Music & Photography

1) Obsessional technophiliacs (if you'll pardon the expression).

2) People with unusually high powers of sensory discrimination. [Not to be confused with those who merely have good hearing or good eyesight].

--Jeremy

quote:

---

People with unusually high powers of sensory discrimination

---

Or sensorial abilities ? Maybe I think too far, but that would mean that we're also good in another domain.

Our wives would certainly enjoy it

Cheese - may all beings be happy

A trick for you, cover up the name on your SLR with tape and watch other people try to guess what it is. They hate not being able to see if theirs is better than yours.

OM2n Mju2

pete

And you'll even look like someone who's still able to handle a diaphragm and an exposure time. Add a fully manual exposure meter, and you're the star of the day

Cheese - may all beings be happy

quote:

---

Reading the different profiles of fellow naimites, I was somewhat astonished to see how many of you are not only keen on music, but also on photography.

---

There are loads of us into photography round here (Joe, Joel, Matthew, Vuk, Ron T, Rico and many more). I consider myself to have mastered the equipment to a degree of relative competance, but I still have tons to learn about recognising decent subject matter and composition. I am very much a beginner. Have you checked out www.photo.net - a few of us have folders over there.

Tony.

Nikon FM2n 28 f3.5, 50 f1.8 / 1964 Pentax Spotmatic 50 f1.4

My suggestions are:

Helmut Newton, Annie Leibovitz and Ansel Adams are flat-earth (and by the way fashionable) photographers.

David Hamilton would be a round-earth (and definitely outdated) photographer.

Am I right ?

Cheese - may all beings be happy

John (Mamiya 7-II, Bronica ETRSi, Canon EOS L lenses for the rest)

This is easy

Flat earthers are those who use manual focus and round earthers are those who use those auto focus thingies.

Life is best kept simple.

Regards

Mick

Be nice or I will start posting the results.

Please take a holiday.....I think you need a good one.

Regards

Mick

quote:

---

from a variety of angles, sometimes with a starburst filter

---

Mind you, that's definitely round-earth. And probably outrageous to your Naim gear.

Simon:

quote:

---

Snowdon, Litchfield

---

I got the point. Snowdon is able to make even the most horrible faces look gorgeous. It is true that Naim equipment makes a bad recording/interpretation sound even worse... So I assume that, according to your theory, Salgado is the archetype of a flat-earth photographer ?!

quote:

---

I dont know if I would describe Ansel Adams as flat earth

---

That's somewhat tricky. According to the many FEP test questions, the fact that you're able to spend days to properly set up your TT boosts your FEP sum. And do you know a bigger perfectionist than Adams ? On the other hand, Adams would have lost some FEP's because he used colour filters to adjust the gray scale to the (in those days awful) technical properties of b/w films.

But IMO no one has yet reached his mastery in reproducing nature almost as beatifully as the human eye can discern, and that without any colours. I personally think he largely deserves the admission to the club of flat-earthers.

Maybe I'm gonna light up a fire in the forum: there's one photographer I really couldn't put in one or the other class: Oliviero Toscani...

Cheese - may all beings be happy

I'd pick both buttons on the survey equally.

I've long since gotten over the gearhead stage, and perhaps lost much of the zeal that saw me walking for hours around my early twenties, with full bag and tripod, and shootling mostly E6 on Kodachrome 25 and 64, Ektachrome 100, and Fujichrome 50 and 100. It might speak volumes to many (or at least assist in establishing bias) that my decision to not change to Nikon FM2 years back was taken for space/weight considerations, as the Olympus was already handling the mud/dust/shock with aplomb, although of course still not built to 'demolition strength'

These days much of my snapping is just that - via a Nikon Coolpix 880, which gets loads of use due to it's portability. The view-cam use seems to put subjects at ease in the same way a TLR does. The SLR kit gets left at home more often, although I'm sure I shoot better stuff on my trusty old OM1 when I take the trouble.

OM1/Zuiko 50-1.8, Zuiko 24-2.8, Zuiko 28-2.8, Zuiko 70-150-4; Nikon N50/Nikkor 35-80 & 80-210; Nikon Coolpix 880.

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

Phil
om1/4/10, zuikos 24/28/35/50/85/100

quote:

---

Interested to see the plehthora of OMs above, especially since Olympus haven't made a reasonably priced camera body for 10 years or so. Is there a similarity with the number of Kan owners out there.

---

I have owned two OM1s in the past, they are fabulous cameras. The only reason I don't have one now is that I could not find a mint condition one locally - they are after all getting on a bit. I love the simplicity, compactness, nice bright viewfinder and the build quality. The fact that there are tons of second hand lenses out there at way below Nikon prices is another real bonus to owning an OM1. The only thing that annoyed me with the OM1 is that you can not see what shutter speed and aperture you have selected through the viewfinder, my FM2n displays this info.

I am pretty happy with the FM2n, and I have no plans to buy loads of lenses, but I could easily revert to an OM1 at a minutes notice.

Tony.

Phil

Maybe the fireworks stuff is a little, say, "junior's" photography ...

But what really p***** me off is that you're another one of these lucky guys owning a jewel like the M6

Cheese - may all beings be happy

[This message was edited by Cheese on SATURDAY 12 May 2001 at 10:13.]

quote:

---

The only downsides are - the mercury 1.35v batteries have been outlawed by the EU

---

I've had my OM1 (bought used) since 1984. During it's last service (1998) at a rather clever camera repairers in Wellington, NZ, I opted for their recommended battery upgrade - a bakelite (or similar) sleeve is inserted in the battery chamber, allowing use of the ubiquitous LR44 cell...(the pos contact must be extended into this new battery enclosure) this cell lasts longer, and you can buy 'em anywhere for next to nought. HTH.

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

Do not get p****d off about not owning a Leica M6. I have one and its a superbly engineered piece of equipment but its the person behind the camera who determines the quality of the photo more than anything else.

I used to use a Nikon FM2n which was a brilliant camera and I had a 28mm, 50mm and 90mm lenses. I really enjoyed using this camera but my wife hated using it.She found it very fiddly to adjust the focus etc. I sold it to a friend and bought a new camera instead, a Canon EOS 50E. Its a very good modern camera but I hate it and my wife loves it. So we agreed, I would buy another camera and she would keep the Canon.

I went out and bought the Leica. This camera is much too good for me, I still take snaps where a television aerial sticks out of someones head, so don't make the mistake of thinking expensive cameras equal good photos, they don't.

I am getting better but I have a long way to go to match some of the photos submitted by Vuk et al.

The only good thing which came out of this, is that my wife is now keen on photography in her own right.

Regards

Mick

[This message was edited by Mick Parry on SATURDAY 12 May 2001 at 11:06.]

I bought mine in a sale in 1978 (I remember at the time,this cleared out my bank account.)

I bought it when I was 13,I have now just turned 36 and still have the very same camera,Its been rock climbing,absailing,canoeing,white-water rafting,hiking,mountain biking,outdoor festivals and on occasions,its even been swimming with me .(DOH !)

Its been dropped,banged,bounced and immersed on more occasions that I care to remember.

On one occasion,it accompanied me on a 60 foot fall into water when some rock gave way.

its been serviced twice,and is on its fourth semi-soft case,but it still comes back for more !

It's a doddle to use,very consistant,very reliable and even though it's almost antique by todays standards,it still seems to have more than a fair amount of street-cred.

Yes,I still have a lot of respect for the OM's !(In fact,I have just been asked to take the official pictures at Andy H's wedding....guess what camera I will be using

Regards

Chris

p.s. Rico, Thanks for the battery tip !!!

[This message was edited by Chris Brandon on SATURDAY 12 May 2001 at 12:18.]

I am looking for a recommended place to buy the "battery fix" from,(preferably in the uk,but if not available,overseas fine.)

I mailed Olympus themselfs,but as of yet they have not replied.

I can use it quite sucessfully by just "gut instinct",but I have been requested to take some "official" wedding shots at Andy H's wedding,and I want to make DAMN sure I get it right !

Regards

Chris

John

Canon EOS 5, 18/3.5, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 28-70/2.8L
Bronica ETRSi
Mamiya 7-II/80/4
...and within the next couple of days:
Contax G2, 28/45/90 (to replace EOS L zoom, and maybe ETRSi in time)

I really really liked the Leica - very quiet, solidly built and with a good viewfinder. The thing was, the lenses really aren't that much better than Canon L glass or the Contax glass (all shots shot on Manfrotto tripods on Fuji Velvia rated at 40, MLU for the EOS, f2 (except EOS) f2.8, f5.6, f8.

I really wanted to buy the Leica, then reality bit me - it's obscenely expensive for what it is, and whilst technically and optically beyond reproach, it was very difficult to justify on any grounds. The Contax G (Zeiss) lens was (in my opinion) better than the Summicron, but it was like splitting hairs. However, the Contax is WAAAAAAY cheaper, leaving enough left over to buy (say) a CD5 plus HiCap.

Mick obviously loves his M6, and I would too, but it is terribly hyped, and whilst it is a wonderful camera, its competitors have caught up optically (IMHO) - Canon's L range springing to mind, along with the Contax Zeiss lenses in the G series - and for the money Leica ask, you can go to a Mamiya-II 6x7 rangefinder (which I have) which optically destroys the Leica, Contax and Canon results even on a 7x5 - as it has a 4.5x bigger negative (a bit like the leap from a cheap P&S camera to a Leica in qualitative terms).

So, medium format for me is king - LF is too heavy and I like to be able to carry all of my gear in a small bag - the M7 is really a kind of 6x7 M6, albeit with a leaf shutter (therefore flash-sync to 1/500s and all the silence of the Leica's rubberised shutter) and only 10 big shots per roll of 120 (as opposed to 37 on the Leica or other 35mm cameras). Plus I can make all the Hasselblad X-Pan owners VERY jealous and produce the same panoramic 35mm shots they can, but then open up to MF for other things,...

John (definitely into his photos).

PS. I bought the G2, 28, 45 and 90 lenses plus a flash in Titanium with an alloy case for just a little more than an M6 body on its own - hasn't arrived yet (I bought from Robert White - cheapest around)

I love the leica but I am the first to admit it is far to good for me.

The quality of the Leica lenses only really show what they are made of when you blow pictures up to say over 10" x 8". Thats when they leave the others standing.

Most of us settle for smaller pics and hence we are not getting the most out of it.

Regards

Mick

I managed to get a couple of OM1 batteries a year or 2 ago - I'd have a trawl through the back of AP and give a few people a bell. Getting hold of the real mercury battery is the best option - they last for years, have very consistent voltage, etc. Alternatively I think there's a zink/air alternative that gives out 1.35v - but you need to be careful - it starts losing its charge as soon as you open it.

Alternatively I've seen the adaptor referred to a couple of times on American web sites. Worth a surf.

Phil