An equipment dilemma

[Soeren]

No sorry. Was it lost or eaten ?

 

[Struan Gray]

Sacrificed to the Great God Entropy.

 

[stormbytes]

Dean,

I'd suggest going with a nice 6x6 outfit, like a Bronica or Hasselblad. No you won't be able to shoot that "winning goal", but you'll thoroughly enjoy capturing the other 99% of situations that this camera will more then provide for. You're an 8x10 shooter, hence, you know how to focus. The AF features of the F100 and similar cameras, as well as AE and the availability of lenses are almost gimmicky when considering the miniscule 35mm negative size. The 6x6 is probably the best of all worlds. It's small enough to be portable, yet the negative is large enough to print at most conventional sizes up to 16x20 with adequate sharpness. The availability of lenses (40mm - 250mm) is ample for practically all day-to-day applications, and there's no shutter lag. And the price tag lends itself to practically any budget these days.

I was in almost exactly the same situation as you are only a few months ago. I wanted to go back to doing some street photography and found the 4x5 to be less then 'condusive' to the task. I have a 6x6 Bronica outfit, but for some reason thought I'd benefit from the AF & built-in metering available with the F100. So I went out and bought one.

Shooting it was fun, but exactly 1 roll later I realized that the 35mm's advantages are best on a spec sheet. The negs are simply miniscule and with that, off to Apug's classifieds

My 2 Cents

 

[gnashings]

I tried taking photos of my dog with my manual focus 35mm gear... and I am just not good enough to do it. Even if I was, I think it would be work. For situations where havingthe photo is the first and most important objective, I would go with a good AF 35mm camera. Can't be beat for size, handiness, and versitility. My choice if money was a big issue would be a Canon Elan II, or laternately a Elan 7. Nothing wrong with the Nikons, far from it, but I find that these two cameras are consistently selling for ridiculously low prices given their feature-laden abilities.

Whatever you get, just remember, this is a case where the worst picture you have is a LOT better than one you just missed.


Peter.

 

[DeanC]

My ears were burning....

For what it's worth, you're describing the perfect situation for 35mm. It's fast, it's light, it's easy to carry around for those "rare everyday" moments. You're looking for the slice of life without slowing life down. The F100 will be great for that.

That said, you'll learn to work with what you have, within reason. For me, I had to have the depth and richness of MF, even for my own kids' shots, and I was willing to make the concession of carrying a light meter and a larger camera bag to get it. It was awkward at first, definitely, but I didn't allow myself the option of using a 35mm as a bail-out, so I got used to it. And I'm blind.

Exactly. When I want to express myself artistically I pull the 8x10 out (and point it at things that move somewhat slower than a 2 year old ;-). I guess it boils down to my wanting an almost photojournalistic record of my sons growing up. It could certainly be done with MF and could even be done with a speed graphic if I worked at it, but 35mm will be the path of least resistance.

BTW, Cheryl, I went and had a look at your website for the first time after that post. Your work really is wonderful. Don't be surprised to see me and the F100 when your workshop comes to SF next year...

 

[Jack Lusted]

I've four kid's, 9,8,6 and 4 and three cameras that I frequently use in photographing them, a Bronica ETR, a Minox GT-E and Leica M6. All work fine, the Bron is great for the more posed shots, Minox when just out mucking about with the kids (and although you have to guess the focus I've never had a duff one from the Minox) and the Leica does just about everything - but it really comes into its own on sports day with a 90mm lens. The great thing with the Leica is that you can see outside the frame. Pre-focus on the hurdle or what ever and it's easy.
So my advice FWIW is go for a rangefinder - light, easy and you are in control.

 

[JosBurke]

So many choices!!!

I well understand your dilemma and understand a need for auto focus and even have a dig. Rebel for my kids action stuff--like soccer but thats what your wanting to avoid. I'm into LF as well and my compromise aside from my Hasselblad equip is my RolleiFlex 3,5 F with the Carl Zeiss Planar--can be had for a few hundred bucks and mine stays on a tripod ala Rollei Quickfix--I use it more than any other camera I own and it really produces a fine image on my favorites of Ilford FP4+ and more often than any other film loaded is HP5+(though Tri-X is fabulous too). I have a Leica M3 with 50 mm Summicron that was intended for that use but 35 mm just falls short for me. The RolleiFlex just blows the 35mm Leica out of the water with ease! The RolleiFlex hits the spot every time and the image quality is what I seek or I wouldn't be shooting 4x5 thru 11x14 in LF! Sure you'll get plenty of responses here but the Rolleiflex really impresses me and I highly recommend the Planar 3,5 version. BTW--I use a split-image Maxwell screen as those old dim factory screens really take away from the pleasure of using a Rolleiflex TLR. My 2 cents!!
I really thought I'd like the Leica for a carry around but after shooting LF and MF those little 35 mm negs are just that--little--too little!!

 

[df cardwell]

How much light is there to shoot ?

If you are shooting something like TMY at 1/30 @ f/1.4,
you are going to have a bad day with MF !

Running around a garden,
MF is perfect.

The film you choose is important: a long straight line film like TMY
or good old Tri X ( in Xtol or D76 but NOT HC-110 )
gives you a huge useful range
and exposure is not a critical thing - and you can chase the kids all day long
and make good pictures.

So, a good, systematic compromise could be an F100
generous exposure
a couple fast lenses
and a little zoom

You might feel you'd be breaking the bank on the AF 28/1.4
but it really is usable wide open
and takes you into a world you can't reach any other way.
For one lens, that's it. Add an 85 or 105 ( they could be manual focus )
A 35-70/2.8 if you need to zoom.

Everybody makes a good 28 or 35 /1.4,
if you found a Minolta or Canon at a good price,
jump at it and get the appropriate body

I use a 35/1.4... at f/1.4 ... a lot.

Just like shooting 8x10 with a 250 @ f/11.

Except there is no tripod... and less light !

 

[Reid Gray]

I have to agree with Claire and Wayne: once I had kids I found the only way I could be sure to get those fleeting facial expressions and whatnot was with a manual rangefinder. I usually use a Leica IIIf RDST (but sometimes a Zeiss Super Ikonta C---and I can fit one of them in each jacket pocket, which means they're actually wth me when the kids are doing something I want to shoot). With an all-manual rangefinder, you don't spend time focussing because you've already focussed (either with the tab while raising the camera to your eye or hyperfocally, or both), you don't spend time metering because you've already done a sunny 16 calculation or poked a handheld meter at various spots in the surrounding area, and you don't even wait for a mirror to flip up (the mirror alone has cost me shots a rangefinder never misses). The only delay is between your eye and your finger---and you don't have to argue with a computer chip first in order to use the settings you want. It took some practice to get good at this, but not as much as I thought it would. The best part, though, is that I can flatter myself with the conceit that those occasional wonderful shots that randomly appear on various rolls of film were actually my doing.

 

[DBP]

The nice thing about using a TLR with small kids is it makes it easier to get down to eye level. That being said, I would still probably use a nice rangefinder or an SLR, whichever you find easier to focus indoors.

 

[DBP]

35mm equipment prices being what they are these days, how about an old fixed lens rangefinder (Olympus, Canon, Yashica, etc.) for indoors and then an old SLR with some longer lenses for outdoors? If you get a K-mount body, you can probably put together a complete kit for a pittance.

 

[DeanC]

I wound up with the F100 and a 35-70/2.8 Nikkor zoom. It's been great so far for chasing the kids around and it even prompted me to go out and pick up a used Omega D-5 off Craig's List. Of course, now every time I print an 8x10 I think "Damn, I wish that negative was just a little bigger". I fear (okay, my wife fears ;-) ) it's only a matter of time before it gets some 645 or 6x6 company in the camera bag.