I bought my Pentax 6x7. The MF Pentax wasn't the mistake... the > way I funded it was the mistake... I sold my entire Nikon F Photomic > FTN system to do it. I've come back in time to 35mm again and I use an > Olympus OM2 and OM10 with various lenses. But nothing is the equal of > that Nikon F. I hear that a lot and I didnt thin'k much of mine, other than I like heavy cameras. It was terribly noisy, not all that contrasty, and didn't have a very precise feel. I don't think the shots were any where near the Spots or Ftb. Bob Hickey |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.