Hi from Loving Texas

[Steaphany]

I joined APUG a while back, well, two years ago, but this is my first post here. The reason for not being an active contributor is simple, work. ( and money for photography ) I also bit the evil digital apple, suffered for it with high noise and crappy resolution, knowing all the time that film was and still is always better.

My start in photography was in the 1970's doing B&W and color with completely manual cameras, which taught me that the photographer needs to be in control. A TTL meter or chip in a camera has no clue about photography.

Even with my venture into digital, I got a camera for snaps years ago and I waited for imager technology to yield a film like sensor, every pixel needs to record the full spectrum. ( Bayer masked imagers aren't worth considering ) I eventually found an imager that met my requirements with Sigma's SD14 dSLR which does a great, well sorta good, job for some photography, but film still has it's advantages. To preserve my lens investment, I purchased a Sigma SA9 fSLR.

Film equipment wise, I'm still lacking. I need a medium format and a 4x5 View camera, plus I also need to put together my wet dark room, and purchase the tools for film scanning to achieve a hybrid image processing flow.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Hello and a warm welcome to APUG! It will take time to get your stuff for photography!

Jeff

 

[M.A.Longmore]

.
Welcome Back, And Welcome Home Steaphany !

Ron
.

 

[williamtheis]

yes welcome. ah... another Sigma user. Wish I had the $ for the SD1.... the new Fuji sensor shows promise by being semi-Bayer and on a slant... and then there's the Betterlight scan back which measures at every pixel (if you can live with it)

Bill

 

[SuzanneR]

Welcome!

 

[Rick A]

Happy to have you here!

 

[papagene]

Hello and welcome to APUG!

 

[Steaphany]

Wish I had the $ for the SD1

I briefly thought about the SD1, but I wonder if the image results are really worth the price, especially when you consider that shooting with FUJICHROME PROVIA 100F with a 35mm format camera yields an image equivalent to a 34.5 megapixel full frame digital imager with an average resolution of 100 LP/mm.

For a good measure where digital imagers stack up to film, just calculate the LP/mm from the spec's of the chips. The Sigma SD1's Foveon imager has 4704 pixels across 23.5mm. Since a digital imager needs 2 pixels to maximally resolve line pairs, the calculation is 4704 pixels ÷ 2 ÷ 23.5mm for 104.5 LP/mm. This is great for digital, reasonable for film, but it's not even a full 35mm frame. Remember, the SD1 will still be prone to dust on the sensor, noise at low light levels, and Sigma is asking $6,899.

I picked up my SA-9 on ebay with two kit zoom lenses that were originally bundled with it for just $35. ( I got my SD-14 body new from B&H Photo in 2008 for $799. :confused: )

I haven't bothered to compare features of the SA-9 against the SD1, but with my SD14, apart from film versus the Foveon imager technology, they are very close to being identical cameras.

 

[M.A.Longmore]

.
Time To suggest A Visit To DPUG !!!

Ron
.

 

[Steaphany]

Time To suggest A Visit To DPUG !!!

Never, Analog is the way to go !

 

[Chazzy]

Welcome to APUG, Steaphany.

 

[JudyS]

Is this the Loving, Texas that is in between Olney and Jacksboro??? Tell me if you want to get together and talk film photography. Welcome. I am in Wichita Falls.

 

[Steaphany]

Hi Judy,

Yes, you found me. I'm surprised to find anyone here as close as you are. I'm up in Wichita Falls nearly every day so it will be easy to get together. Please feel free to send me a private message.