• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Red Headed Woodpecker

Mark W. said:
Actually NONE of my lenses will fit any digital camera. But just like my 1964-5 Scott and 1973-85 Pioneer stereo gear they work beautifully.

I just put this little $3.00 rol of film in the back and snap away until I have used up the 36 exp. and then I take it to my local Costco and for $6.00 they give me back a bunch of wonderfull prints that all I have to do with is look at them.

Unless I'm serious and then I use Slide film and it costs $8.00 to process it.

The Canon Manual focus camera I own and use are the same cameras that took all those wonderfull photo's you were amazed at in the 70's 80's 90's and still do. Nothing has changed.


I can still buy well over 100 different 35mm films to use in my camera and I can get processing done at any drug store or photo lab in the area.

I do own a Canon G3 I have to for the internet but not for photography


Thinking that latest greatest most expensive camera will make you a better photographer is the same as thinking that buying a 1957 Stratocaster will make you a better Rock Star.

Photography is an art the camera a tool used to capture the light that is all.
Click to expand...

I understand your current collection is a sunk cost. But, what's the point of amassing additional pieces? Is there a readily available demand for these from buyers? Most TOTL vintage stereo pieces can be bought and sold very readily. It's a pretty liquid 'investment' if you need to sell and get something else. Like I said, at the Estate Sale, people were walking out with BAG loads of cameras (maybe 30 to 50 per bag) for $5 for anyone who was interested. I'm just wondering if these things are really worth anything?

My Canon Digital Rebel SLR (after purchase and the memory card) takes FREE pictures. If I make a mistake or don't like the pic, I just delete it. I 'develop' them on my own with an Epson Photo printer on quality photo paper. I think the high per use variable cost of analog is what is rendering this technology obsolete with a very low demand for resale.

IMHO, just don't see the value in collecting a bunch of stuff that doesn't have many buyers interested when I want to liquidate.

I may be way off base and haven't even researched or looked into it, but are cameras from the 70's, 80's, 90's valuable in some way to collectors? Perhaps the plate cameras from the later 1800's might have some value........
 
Brudha said:
I understand your current collection is a sunk cost. But, what's the point of amassing additional pieces? Is there a readily available demand for these from buyers? Most TOTL vintage stereo pieces can be bought and sold very readily. It's a pretty liquid 'investment' if you need to sell and get something else. Like I said, at the Estate Sale, people were walking out with BAG loads of cameras (maybe 30 to 50 per bag) for $5 for anyone who was interested. I'm just wondering if these things are really worth anything?

My Canon Digital Rebel SLR (after purchase and the memory card) takes FREE pictures. If I make a mistake or don't like the pic, I just delete it. I 'develop' them on my own with an Epson Photo printer on quality photo paper. I think the high per use variable cost of analog is what is rendering this technology obsolete with a very low demand for resale.

IMHO, just don't see the value in collecting a bunch of stuff that doesn't have many buyers interested when I want to liquidate.

I may be way off base and haven't even researched or looked into it, but are cameras from the 70's, 80's, 90's valuable in some way to collectors? Perhaps the plate cameras from the later 1800's might have some value........
Click to expand...



The reason your confused is that you do not attend Camera shows or spend countless hours wishing you could out bid someone on ebay. YES go to ebay do a completed auction search for Canon AE-1 (they made over 4 million of them) now granted they are not fetching high prices and the market is down right now. But they still sell.

And the point of buying a camera is to use it to take photo's If I wanted to make money a nice Janus Mutual fund would make more sense.

The Canon Fd system I have amassed is so that I have the tool I need for the photographic tash I have at hand. When I shoot a wedding I need to identical cameras flashes etc. so that I can not possibly run out of film or batteries when a shot presents itself. I also always take a third body as back up. Also different camera bodies do different things. My T-90's do flash amazingly good but I can mount a waist level finder on them or use my sports finder. On the other hand My F-1N's are capable of constant duty at -20 degrees F. And will mount the special finders viewing screens and survive terrible treatment under very harsh conditions being they are a totally sealed camera.

MY little AE-1p's are the prefect simple yet capable bodies for the wife to use when we go to do bird photography.

My lenes range from a 17mm f4.0 nFD wide angle that is backed into a corner will take a photo of all four walls of a room or a 100 foot water fall from a few yards in front of it.

My 500mm f4.5L S.S.C. with a 2X-A doubler will take photo's showing 5 of Saturns moons. And a nice head shot of a Goldfinch at 40 feet.

I have lenses that can take wedding photo's in the lighting in almost any church. I have lenses that can fill the viewfinder with a single blueberry.

If I go on any more I will need to charge you for photography lessons.

Save to say collecting cameras is very very similar to collecting stereos. After all does anyone really need 107 stereo Recievers?
 
Mark W. said:
The reason your confused is that you do not attend Camera shows or spend countless hours wishing you could out bid someone on ebay. YES go to ebay do a completed auction search for Canon AE-1 (they made over 4 million of them) now granted they are not fetching high prices and the market is down right now. But they still sell.

And the point of buying a camera is to use it to take photo's If I wanted to make money a nice Janus Mutual fund would make more sense.

The Canon Fd system I have amassed is so that I have the tool I need for the photographic tash I have at hand. When I shoot a wedding I need to identical cameras flashes etc. so that I can not possibly run out of film or batteries when a shot presents itself. I also always take a third body as back up. Also different camera bodies do different things. My T-90's do flash amazingly good but I can mount a waist level finder on them or use my sports finder. On the other hand My F-1N's are capable of constant duty at -20 degrees F. And will mount the special finders viewing screens and survive terrible treatment under very harsh conditions being they are a totally sealed camera.

MY little AE-1p's are the prefect simple yet capable bodies for the wife to use when we go to do bird photography.

My lenes range from a 17mm f4.0 nFD wide angle that is backed into a corner will take a photo of all four walls of a room or a 100 foot water fall from a few yards in front of it.

My 500mm f4.5L S.S.C. with a 2X-A doubler will take photo's showing 5 of Saturns moons. And a nice head shot of a Goldfinch at 40 feet.

I have lenses that can take wedding photo's in the lighting in almost any church. I have lenses that can fill the viewfinder with a single blueberry.

If I go on any more I will need to charge you for photography lessons.

Save to say collecting cameras is very very similar to collecting stereos. After all does anyone really need 107 stereo Recievers?
Click to expand...

You evidently already have some nice stuff and it suits you. To duplicate it in digital would be very costly. My point is to continue to buy just ordinary camera stuff just for the sake of amassing a bunch of stuff to look at. My little experience show that most of it isn't worth that much to someone else.

As for the problem of running out of film and even changing it midstream, my Digital Rebel with an 8gb compact flash card can literally take TWO THOUSAND pictures without having to mess with any other storage. How much would you spend on film for that? The resolution is equal that of film

I don't much understand it either; but, as far as the 107 receivers, I'll let Yrly answer that one.......
 
Brudha said:
The resolution is equal that of film
Click to expand...


Not even close. I don't know where you get your info but 35mm film is equal to about 22mp of info it's my understanding that the best of the D rebles do 8mp the best of the Canons does 16Mp. Seams your math is a bit short.

Your experiance with a single estate sale has no bearing on the world of camera collecting any more then the price of a album at a garage sale does on the world of record collecting.

I again suggest you go to ebay and spend a couple hours looking at completed auctions. Or go to some of the specilty auction sites and look at sales of high end collectable cameras. Early wood cameras can easily go for over 10,000.00


But this is turning into an argument so I'm done.
 
Mark W. said:
Not even close. I don't know where you get your info but 35mm film is equal to about 22mp of info it's my understanding that the best of the D rebles do 8mp the best of the Canons does 16Mp. Seams your math is a bit short.
Click to expand...

More, experienced opinions than I:

#1
#2
#3
#4

Excerpts:

"How many pixels does a digital sensor need to outperform 35mm film? The answer is less speculative than it used to be: The 11+ megapixel Canon EOS-1Ds, EOS-1Ds Mark II, and EOS 5D clearly outperform 35mm. I can make finer prints with the 8.3 megapixel EOS 20D (razor sharp at 13x19 inches) than I ever could with 35mm— and I was fanatic about lenses and darkroom work."

"Ignoring the possibility of superior performance from medium format film by having drum scans made (which I don't normally do — not at $100 - $300 per scan) I am only left with the conclusion that I no longer retain any advantage in shooting medium format film. It's more expensive, less convenient and produces lower quality images. The range of lenses available to me is much greater with 35mm digital, including the availability of longer lenses, wider lenses, more zooms, Image Stabilization, wider aperture primes, and tilt / shift lenses. You can see where I'm going, can't you?"
 
There is an analog vs digital thread in this forum. That is where this conversation should go.

Nice woodpecker shot! :thmbsp:
 
I still use my Cannon AE 1 on occasion. When people see the pictures I take with it,
they think it is a high end digital. I enjoy using it when I have the chance. For me,
it reminds me of how much I enjoy analog.
 
Brudha your examples compare digital to digital not optical prints to digital prints the comparison is flawed and of no real use.

when a digital print can compare with a real photographic print I'll let you know.

In the examples you sight the film is being scanned what is being compared is a camera digital capture to a scanner digital capture. Not a film based optical print ot slide to a digital file.

Sorry I been doing this silly argument for about 5 years now and I'm tired of it so this will be the end.
 
gyusher said:
Hope this turns out OK after reducing the size etc so I can post it.

I was at an air show when I snagged this shot. . .
600mm lens . .no IS. . .
Click to expand...

I can't believe nobody mentioned this yet, but 600mm and hand held? Kudos to you if so!

dew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

pioneervato
EP-L1 and Sigma 600mm Catadioptric Lens
Replies
18
Views
1K
chillwolf
chillwolf
M
SX-850 Woodpecker
Replies
8
Views
467
painttoad
painttoad
danj
I Want This Lens!
Replies
16
Views
2K
kretinus
kretinus
mhardy6647
Perseid meteor shower peak this weekend
Replies
9
Views
621
nakmandan
nakmandan
Romeo Wolf
Worst lens you've ever used?
Replies
0
Views
231
Romeo Wolf
Romeo Wolf
Back
Top Bottom