[sleeping]

15$ doesn’t seem totally unreasonable, but it’s not really a bargain either (you could probably get one for less on ebay) unless it happens to be some rare/collectible model. There are tons (probably literally) of those old cameras out there, and unless the optics are fogged up or have fungus in them, they tend to work fine because there’s not much to go wrong with them. It’s basically just a light tight box with a simple lens and spring shutter, as well as the sprockets for the film rolls….

The thing to look for past the basic condition if you want one to shoot cheaply and easily is one that takes 120 film instead of 620 or any of the other oddball sizes out there. That tends to mean European not American makers and particularly not a kodak (620 was their format).

The results will be closer to a Holga than a Hasselblad for anything like that, although you won’t probably get the light leaks or extreme vignetting.

[sleeping]

god know how you check. or for that matter what you check 🙂

Photograph a ruler with a MM scale with the setup you want to know the magnification of. Compare that to your sensor size, which should be available online somewhere for most cameras 🙂

[sleeping]

I have a really cheap macro for my Olympus Four Thirds. It can do 1:1, but you have to get really close to do this. However, because of the size of the sensor, 1:1 actually becomes 1:2 (so I read). Does this mean that I cannot take “true macros”, only “half-sized”?

No, whatever you read was wrong.

Magnification, in photographic terms, is purely an artifact of the lens, not the camera body. At 1:1 magnification, the image projected at the focal planes on each side of the lens is the same size.

So on a full frame camera at 1:1 you can capture 36x24mm, and for 4/3 its 17x13mm, but the magnification in both cases is the same.

[sleeping]

Yeah, it looks like you’d need to remove that entire flange probably. Not sure if that could be removed in a reversible manner, but you could probably dremel/hacksaw it out.

[sleeping]

Have you thought about buying the PK – Nikon adapter and removing the internal optical element? That would basically turn it into a very short extension tube. If you don’t want a lot of extension that might be the easiest thing to do?

[sleeping]

You don’t need a nikon flash, but you do need one which is compatible with the Nikon i-ttl system to get automatic flash metering.

The sb600 is less powerful than the 900, and it can’t act as a contoller in a multi flash setup. It also doesn’t zoom as much to cover as many focal lengths. On the plus side, it’s a good deal smaller. I have one myself and it’s been more than adequate for most uses, although more power wouldn’t go amiss occasionally. You can compensate a bit by kicking up the iso a bit in a lot of circumstances, though.

[sleeping]

If you want to get as close as you can to a subject, with any lens, it’s often easiest to set it to manual focus, set the focus ring to the closest distance, and move the camera until the subject is in focus. You can use the little green confirmation dots in the viewfinder to help with this (on a Nikon, I assume other brands have something similar)

But yes, a real macro lens will make a big difference. I assume you have the 35mm F1.8 DX Nikkor? That will get you about this close (I’m pretty sure I had it set to the minimum focus distance):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/awrose/4552782444/

A real macro lens, on the other hand, will get you this close:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/awrose/4552782400/

(incidentally, by “close” I’m talking about magnification, the minimum focus distance of both lenses is actually pretty similar 12″ for the 35mm, 11″ for the Tamron 90mm Macro)

[sleeping]

I want to write more, but don’t have enough spare minutes (I get verbose), but I did want to mention that FD lenses will NOT work on current DSLR’s.

You can adapt them to micro 4/3 though, and keep infinity focus without glass. Those are an interesting option as far as adapting old lenses because you can fit just about anything on the front given the short flange-sensor distance….

[sleeping]

But what makes color pop, other than saturating a picture?

Curves. They let you make an image much punchier without looking cartoony or blowing out the highlights.

I posted an example here: http://farktography.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=24261#24261

And I never got the ‘white balance’ thing. How dost that work?

Light comes in different colors, but the human visual system adapts to that (within certain constraints, it breaks down as the range of colors present gets smaller) so white objects will continue to look white, not blue or pink etc. in a range of different lighting.

Your camera will attempt to make the same sort of correction if you set the white balance to auto, but sometimes it will get it wrong. Also, it may remove desirable color casts, e.g. if you’re shooting a sunset.

Your camera likely has a bunch of presets too, those can sometimes work better than auto, if you can match the preset to the lighting environment you’re shooting in (the auto modes tend to be worst with artificial light so you may be better off, for example, by setting the WB to fluorescent under fluorescent lights). You can probably also set the WB manually (the exact process will depend on your camera). Usually this means pointing the camera at a neutral toned object (e.g. a gray card) and shooting a blank frame so the camera can calculate the exact color of the light.

Most any decent image editor should let you correct it afterward though. Usually it’s just a matter of clicking somewhere in the image where the tones should be neutral (gray, white or black).

[sleeping]

It can be done, I cleaned the taking lens on my Autocord with Isopropyl alcohol and that seemed to kill it off quite effectively. If the fungus has gotten inside one of the element groups themselves, you might not be able to get in there and get it out though….

You might need a spanner: http://www.amazon.com/Lens-Spanner-Wrench-Camera-Enlarger/dp/B000HRD0K8

[sleeping]

Here’s a quick lighting diagram of how I set up my shots, it’s just my sb600 on a cable bounced off a sheet of white foam core. The glass was further back than the flash.

[sleeping]

You might try Freestyle, they will ship stuff that B&H doesn’t.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/c1000-Color-Chemicals

[sleeping]

While we’re dreaming, I want one of these: http://www.sinar.ch/en/products/cameras/141-sinar-p3

[sleeping]

I don’t think the Hasselblad 645 digital cameras can shoot film any more, but they do make digital backs for the 6×6 film cameras.

[sleeping]

Hmm, I somehow only managed to post 2 of my photos yesterday. Doh! This was going to be the third:

The bridge is part of an aqueduct that used to send drinking water in to Boston.

[Author]

Posts