Feeling a bad case of GAS coming on: square formats

[BrianShaw]

Gee thanks, Suzanne. Now I think I want one of those GF670s - rangefinder, meter, multi-format and all in a compact package that will travel well. All that's between me and that camera is the $1600 that I don't have!

 

[SuzanneR]

Sorry Brian!! Funny, that $1600 is between me and that camera, too!! So, I decided I could part with $230 for an older version... won't be quite as easy to use, but I just put a roll through it, and it felt great!!

 

[Klainmeister]

What a lovely camera Suzanne! You'll be awfully surprised by the results from these little guys. I used folders because of my economic predicament (academia) before upgrading to a more modern system, but still use them time and time again because they are fun and produce stunning results for their age. Please post some results!

 

[BrianShaw]

The challenge Iv'e had with the old folders (I've been using a Kodak Duo - 645 format) is that I am terrible at range estimation. I'm hoping to come across an accessory rangefinder one day that might help me out. I can easily deal with the red window - I hate fast film anyway.

 

[Klainmeister]

The challenge Iv'e had with the old folders (I've been using a Kodak Duo - 645 format) is that I am terrible at range estimation. I'm hoping to come across an accessory rangefinder one day that might help me out. I can easily deal with the red window - I hate fast film anyway.

This is one benefit of being raised as a big game archery hunter

Have you looked for a Watameter or Telex? I've used both and they are pretty nice. Got em' for around $15 off the auction site.

 

[BrianShaw]

I'll have to use those search terms. Thanks for the suggestion. I've been looking at the Kodak Service Rangefinders mostly.

 

[SuzanneR]

The one I bought came with the Watameter rangefinder attachment for the hotshoe, but it's in cm, and the lens of the camera is in inches. (Hurts my brain... not sure how useful I'll find it!)

 

[bdial]

Are you sure it's not meters and feet?
More or less 1 meter is 3 feet (39 inches, actually), so just multiply the number on the rangefinder by 3 and set the camera to that. Should be close enough if you aren't wide open.

 

[PaulC]

Try shooting a roll purely by guessing the distance. You'll probably be surprised and never bother with the rangefinder again.

 

[SuzanneR]

Are you sure it's not meters and feet?
More or less 1 meter is 3 feet (39 inches, actually), so just multiply the number on the rangefinder by 3 and set the camera to that. Should be close enough if you aren't wide open.

Barry, indeed, it's in cm to start, and becomes "meters" on the dial, and the lens is in feet, so I might be able to manage multiplying by three!

And Paul, I put a roll through it yesterday doing just exactly that. I figure F8 can help, if I'm really unsure, but I did some open to F4.5, too... won't have time to soup the film until this weekend...

I must say, I love the feel of it!! And I think I'll have to brush up on sunny 16... guessing the distance, the exposure... I don't always want to carry around a light meter.

 

[Rick A]

Suzanne, I generally use the "sunny 11" rule as insurance. The only time I go for f/16 is on a blindingly bright day with a light colored background, seems to work out very well for me. It also helps to have a working knowledge of which items have an approximation of middle gray reflectance. Green grass is mostly perfect for this, a persons skin add one or two stops depending on how fair skinned they are. I assign the value to whatever my main subject is.

 

[SuzanneR]

Just to follow up, I ran a test roll through the camera late last week, and processed it yesterday... really like the look of this lens. I'm too lazy to upload the pix here, but you can see them on my blog,

http://suzannerevy.blogspot.com/2011/09/test-roll.html

Thanks again for all the thoughts, can't wait to put some more film through it!

 

[CGW]

Just to follow up, I ran a test roll through the camera late last week, and processed it yesterday... really like the look of this lens. I'm too lazy to upload the pix here, but you can see them on my blog,

http://suzannerevy.blogspot.com/2011/09/test-roll.html

Thanks again for all the thoughts, can't wait to put some more film through it!

Heavens! You scanned those? Surely the Analog Ayatollahs will have something to say about this! *^)

Like the William Klein "Gun 1" riff shot.

 

[Rick A]

Nicely done Suzanne. One thing I've found, is to let the DOF help with focus. If you stick to mid-range f/stops you can cheat with focus and not need to be so critical. At least thats what I do. I know it's harder to do with medium format but once you practice a bit you'll start getting the gist of it.

 

[ntenny]

Try shooting a roll purely by guessing the distance. You'll probably be surprised and never bother with the rangefinder again.

I'd disagree, personally, but maybe I'm just bad at estimating distances. I've found that at near-to-middle distances, an auxiliary rangefinder improves my results significantly as compared to scale focussing.

English<->metric conversions are pretty easy to get used to: 3 meters is almost exactly 10 feet and you can interpolate from there. The only real gotcha is the occasional camera that doesn't *say* whether it's in meters or feet!

-NT

 

[DWThomas]

..... The only real gotcha is the occasional camera that doesn't *say* whether it's in meters or feet!

-NT

Well in medium format, if the lowest number is 1 or 1.5, I think you can be pretty sure it's meters.

Most of my cameras have been SLR or had a built in rangefinder. As a mechanically inclined sort, I find I do pretty well at estimating distances. My one session of slight panic was doing some flash photography outdoors at a wedding where the wooded location resulted in near total darkness. No matter how good my estimates were, I had one heck of a time reading the numbers on the focus scale to set it! The problem never crossed my mind until I was faced with it. I was not an official photographer fortunately.

 

[fatboy22]

Suzanne,

This is a great camera, I own one. It is small and easy to carry with you, it is the fast and easy to load and amazingly quiet!
I highly recomend! They are a bit pricey but well worth it! I have had mine for 2 years now, no problems, very robust.

Jamie