Holga D, The Ultimate Lo-Fi Digicam
http://www.saikatbiswas.com
Eyjafjallajokull
http://www.boston.com
Dennis Hopper: Photographs 1961 -1967
http://www.taschen.com
Glastonbury Festival 2010
http://www.boston.com
Add comment August 21st, 2010
Not many people are interested in a single purpose digital camera, which is exactly what the Sigma DP1 is. Designed for wide angle nature photography, this compact digital camera offers few features most consumers would want, like a mechanical zoom lens or the ability to shoot HD video. But the DP1 does include features I find particularly appealing, like a DSLR sized imaging sensor and manual exposure control. I’m especially fond of the long shutter option, which allows for (semi) long exposure night photography — something I haven’t seen on many compact digital cameras. I also like the overall design and construction of the DP1, which has a decidedly old-fashion flair to it. When the lens is retracted and covered with the purpose-built cap, it slips easily into the jacket pocket. The layout of the controls are pretty simple and the camera is relatively easy to learn. There is no optical viewfinder, but I always use the LCD for framing shots, so this isn’t a big deal for me. And while I like the design from an aesthetic standpoint, the ergonomics are really quite bad once you start using it on a regular basis. So bad that I prefer the way my crappy Canon A-70 handles. Once you attach the lens shade/filter adapter, the camera becomes even more awkward to use. But I suspect most fans of the DP1 put up with its quirk because when it does perform, it performs fantastically. I was sold on the camera after seeing example photos on the Sigma website. It’s not easy to produce razor-sharp and highly saturated pictures, but with some practice, it within reach of even the most novice of users. One other thing worth pointing out is the DP1 does export images in the RAW format, which is common for DSLRs for not so much for compact digital cameras. Unfortunately, Sigma forces you to use their software to convert the images to something you can use (like .jpg), but for me, this isn’t a big hassle. I suppose if you had dozens of photos to convert it would be frustrating though.
Finally, it’s worth mentioning the newer DP2 offers some features that might appeal to a wider user-base. Gone is the wide angle lens, which has been replaced something approximating the standard 50mm focal length (non zoom of course) someone would use on a DSLR. But other than the lens change, I don’t know if Sigma made any radical departures from the original design. Would I recommend this camera to someone in the market for a compact digital camera? Probably not. Besides the fact it lacks a zoom lens, most people would be very disappointed with the shutter lag and low light performance. These aren’t really issues for most DP1 users who are taking landscape photos, but casual users are looking for something to take pictures of their kids, which the DP1 wasn’t really designed for. I suppose the DP1 would make a good travel camera due to it’s small size and robust construction — just make sure and bring the battery charger.
For examples shots from the DP1, see my Flickr page
Add comment July 2nd, 2010
This SLR was my dad’s and it has served me faithful for about a half dozen years. I think it’s one of the easiest cameras I’ve ever used. It’s also one of the most robust built SLRs I’ve come across. But what about the lens? Minolta use to make great optics in the MD and MC format. I also have an M42 adapter, which lets me use screw mount lens. This opens up a whole range of lens from Japanese Super Takamurs to old East German Zeiss Jenas. I’ve added the Autowinder G motor drive to my X-570, which improves the balance of the camera and makes it operate in a fashion that seems more modern. The X-570 came out in the early ’80s and was a less expensive version of the X-700, but is consider a better camera than its more expensive sibling. I tend to use the X-570 in the all manual mode, so I set the shutter speed and then adjust the aperture while monitoring the exposure LED in the viewfinder. Unfortunately, when I’m using an M42 lens, the view is “stopped down”, meaning a dim image. This isn’t an issue in low light settings, because the lens will generally be open all the way. But when shooting, say, around F16, the viewfinder is very dark. In these cases, I usually compose my shot and then dial the appeture down. Really, it’s not a big deal for me most of the time. Of course when using a Minolta mount lens, this isn’t an issue.
Add comment December 23rd, 2009
This is a camera I wanted to love so much — yet it continues to disappoint every time I use it. Rangefinders are dreamy, and I bought the Contax after feeling nostalgic for my old Voighlander Bessa R. And the Contax should be a great camera simply because of its impeccable pedigree, yet I find the camera maddening to take pictures with due to its bizarre design. The two lonely positives are the interchangeable Carl Zeiss lens and the beautiful fit and finish of the camera body. Just holding the camera in your hand is like handling a piece of art. But back to the aggravating design. The G1 is actually not a traditional rangefinder like the old Leicas. It can operate in auto or manual focus modes. To manually focus, you must turn an awkwardly placed dial on the top of the camera. For me, it takes forever to get the focus just right, even with as much practice as I’ve had. the updated G2 has the focus dial in the front of the camera, which is a little better, but it’s still totally fiddly. Forget auto focus mode, I find it completely useless.
Despite the frustrations the camera elicits, I continue to use it. Quite simply, the Zeiss lens are some of the best lens I’ve ever used. The 45mm Planar is actually considered the sharpest 35mm camera lens ever made, beating the Leica 50mm Summicron. For some reason these lens are magic with black and white film. I also like the camera size. It’s smaller than an SLR, but has a nice heft to it and it auto advances the film unlike my old Bessa R. It’s too bad they screwed up on the auto and manual focusing though. Coming from my Nikon F100 (review coming), the auto focus on the G1 seems clumsy and primitive. Even my cheapo Yashica T4, made by the same company, has a better auto focus system. But I suppose I’ll keep the camera just for its lens. The G series Zeiss can’t be used on any digital cameras, so they can be found on eBay for pretty cheap.
1 comment November 4th, 2009
I scanned some old b&w film the other day and was surprised at how cool it came out. Sure, you can desaturate a digital camera pic in Photoshop, but I still prefer good old b&w reversal film. Maybe it’s the grain. BTW, these shots were taken w/ a red filter on a Yashica Electro GSN rangefinder.
2 comments April 11th, 2007
Finished scanning the remaining photos last night and uploaded them this morning. I was surprised how dramatically altered some of the cross processed pictures turned out. Usually they don’t have that drastic of a green cast or such high contrasts. I think it was because the film was super expired. Anyway, a bunch of the photos are now online if anyone is interested in taking a look. All shot analog style.
New York and PA Photos
http://www.wildfreshness.com/photos/simpleviewer/
6 comments June 13th, 2006
You might remember a post from a while back linking to a gallery full of images culled from slides I scanned. Those images were taken in 1963 by an American traveling in Brazil and given to me by my neighbor Tim. I’ve been meaning to digitize more, but didn’t have access to a slide scanner. Well, that has changed since my father gave me a new scanner for Christmas. It’s a flatbed Epson, but it came with an adapter allowing slide and negative scanning. Check the link if your interested in seeing more of the images.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wildfreshness
2 comments January 10th, 2006
My neighbor Tim from across the street was cleaning out his garage the other day and came across a box of slides he found at a thrift store a couple years back. Naturally, knowing my obsession with Kodachrome, Tim offered the slides to me. It’s hard to tell what the story is behind the snapshots, but this I know: all the photos were taken in Brazil in 1963. I don’t know anything about the photographer, but from looking through everything, he must have been some kind of American official. My guess is he was on some kind of diplomatic mission — maybe related to trade or education. Anyway, take a look at some of the slides I scanned yesterday. It’s a great little window into the past.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wildfreshness
7 comments September 27th, 2005
Well, Kodak finally pulled the trigger and announced the end of Kodachrome (K40) super 8 this week. This is a real bummer, since they decided to replace it with the color reversal film Ektachrome 64T (tungsten balanced) instead of the anticipated Ektachrome 100D (daylight balanced). At first I didn’t think any of my cameras would notch these new 64T carts correctly. But as it turns out, two of my lesser used cams should recognize the new carts, so not all is lost. Also, some of my favorite cameras that do timelapse have manual exposure control, so it’s possible I could use 64T and just adjust the exposure by 2/3 a stop or so.
What really bums me out is that Kodachrome was my gateway into super 8. Any super 8 camera out there will notch a Kodachrome cartridge correctly in a plug-and-play sort of way. And Kodachrome was cheap to buy and process. I’m afraid that with the demise of Kodachrome at the end of the summer, less people will find their way into amateur filmmaking like I did.
Kodak claims they’re discontinuing Kodachrome for environmental reasons. I don’t have any issues with that, because Kodachrome does require all sorts of dangerous chemicals to process. However, for some strange reason, Kodak will continue to make Kodachrome for 16mm, so their reasoning for discontinuing super 8 is just bizarre. My only guess is that Kodak wants to transform super 8 into a professional film format by moving us over to negative film. Super 8, you’ve come a long way baby!
1 comment May 12th, 2005
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Aug | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||