A mechanical camera will almost never expose slide film correctly.Its not a simple matter of adjusting processing because the exposure will be high in one frame and low the next and theres no prints than can be adjusted, its either right or not.
If that's true for a specific camera, it needs to be serviced.Its not a simple matter of adjusting processing because the exposure will be high in one frame and low the next...
For me, the decline began with the discontinuance of the F2 not the introduction of the F4.
Yep. I still have my F2, and it still functions perfectly (although I should replace the foam).In the Nikon line of 35mm SLR cameras, the F2 was the last one that truly was fully mechanically operated, and it did not require a battery to function.
Absolutely false.The electronic cameras were reliable enough, with the big advantage they have over mechanical when shooting kodachrome sold me on them. A mechanical camera will almost never expose slide film correctly.
Millions of perfectly exposed slides were shot on mechanical cameras. I have thousands of shots on K25, K64 and other slide films, taken with various mechanical cameras over the course of 36 years, which say you're wrong. Precision is important with transparency film, yes, and I have obtained very precise reults from any mechanical camera in good condition. Do you actually think Kodachrome couldn't be accurately exposed in (for example) Nikon F's and F2's? Old National Geographics will prove you wrong. Do you really think a 500 series Hasselblad will ruin people's Velvia? Hell, I have beautifully exposed ASA 10 Kodachromes taken by my grandfather in the 50's with his Argus C3.Its not a simple matter of adjusting processing because the exposure will be high in one frame and low the next and theres no prints than can be adjusted, its either right or not.
Talk about exposure inaccuracy! Relying on AE for perfect exposure will get you a lot more poorly exposed images than careful exposure with a mechanical camera by an experienced, knowledgeable person. In action shooting such as you mention AE has advantages, true, but if the scene reflectance (not luminance) changes significantly you will get poor exposures if you do not compensate for it.Bracketing is not an option with action shots, and exposure requirements can change if following a moving object from the start of a pan to the end.
Not if they know what they're doing. In the 70's I went to many races at Riverside and Ontario raceways and saw many an F, F2, and Canon F1 with motor drives being used. For one thing, lighting conditions don't always change much depending on which way the camera is pointed. The exposure is for the highlights and that often remains completely constant. For another, the photographers planned their shots and set up, prefocused, and waited for cars to enter the frame. If they panned, they knew at what point they would take the shot, and prefocused and set exposure accordingly.It has always cracked me up seeing a motor drive on a FM at the track. Unless they are shooting print film they are wasting film.
Not better exposure control, just shutter speeds closer to nominal. More accurate than mechanical, yes, but the mechanical speeds were still accurate enough to work just fine.The shift away from full mechanical was after people learned the electronic controlled cameras had better exposure control.
The same is true of modern digital cameras. They typically operate in 1/3 stop steps.You only have a choice of fixed shutter speeds with a mechanical camera.
Absolutely wrong.A mechanical camera will almost never expose slide film correctly.
And lens openings are variable.You only have a choice of fixed shutter speeds with a mechanical camera.
Setting an aperture ring between clicks won't tell you what aperture it is either, but it works. Are you advocating for full-time AE? Because many electronic camera's manual shutter speeds cannot be set at in-between speeds, either.If you need an in between speed you are SOL.The F2 can be set inbetween but you have no way of knowing what the speed it.
Good thing the diaphragm is infinitely variable, ain't it?Pick up an FM and see how many scenes meter so that changing the shutter speed results in over or under, never dead on. With kodachrome and ektachrome film this error can be just short of one stop and that error is enough to not give the correct exposure with slide film.
Not a problem, if you know what to do about it.Its a problem inherant in all mechaical cameras, brand new they have this problem.
So you choose one and move the diaphragm ring a half stop or quarter stop or third stop or whatever to compensate. And it may very well be that your electronic camera is giving you 1/450 when it says 1/500. Which is fine: the difference between 1/450 and 1/500 is insignificant in actual use.If you need 1/90th you have a choice of either 1/125 or 1/60.
If you need 1/450 you have a choice between 1/500 and 1/250.
I've gotten thousands, as a matter of fact.Get the picture?
There are hundreds of sports photographers who got great shots with their mechanical cameras.Electronic shutter control was the best thing to happen to cameras, it was developed to address the exposure errors.
And what's this about "circular" polarizers? They don't have to be circular type, you know.Put a circular polarizer on a lens...
Its a problem inherant in all mechaical cameras, brand new they have this problem. If you need 1/90th you have a choice of either 1/125 or 1/60.
If you need 1/450 you have a choice between 1/500 and 1/250. Get the picture?
The Copal Square was slightly slower than 1/125th, but still in spec.It may be that the marketing types with Copal were pushing it a bit when they claimed that the Copal Square had the fastest X-sync focal plane shutter at 1/125th second. Yes, it actually was faster than the 1/50th a or 1/60th everyone else had back in the 1960s, but it really was not 1/125th second. However, please note that with the standard tolerance of +/- 20% accuracy in the ASA standard for photographic shutters, the claim really was valid.
The electronic cameras were reliable enough, with the big advantage they have over mechanical when shooting kodachrome sold me on them. A mechanical camera will almost never expose slide film correctly.Its not a simple matter of adjusting processing because the exposure will be high in one frame and low the next and theres no prints than can be adjusted, its either right or not.
Bracketing is not an option with action shots, and exposure requirments can change if following a moving object from the start of a pan to the end. It has always cracked me up seeing a motor drive on a FM at the track. Unless they are shooting print film they are wasting film.
The shift away from full mechanical was after people learned the electronic controlled cameras had better exposure control.
The guy's handle is fstop, not shutterspeed, maybe we should cut him some slack.
The idea that you can't shoot chrome film well with a mechanically timed shutter, it's just not borne out by evidence. But it's off topic. Best decade? seems like slr guys say 70's, but if you are a rangefinder guy i would think the 50's are the best. I would like my decade to include the early 80's, so my fav OM-3 makes it, mechanical shutter not withstanding!
I think you'll find that, in reality, exposure requirements just don't vary that much when you're shooting outdoor subjects.
Hey, it's a 70s holdover, 'cept for its spotmeter, eh?
There are hundreds of sports photographers who got great shots with their mechanical cameras, probably because they didn't read your opinions.
Electronic shutters were designed to meet the demands of the brainless amateurs who want mediocre pictures, and because the electronic type is cheaper to manufacture than the mechanical type.
And what's this about "circular" polarizers? They don't have to be circular type, you know.
Every comment you make indicates that you haven't been doing this very long.
Have you ever actually used a manual camera, or just read about them?
- Leigh
Well, I've got you by about 20 years, going back to 1954.You're right I haven't done this very long, only since the mid 70s.
Going on 40 years is fairly short in the grand scheme of things.
1/93rd of a second???Ralph I'm not talking about the accuracy of the speed, I'm talking about the speed itself.There is not a manual camera ever made that can be set to 1/93 th of a second if you need it, electronic shutters are stepless.
What electronic shutter is stepless in actual operation?
Oh I've learned plenty, people are like sheep.Surprised you haven't learned anything in those 40 years.
Not true. I just tried my D300s in Aperture Priority mode, and the shutter speeds change in 1/3-stop steps, not continuously.Any Nikon or Minolta electronic controlled shutter in aperture priority mode.
Advertising work was frequently done on the street rather than in studio. You need only look through the magazines to confirm that.The hassy analogy is bad one, a studio with controlled lighting is obviously going to provide predictable lighting and the Blad has a polaroid back that is used to check exposure...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?