Starter slr question

JimKramer wrote:
On Dec 20, 4:39 pm, Tony Polson wrote:
Scott W wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:08 am, Tony Polson wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Tony Polson wrote:
Doug Jewell wrote:
Personally, I very rarely use Tv mode. Av is far more useful
- set the aperture you want, and let the camera decide on a
shutter speed. Usually, it is more important to control
Depth of Field, than controlling the length of the shutter.
But that depends entirely on what you are shooting. With moving
subjects it is important to freeze motion, and for that Tv (or S) mode
is best. You choose the shutter speed you need to freeze the motion
and the camera sets the aperture that gives the right exposure.
Then you just open up the lens & that's as fast as it'll get. It really
doesn't matter which way, you really have to look at both settings.
That's true, but if you need a particular shutter speed and don't have
the time (or need) to consider the aperture, choose Tv or S and shoot.- Hide quoted text -
In cases like this I often would rather fix both the aperture and the
shutter speed and let the camera adjust the ISO as needed. Say I am
shooting at f/8 at 1/400 second and ISO 400, The sun now comes out and
if I am in Tv mode my aperture goes to something like f/16, which is
not where I would normally want to be shooting. I would much rather
the camera turn down the iso to 100.
On the flip side say I am shooting at f/8 and 1/400 second at iso 100
and the sun goes behind a cloud, I often would rather go to iso 200 or
even 400 rather then loss DOF from opening the lens more.
Sadly my camera does not adjust iso, unless I shoot in full auto mode,
and that is not something I am going to be doing. The next best thing
would be an iso knob, but again my camera is lacking in that. There
seems to be a mind set from the days of film that iso is not something
that you change often.
We were discussing film!

The days of film are not over, not by a very long way, however much
you would like that to be the case.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ask all of the people here (i.e. taking part in this thread) when was
the last time they shot film? What kind and what subject?

Me? Eight weeks ago - TriX100 - New puppy
http://www.jlkramer.net/Pictures/Puppy/buzz10weeks.htm

For me it was a week and a half ago - last photos that I
shot. Film - Reala, subject - bull-ants. I was using film
because I went away out of town, forgot my charger, and
found myself with flat batteries, so dragged old-faithful
out of the camera bag.
Last time I used film by choice (ie, I had the choice of
digital or film, and chose film), was in late september,
when our city was having it's annual "Carnival of Flowers".
Film was Velvia, subject was flowers.
Mind you, I've been exceptionally busy of late anyway, so I
haven't taken very many photos digitally in that time either.

Scott W wrote:
On Dec 20, 10:08 am, Tony Polson wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Tony Polson wrote:
Doug Jewell wrote:
Personally, I very rarely use Tv mode. Av is far more useful
- set the aperture you want, and let the camera decide on a
shutter speed. Usually, it is more important to control
Depth of Field, than controlling the length of the shutter.
But that depends entirely on what you are shooting. With moving
subjects it is important to freeze motion, and for that Tv (or S) mode
is best. You choose the shutter speed you need to freeze the motion
and the camera sets the aperture that gives the right exposure.
Then you just open up the lens & that's as fast as it'll get. It really
doesn't matter which way, you really have to look at both settings.
That's true, but if you need a particular shutter speed and don't have
the time (or need) to consider the aperture, choose Tv or S and shoot.- Hide quoted text -


In cases like this I often would rather fix both the aperture and the
shutter speed and let the camera adjust the ISO as needed. Say I am
shooting at f/8 at 1/400 second and ISO 400, The sun now comes out and
if I am in Tv mode my aperture goes to something like f/16, which is
not where I would normally want to be shooting. I would much rather
the camera turn down the iso to 100.

On the flip side say I am shooting at f/8 and 1/400 second at iso 100
and the sun goes behind a cloud, I often would rather go to iso 200 or
even 400 rather then loss DOF from opening the lens more.

Sadly my camera does not adjust iso, unless I shoot in full auto mode,
and that is not something I am going to be doing. The next best thing
would be an iso knob, but again my camera is lacking in that. There
seems to be a mind set from the days of film that iso is not something
that you change often.
Sounds like the TAv mode on the Pentax K10D was invented
just for you. Personally I haven't seen much of a use for
this mode, but it does exactly what you describe.

Scott

Tony Polson wrote:
Doug Jewell wrote:

Personally, I very rarely use Tv mode. Av is far more useful
- set the aperture you want, and let the camera decide on a
shutter speed. Usually, it is more important to control
Depth of Field, than controlling the length of the shutter.


But that depends entirely on what you are shooting. With moving
subjects it is important to freeze motion, and for that Tv (or S) mode
is best. You choose the shutter speed you need to freeze the motion
and the camera sets the aperture that gives the right exposure.
In these situations I still find it more useful to use Av,
and open up to a wide aperture. Then you know the camera is
going to be using the fastest shutter possible.
The alternative - dialling in a fast shutter and let the
camera choose the aperture, runs the risk of the needed
aperture being wider than the lens will go.
Using the Av system, even in the brightest sunlight, an F2.8
lens, at ISO 100, you will have a shutter speed of about
1/4000th, which most cameras can do - it would be most
unusual for a shutter speed outside the camera's range to be
selected.

On Dec 21, 1:08*am, "William Graham" wrote:
"JimKramer" wrote in message

...


Ask all of the people here (i.e. taking part in this thread) when was
the last time they shot film? What kind and what subject?

Me? *Eight weeks ago - TriX100 - New puppy
http://www.jlkramer.net/Pictures/Puppy/buzz10weeks.htm

I shoot it all the time.....Usually slide film. I like the "hard copy" that
it produces......And it doesn't go away if I hit the wrong button my
mistake....:^)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Some would call that "hard copy" a "print". :-)

On Dec 20, 8:32*pm, That Rich wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:17:29 -0800 (PST), JimKramer





wrote:
On Dec 20, 7:59 pm, That Rich wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:37:44 -0800 (PST), JimKramer

wrote:
Ask all of the people here (i.e. taking part in this thread) when was
the last time they shot film? What kind and what subject?

Guess now I'm taking part in this thread....

Dec. 15, 2007
Xmas party
Agfa Optima 100

BTW: I don't even own a digital camera and get along just fine, thank
you.

RP(c)
-www.pbase.com/that_rich

Do you realize that was 5 days ago!?!?! :-)

I thought AGFA went belly up? Did they get bought by someone?

I will admit it is interesting listening to novices "gush" over some
inkjet prints of scanned film. They know something is not the same as
the PS digitals they use, but they can't tell you what... :-)

BTW Rich, post more often. :-) I know it's been pretty dry here
recently...
Jim

Hi Jim,

I believe you are right about Agfa. *I was caught with my metaphorical
pants down when many of the _other_ favorite films were discontinued.
Upon hearing Agfa being in dire straights I purchased 50 rolls...
think I have about 20 left. In hindsight, I should have grabbed 100.

Have great Holiday Season,

RP©- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You too,

Hmm. I just got a confirmation email that something has shipped and to
expect it soon. Only it arrived yesterday. :-)

Doug Jewell writes:
Scott W wrote:
In cases like this I often would rather fix both the aperture and
the shutter speed and let the camera adjust the ISO as needed.

[snip]

Sounds like the TAv mode on the Pentax K10D was invented just for
you. Personally I haven't seen much of a use for this mode, but it
does exactly what you describe.

On the newer Nikons, M mode with Auto ISO enabled does exactly this
too. I like it in low light situations.

--
Fredrik Sandström

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...

Whereas with later film SLRs with sophisticated matrix multi-pattern
metering, you would never know how close the camera had got to the
correct exposure until the negatives or slides were developed.

And when you looked at the results, you realised that often, you would
have been better using a camera with a little needle that you could
centre and get close to the right exposure, rather than using
something far more sophisticated that got it so badly wrong.

The last camera I bought was Pentax most sophisto line; the ZX series. After
all the great cameras they made, this one was a complete disaster. It had so
much info in the narrow right margin I couldn't read any of it, and I could
read the top panel only in shade, no sun or darkness. Changing any thing was
a 3 step operation, if I remember right, and I couldn't see if I was going
up or down anyway. It took forever to take a picture, and AF couldn't make
up it's mind. The best was it wouldn't fire until the AF was happy, so if
something moved, it never fired till it stopped. I kept that one for about 3
rolls. Bob Hickey

"JimKramer" wrote in message
...
On Dec 21, 1:08 am, "William Graham" wrote:
"JimKramer" wrote in message

...


Ask all of the people here (i.e. taking part in this thread) when was
the last time they shot film? What kind and what subject?

Me? Eight weeks ago - TriX100 - New puppy
http://www.jlkramer.net/Pictures/Puppy/buzz10weeks.htm

I shoot it all the time.....Usually slide film. I like the "hard copy"
that
it produces......And it doesn't go away if I hit the wrong button my
mistake....:^)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Some would call that "hard copy" a "print". :-)

Yes. Or a "slide", which is the form mine usually end up. But there is
something very satisfying about actually holding something in my hand that I
can stick in a box and file away somewhere. And, I can actually look at it
and enjoy it without the help of a computer.......

"hickster11" wrote:
The last camera I bought was Pentax most sophisto line; the ZX series. After
all the great cameras they made, this one was a complete disaster.


I was a Pentax user since 1973. Started with an H3, and kept
acquiring more. Spotmatics, ME Supers, Super Program, etc.
Lenses range from 24mm up to the 1000mm f8. I finally caved
in and bought an autofocus body when the PZ 1P was their
top of the line. Didn't take long to realize they had abandoned
the advanced amateur/pro market, altogether. They haven't made
a true 'pro' body since the LX. I switched to Nikon (F5) about
four years ago. Bought a D50 in the Summer of '05. Plan to get
a D300 before next Summer.

Still have some Pentax gear. Rarely use it.


--
Steve snip McQ

"hickster11" wrote:


"Tony Polson" wrote in message
.. .

Whereas with later film SLRs with sophisticated matrix multi-pattern
metering, you would never know how close the camera had got to the
correct exposure until the negatives or slides were developed.

And when you looked at the results, you realised that often, you would
have been better using a camera with a little needle that you could
centre and get close to the right exposure, rather than using
something far more sophisticated that got it so badly wrong.

The last camera I bought was Pentax most sophisto line; the ZX series. After
all the great cameras they made, this one was a complete disaster. It had so
much info in the narrow right margin I couldn't read any of it, and I could
read the top panel only in shade, no sun or darkness. Changing any thing was
a 3 step operation, if I remember right, and I couldn't see if I was going
up or down anyway. It took forever to take a picture, and AF couldn't make
up it's mind. The best was it wouldn't fire until the AF was happy, so if
something moved, it never fired till it stopped. I kept that one for about 3
rolls. Bob Hickey


I had one of the ZX series - it was the MZ series outside the USA.

Mine was the MZ-3, which was basically an MZ-5n (USA ZX-5n perhaps?)
but with the shutter out of either the Nikon F100 or the Nikon F4, I
can't recall which. Like the ZX-5n it had conventional controls and
was a joy to use.

But you're right, the rest of the ZX series were over-provided with
features and given a complex interface and were therefore difficult to
use.

They reminded me of the Nikon N70 (F70 outside the USA) and the N6006
(F601 outside the USA). These cameras had weird and complex user
interfaces that frightened off most people, except those who were
fascinated by complex devices.

Ironically, the people who liked them most probably took to digital
SLRs like ducks to water. ;-)