Hello. I just bought this camera the other day because I think I may have obsessive compulsive camera disorder.(OCCD) It is film, but I heard film is cool + much less expensive than a comparable digital camera. This thing w/ the lens was under 250 US$. I have already shot one roll of film and recently started on a new one. I've yet to develop any pictures though because now I don't have any money for that sort of thing(or any other sort of thing). I would like to learn more about traditional film & SLR photography so I figure this is probably a good investment. Does anyone know if I should leave the lens attached to the the camera? I figure by doing so will help keep the dust out. Also, a couple weeks ago I mailed my new Panasonic Lumix FZ20 dig-cam(a cool cam), still under warranty, in for repairs. I just got it back today, but it still has a few errant pixels just like before I mailed it. At least it didn't take long for Panasonic's repair center to "fix" it. (apparantly they did clean/check it) I'm thinking that those errant pixels must have showed up in the technicians blind spot. :-) -Jeff :-)

hehe, jeff...OCCD!!!! cool cam!!!! sorry 'bout the problems with your Panasonic. :(

Nice cam - I had a Minolta slr for many years and it always gave excellent service :)

Hi coolj001 !

Nice seing there are "still" fans of "chemical photography" out there ! :-)
Congratulations to having bought a really nice camera ( meaning Minolta ).

You're quite right about film cameras.
I bought my Minolta Dynax 505si with 2 lenses for a bargain price and getting a digital equal would cost me about 4 times more.
Ok - I spent more on my slide/neg scanner, but on the other hand i don't need to fill my pockets with expensive memory cards when I'm out in the field shooting landscapes...

I would like to learn more about traditional film & SLR photography

Visit your local library. There's lots of books written on the subject.

Yes - if it's the only lens you've got, leve it on the camera. Protects the delicate mechanics of the shutter from dirt.
Also, you should put a filter on the lens to protect the glass surface from scratches. A scratched filter is much cheaper to replace than a scratched lens.
I see you've got a 55mm thread so there should be filters in most camera stores. If you're shooting Colour Slides I'd recommend a "Sky Light 1B" and if it's B&W or Colour Negatives a "1A" would do ( it's ok with 1B, too ).

Welcome to the world of chemical photography !

Bakkti

webmaster@jiger.org

www.jiger.org

Thanks Bakki for the tips, recommendations, and answering my lens question. :-) Library eh? Sounds like a most excellent idea. I will have to check out some photography books. I have already been reading some Photographic Magazine. It seems a good publication w/many helpful tips and cool technical info. That's how I learned about this particular Minolta. (They reviewed it in their May 04' issue) In H.S. I took a photography class (when I showed up)and remember I even learned how to develop B/W film. I will have to get a lens filter as you recommend. I have already scratched my Panasonic's Leica lens. It is a very small scratch and doesn't seem to cause any noticable problems, but I will probably get a lens filter for that cam as well. I have a scanner, but it doesn't have slide/negative scan capabilites. Earlier this morning I had a thought that I could scan a negative with my scanner then use PS to change it to a negative. I wonder if this technique would work, and if this would yield the same quality results as using a comparable scanner w/slide/negative scan capabilities. One thing I do know about film...hard copy enlargements are typically higher quality than digital as if film has more megapixels. -Jeff :-)

"but on the other hand i don't need to fill my pockets with expensive memory cards when I'm out in the field shooting landscapes..." Errr...

How many films you need to shoot 179 pictures? (lowest compression 8MP JPG on a 1 GB card.) How much money you have to spend developing the films and the prints? Can you use those films again?

Message edited on: 05/12/2005 18:11

coolj001 !

Library eh? Sounds like a most excellent idea.

Trust me - it is ! :-)
I've done photography since 1976 ( worked as a Photo- and Image Teacher for some years ) and there's lots of books written on the subject. Some good - some not so good ...

I have already scratched my Panasonic's Leica lens.

Ouch !!
Scratches on lens surfaces has the effect of scattering the light rays hitting them and thus affects sharpness, but if it's a very small scratch it may not have too much an overall effect. A filter is a very cheap insurance aginst damages like that.

On your scanner thoughts:
No, you can't scan a negative/slide in a flatbed without a proper adapter. Neg/slides are "see through" and flatbeds work as reflectives.
Even if you would manage to make a scan it won't be of any comparable quality at all.
Your best go is to scan your hard copies.
Sorry ...
.......................

Erlik:

I have no intention at all to start some variant of "Platform Ware" here, so I let your post stand as is.

I've done photo since 1976 and I've tried both classic and digital. Both have their advantages and their drawbacks.

Let me just say that my customers are very happy when I can deliver them 3000x2250 pixels 300 dpi Tifs as workfiles for their printing. Some even want 4700x4700 pix 300 dpi's and larger. You do the math...

Buying the Minolta I mentioned instead of a digital equal left me money to invest in a hi-quality slide/neg scanner ( enough for 5000x5000 pix 1200 dpi ) and to hot up my puter such that I can handle files those sizes without PS slowing to a crawl or choke on the job.

It all comes down to what you need your photo equippment for...

Bakkti.

webmaster@jiger.org

www.jiger.org

"I have no intention at all to start some variant of "Platform Ware" here, so I let your post stand as is." Absolutely was not my intention. "I've done photo since 1976 and I've tried both classic and digital. Both have their advantages and their drawbacks." Exactly. But memory cards being expensive is not exactly one of the drawbacks of digital. Of course, it all depends on the type and size, but my 1 GB CF card costs ... dem the conversion ... $100 or about 50 pounds. I have two and I can use them and reuse them. For instance, I see on the web that Fuji Superia 200ASA 24exp is 8.5 pounds. If I use RAW on Olympus E-300, it's equivalent of 3 rolls of film. 25.5 pounds to fill the 1 GB card. I've already filled it three times. You do the maths. :-) Plus, I'm not limited to one range of sensitivity. "Let me just say that my customers are very happy when I can deliver them 3000x2250 pixels 300 dpi Tifs as workfiles for their printing." Incidentally, Olympus E-300 delivers 3264x2448 at 314 dpi. Was surprised when I noticed the resolution for the first time. 314 dpi? But it's nice. :-) "Some even want 4700x4700 pix 300 dpi's and larger. You do the math..." That's true. Being, so to say, continuous tone, film can deliver biggger sizes with, usually, much less quality loss. "Buying the Minolta I mentioned instead of a digital equal left me money to invest in a hi-quality slide/neg scanner ( enough for 5000x5000 pix 1200 dpi ) and to hot up my puter such that I can handle files those sizes without PS slowing to a crawl or choke on the job." That's also true. But if you're calculating the costs, don't forget the time invested into developing and scanning and so on. Not to mention that with so many links, the work chain opens up more for a possibility of mistakes. BTW, which scanner? Is that 1200 the real resolution or interpolated? "It all comes down to what you need your photo equippment for..." Exactly. We are in a complete agreement. :-)

Thanks Bakkti for answering my questions. That makes sense about negatives...see through vs. reflective scans, although I am thinking that scanning a negative with my current scanner could possibly make for a good piece of bad negative space 2D art. Today I plan to go take some pictures here in Olympia, WA. I think I'll bring both the Minolta and the Panasonic. -Jeff