[OT] Too many cameras?

"Martin Francis" <removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty.DeleteThis@btinternet.com> wrote in
message news:c3ngs2$5m3$1@titan.btinternet.com...
 > Okay, okay, you can never have too many cameras... but I suppose there is
a
 > line, and i'm coming close to it.
 >
 > Until today, I had a 35mm SLR, two medium format SLRs (different systems),
 > and a digital fixed-lens SLR. Today I bought a 35mm point and shoot, and
 > soon I plan to buy a 5x4" monorail. As a student whose money is currently
 > coming from taxpayers moreso than wages, this is most definitely overkill.
I
 > am thinking perhaps of streamlining my system. Here's my gear, and my
 > excuses for keeping it:
 >
 > Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting with it,
 > and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the flash off, no-one
 > even looks twice at me when I use it.
 >
 > Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR outfit, I
 > am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I enter full-time
 > employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture useful, great picture quality.
 >
 > Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily researched in
 > advance, does pretty much everything I want from a medium format. Two- to-
 > three more lenses wanted, but I can't afford them now (or for a while to
 > come)
 >
 > Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a
replacement
 > for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder makes for smaller kit.
 > Practice: rightangle viewing makes for limited application, older Zeiss
 > lenses leave much to be desired ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I
 > thought I wanted her- until I got her, and found nothing there. Will most
 > definitely sell.
 >
 > Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for exposure tests
and
 > frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many applications.
 >
 > I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
 > SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica
AND
 > 'Blad....
 >
 > Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone might
give.
 >
 > (NOTE- Bronica gift from late Grandmother, reluctant to sell without
worthy
 > replacement; E10 21st birthday gift from mother, will die if I sell it)
 >
 > --
 > Here lies the late Martin Francis
 > He couldn't tell you the technical merits of Leitz and Zeiss
 > But he did take some photographs once.
 >
 >

If your monorail were a field camera, I'd say go for replacing the medium
format with it. Monorails just aren't as portable. Neither are field
cameras, but they're better than a monorail. Other than that, sounds like
you've got it figured out. Drop the hassy and the contax and look to get
anything as remotely as nice as the FM3a you dumped a half year back!

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.mattclara.com" target="_blank">www.mattclara.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

 >Subject: [OT] Too many cameras?
 >From: "Martin Francis" removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty DeleteThis @btinternet.com
 >
 >Date: Mon, Mar 22, 2004 4:04 PM
 >Message-id: <c3ngs2$5m3$1@titan.btinternet.com>
 >
 >Okay, okay, you can never have too many cameras... but I suppose there is
 >a
 >line, and i'm coming close to it.
 >
 >Until today, I had a 35mm SLR, two medium format SLRs (different systems),
 >and a digital fixed-lens SLR. Today I bought a 35mm point and shoot, and
 >soon I plan to buy a 5x4" monorail. As a student whose money is currently
 >coming from taxpayers moreso than wages, this is most definitely overkill.
 >I
 >am thinking perhaps of streamlining my system. Here's my gear, and my
 >excuses for keeping it:
 >
 >Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting with it,
 >and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the flash off, no-one
 >even looks twice at me when I use it.
 >
 >Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR outfit,
 >I
 >am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I enter full-time
 >employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture useful, great picture quality.
 >
 >Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily researched
 >in
 >advance, does pretty much everything I want from a medium format. Two- to-
 >three more lenses wanted, but I can't afford them now (or for a while to
 >come)
 >
 >Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a replacement
 >for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder makes for smaller kit.
 >Practice: rightangle viewing makes for limited application, older Zeiss
 >lenses leave much to be desired ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I
 >thought I wanted her- until I got her, and found nothing there. Will most
 >definitely sell.
 >
 >Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for exposure tests
 >and
 >frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many applications.
 >
 >I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
 >SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica
 >AND
 >'Blad....
 >
 >Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone might give.
 >
 >(NOTE- Bronica gift from late Grandmother, reluctant to sell without worthy
 >replacement; E10 21st birthday gift from mother, will die if I sell it)

You may not like this, but since you asked...

Sell everything but the Mju - just kidding

You basically know what to do already... I would sell off the Hassey gear and
give yourself some time with the view camera to see if its "you" - quality
aside, I'm not even sure why you bought it as your Bronica gear will suffice
for anything but ultra extreme enlargements.

Where it gets tricky is your 35mm/digi gear. You have a number of systems
covering overlapping needs (as well you know). Your E-10 basically covers your
35mm _style_ shooting but it is not as portable as the Oly/Contax gear and your
stuck with its zoom range (maybe not a problem for you?) and its bulkiness.
Nikon MF 35mm gear is great but you would just be repeating what you already
have with your Contax. And used Zeiss MF lenses (in the slower 28-135 range)
are inexpensive for what you get. Would a Contax with a small shoe mount
accesory flash do? If so, you would have a small carry round package with (TTL,
I believe) flash capacity, SLR viewing, DOF preview, etc. with controlable
f/stops/shutterspeeds. If all you do is snap shooting then use either the Oly
E10 (heavier) or the Olympus, but the Contax and some inexpensive Zeiss lenses
would give you portability and flexibility and control over your photography in
a way that no P&S can. I know. I've been using my Nikon EM to do both
snapshooting and fine art and it works well for both (aperture priority but it
does have manual control over the A.S.A. for shutter speeds/exposure comp).

Keep what you use, sell what you don't/won't. It can't get any simpler than
that. . Look at the situations you tend to shoot the most and what
percentage of the time you actually end up shooting with which particular gear
in each specific situation. This should give you some clue as to what to keep
and what not.

Examine yourself and your needs - suggestion/advice can be good but knowing why
(right or wrong) you want or need to keep a piece(s) of gear is even better).
Nothing wrong with having multiple systems so long as each system serves a
purpose beyond sitting on your shelf or closet collecting dust instead of
pictures.

Keep:

Bronica gear
Contax gear
E10

Toss:

Oly Mju (yes, I know you're very emotionally attached to it right now, but you
may be better served w/ a small inexpensive used 35mm SLR w/ interchangeable
lenses and TTL flash unless you have a penchant for only using cameras small
enough to fit into a shirt pocket -- go ahead argue with me, I know you will
, but in the end its your style of shooting/prefernece that will determine
whether you keep it or not when/if you wish you had more control over aperture,
shutterspeed, exposure, framing and/or depth of field, not to mention the
ability to blow up large, though the Oly may or may not be good enough in this
regard depending on how high you want to blow things up -- and yeas, I know
small P&S are fun, its just a matter of how much flexibility you want in
addition to your fun)
Hassey (of course!)
View camera (once you grow tired of it -- or --- you can always rent for those
rare times you may use it, same comment goes fror the Hassey gear)

I wish you success and many more coffee malteds with the money from the
equipment you sell.

This post is...

© 2004 Lewis Lang
All Rights (and coffee malteds) Reserved

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm" target="_blank">http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm</a>

Remove "nospam" to reply

***DUE TO SPAM, I NOW BLOCK ALL E-MAIL NOT ON MY LIST, TO BE ADDED TO MY LIST,
PING ME ON THE NEWSGROUP. SORRY FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. ***<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

Martin Francis wrote:
 > Okay, okay, you can never have too many cameras... but I suppose there is a
 > line, and i'm coming close to it.
 >
 > Until today, I had a 35mm SLR, two medium format SLRs (different systems),
 > and a digital fixed-lens SLR. Today I bought a 35mm point and shoot, and
 > soon I plan to buy a 5x4" monorail. As a student whose money is currently
 > coming from taxpayers moreso than wages, this is most definitely overkill. I
 > am thinking perhaps of streamlining my system. Here's my gear, and my
 > excuses for keeping it:
 >
 > Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting with it,
 > and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the flash off, no-one
 > even looks twice at me when I use it.
 >
 > Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR outfit, I
 > am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I enter full-time
 > employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture useful, great picture quality.
 >
 > Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily researched in
 > advance, does pretty much everything I want from a medium format. Two- to-
 > three more lenses wanted, but I can't afford them now (or for a while to
 > come)
 >
 > Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a replacement
 > for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder makes for smaller kit.
 > Practice: rightangle viewing makes for limited application, older Zeiss
 > lenses leave much to be desired ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I
 > thought I wanted her- until I got her, and found nothing there. Will most
 > definitely sell.
 >
 > Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for exposure tests and
 > frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many applications.
 >
 > I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
 > SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica AND
 > 'Blad....
 >
 > Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone might give.
 >
 > (NOTE- Bronica gift from late Grandmother, reluctant to sell without worthy
 > replacement; E10 21st birthday gift from mother, will die if I sell it)
 >

Keep the Bronica, and the two Olympus models, sell the rest. With the
money you get for the 'Blad you can get some nice glass for the Bronica.
Maybe even some previously viewed glass to keep the cost down. You
don't need much, say something around 40mm, 200mm and 400mm.

You can have too many cameras, you have too many, when you can't decide
which camera to use for a specific shooting session. With the Bronica
you have a serious camera for serious shooting, with the money you get
from selling the 'Blad you should be able to pickup some extra glass for
it, maybe a 40mm and a 200mm, add a teleconverter to boost the 200 to
400 for the times you might need it.

A P&S 35mm is always handy, if you want some nice shots you can drop off
at the 1hr lab and get prints done, especially when the subject is a
pretty girl you want to impress.

A P&S digital is handy when you want to skip the lab, and share your
photos by email or the web.

Paul<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

"Lewis Lang" <contaxman DeleteThis @aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20040322164404.08390.00000170@mb-m10.aol.com...
 > You may not like this, but since you asked...
 >
 > Sell everything but the Mju - just kidding
 >
 > You basically know what to do already... I would sell off the Hassey gear
and
 > give yourself some time with the view camera to see if its "you" - quality
 > aside, I'm not even sure why you bought it as your Bronica gear will
suffice
 > for anything but ultra extreme enlargements.

I haven't bought it yet... but at £100 for a rather decent spec Cambo I
don't see why I shouldn't. I'd certainly spend more than that on a rental
model. And if I don't get on with it, I won't lose much selling it on...

 > Keep:
 >
 > Bronica gear
 > Contax gear
 > E10

It's odd; I don't think i've gelled with Contax as I thought I would. I
appreciate the lenses are nice, but in honesty (like the sig says) I
couldn't care much for the differences. OTOH I got along pretty well with
the Nikon SLRs- particularly the F3, although the flash capabilities are
prohibitive.

Anyway, I think i'll give the Contax a chance for a while yet- I promised
myself not to invest further in 35mm until i'm earning proper money.

 > Toss:
 >
 > Oly Mju (yes, I know you're very emotionally attached to it right now, but
you
 > may be better served w/ a small inexpensive used 35mm SLR w/
interchangeable
 > lenses and TTL flash unless you have a penchant for only using cameras
small
 > enough to fit into a shirt pocket -- go ahead argue with me, I know you
will
 > ,

Not one to disappoint; I think the Mju is invaluable. I have a habit of
leaving my camera at home unless I plan to take a picture, which (in
accordance to the third law of Sod) usually means I miss a load of good
opportunities. Frankly, none of my many jackets will accomodate even a small
SLR. I tried a Ricoh GR-1S briefly and returned it on the basis that I
didn't need an aperture priority system, and from what i'd seen I thought
i'd appreciate an Olympus Mju II more (price vs. usefulness). The Oly cost
less than £40, the Ricoh £150.


but in the end its your style of shooting/prefernece that will determine
 > whether you keep it or not when/if you wish you had more control over
aperture,
 > shutterspeed, exposure, framing and/or depth of field, not to mention the
 > ability to blow up large, though the Oly may or may not be good enough in
this
 > regard depending on how high you want to blow things up -- and yeas, I
know
 > small P&S are fun, its just a matter of how much flexibility you want in
 > addition to your fun)
 > Hassey (of course!)

Unfortunately very hard to do- eB*y is a last resort as I know I will get
bugger all for it. This April many of my fellow students receive their final
loan installment, so hopefully someone will be tempted- I just have to
advertise closer to the time.

 > I wish you success and many more coffee malteds with the money from the
 > equipment you sell.

Coffee whatnow?

It seems the British Academy of Film and Television put a high value on
buttocks:

"Scarlett (Johansson) had showed off her bottom in a pair of see-through
knickers in 'Lost in Translation', for which she also won a prestigious
BAFTA Award."

Today the BAFTAs, tomorrow Rear of the Year!

--
Here lies the late Martin Francis
He couldn't tell you the technical merits of Leitz and Zeiss
But he did take some photographs once.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

BIG SNIP

 >Coffee whatnow?
 >
 >It seems the British Academy of Film and Television put a high value on
 >buttocks:
 >
 >"Scarlett (Johansson) had showed off her bottom in a pair of see-through
 >knickers in 'Lost in Translation', for which she also won a prestigious
 >BAFTA Award."
 >
 >Today the BAFTAs, tomorrow Rear of the Year!

Is today non sequitor day? How did we move from coffee malteds to buttocks
awards? Are the BAFTA drinking too much coffee or tea lately?

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm" target="_blank">http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm</a>

Remove "nospam" to reply

***DUE TO SPAM, I NOW BLOCK ALL E-MAIL NOT ON MY LIST, TO BE ADDED TO MY LIST,
PING ME ON THE NEWSGROUP. SORRY FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. ***<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

"Martin Francis" <removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty.DeleteThis@btinternet.com>
wrote:
 >
 >I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
 >SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica AND
 >'Blad....
 >
 >Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone might give.


Easy. Buy a Kiev TTL prism finder for the 'Blad, and sell the Bronica.

No, I'm serious! If your ETRSi has the 75mm PE lens, you will get
three times more money for it than you will need to pay for a Kiev TTL
prism finder.

The 'Blad plus accurate, reliable TTL metering in a Kiev prism finder
will make you realise you don't need the ETRSi. OK, the ETRSi has TTL
flash and the 'Blad doesn't, but surely you can manage with manual
control of fill flash for those infrequent occasions when you need it?
I frequently use fill flash at weddings but choose manual over TTL
auto control 90% of the time because of the range of reflectance of
the subjects.

The biggest advantage of the 'Blad over the ETRSi is never having to
rotate the camera to take portrait shots. You just shoot square and
crop accordingly.

I thought of rationalising my own outfit but it all gets used - some
gear more often than other gear but it all gets used frequently enough
to keep it. When I bought the E-1 I didn't sell any 35mm gear ...
because, at the risk of repeating myself, it still all gets used.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

"TP" <tp DeleteThis @nospam.net> wrote in message
news:ebtu50hg5mp228mn55a9pbfsqeqisgg2ib@4ax.com...
 > Easy. Buy a Kiev TTL prism finder for the 'Blad, and sell the Bronica.

Already got one! £30, which was a ripoff as Jessops paid absolutely nothing
for it...

 > The biggest advantage of the 'Blad over the ETRSi is never having to
 > rotate the camera to take portrait shots. You just shoot square and
 > crop accordingly.

And the biggest advantage of the Bronica over the Hasselblad is that the
focusing and aperture selection are considerably easier (although having the
shutter speed control on the body is a pain). Plus, as you once said
yourself, the PE glass is great stuff- I have Dr.Strangelove-like tendencies
to grab my wallet and put it on the counter at my local Jessops, who have PE
50mm, 105mm macro and 180mm lenses which are ALL on my "most wanted" list.

--
Here lies the late Martin Francis
He couldn't tell you the technical merits of Leitz and Zeiss
But he did take some photographs once.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

"Martin Francis" <removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty.TakeThisOut@btinternet.com>
wrote:
 >
 >And the biggest advantage of the Bronica over the Hasselblad is that the
 >focusing and aperture selection are considerably easier (although having the
 >shutter speed control on the body is a pain). Plus, as you once said
 >yourself, the PE glass is great stuff- I have Dr.Strangelove-like tendencies
 >to grab my wallet and put it on the counter at my local Jessops, who have PE
 >50mm, 105mm macro and 180mm lenses which are ALL on my "most wanted" list.


Hmmm. Sounds like you want to keep the Bronica, regardless of the
merit of any alternative ...

<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

In article <c3ngs2$5m3$1@titan.btinternet.com>,
Martin Francis <removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote:
 >Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting with it,
 >and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the flash off, no-one
 >even looks twice at me when I use it.

Mju II? What's an Mju? Sorry, I know nothing of Olympus gear. Searching
the Olympus site for "Mju" yields nothing.

 >Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR outfit, I
 >am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I enter full-time
 >employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture useful, great picture quality.

Is there any reason to switch to Nikon MF? What does Nikon offer that
Contax does not for your specific shooting?

 >Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily researched in
 >advance, does pretty much everything I want from a medium format. Two- to-
 >three more lenses wanted, but I can't afford them now (or for a while to
 >come)

Nice system. I was considering it before moving up to a Mamiya C220 b/c
I wanted the square.

 >Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a replacement
 >for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder makes for smaller kit.
 >Practice: rightangle viewing makes for limited application, older Zeiss
 >lenses leave much to be desired ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I
 >thought I wanted her- until I got her, and found nothing there. Will most
 >definitely sell.

Don't believe the hype. I've been fortunate never to use a Hassleblad,
although whenever I tell my friends I shoot they ask me, "Do you have a
'blad?" Yuck.

Expensive, not worth it IMHO for typical usage. 99% of the world will prob-
ably disagree with me though.

 >
 >Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for exposure tests and
 >frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many applications.

A digital camera isn't a necessity, but I have found that it is damn
useful.

 >
 >I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
 >SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica AND
 >'Blad....

*why* do you need a 4x5 over MF? Is it only for neg size? If so, switch to
a slower film.

I've shot 4x5 but when I went MF I never turned back. I'm now in the midst
of selling my LF gear. 6x6 did me fine, and then I went to 6x7 and I'm
equally happy. Unless you need tilt/shift or extra-large polaroids, I don't
see any real need for LF.

I've streamlined as well, to a nice 35mm system and my MF system which is
slowly but surely growing. Like you: only one lens, one body, needing
more.

My advice? Yes, stick with one 35mm system, one MF, and one digital.
Forget about LF unless you're doing architectural work.

-p<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

 >Subject: Re: [OT] Too many cameras?
 >From: Paul Schmidt wogsterca DeleteThis @yahoo.ca
 >Date: Tue, Mar 23, 2004 12:01 AM
 >Message-id: <LFO7c.11811$re.971733@news20.bellglobal.com>
 >
 >Martin Francis wrote:
  >> Okay, okay, you can never have too many cameras... but I suppose there
 >is a
  >> line, and i'm coming close to it.
  >>
  >> Until today, I had a 35mm SLR, two medium format SLRs (different systems),
  >> and a digital fixed-lens SLR. Today I bought a 35mm point and shoot, and
  >> soon I plan to buy a 5x4" monorail. As a student whose money is currently
  >> coming from taxpayers moreso than wages, this is most definitely overkill.
 >I
  >> am thinking perhaps of streamlining my system. Here's my gear, and my
  >> excuses for keeping it:
  >>
  >> Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting with
 >it,
  >> and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the flash off, no-one
  >> even looks twice at me when I use it.
  >>
  >> Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR outfit,
 >I
  >> am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I enter full-time
  >> employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture useful, great picture quality.
  >>
  >> Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily researched
 >in
  >> advance, does pretty much everything I want from a medium format. Two-
 >to-
  >> three more lenses wanted, but I can't afford them now (or for a while
 >to
  >> come)
  >>
  >> Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a replacement
  >> for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder makes for smaller kit.
  >> Practice: rightangle viewing makes for limited application, older Zeiss
  >> lenses leave much to be desired ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I
  >> thought I wanted her- until I got her, and found nothing there. Will most
  >> definitely sell.
  >>
  >> Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for exposure tests
 >and
  >> frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many applications.
  >>
  >> I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
  >> SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica
 >AND
  >> 'Blad....
  >>
  >> Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone might
 >give.
  >>
  >> (NOTE- Bronica gift from late Grandmother, reluctant to sell without worthy
  >> replacement; E10 21st birthday gift from mother, will die if I sell it)
  >>
 >
 >Keep the Bronica, and the two Olympus models, sell the rest.

BIG SNIP

Good advice, Paul

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm" target="_blank">http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm</a>

Remove "nospam" to reply

***DUE TO SPAM, I NOW BLOCK ALL E-MAIL NOT ON MY LIST, TO BE ADDED TO MY LIST,
PING ME ON THE NEWSGROUP. SORRY FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. ***<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

"Martin Francis" <removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote in
message news:c3ngs2$5m3$1@titan.btinternet.com...
 > Okay, okay, you can never have too many cameras... but I suppose there is
a
 > line, and i'm coming close to it.
 >
 > Until today, I had a 35mm SLR, two medium format SLRs (different systems),
 > and a digital fixed-lens SLR. Today I bought a 35mm point and shoot, and
 > soon I plan to buy a 5x4" monorail. As a student whose money is currently
 > coming from taxpayers moreso than wages, this is most definitely overkill.
I
 > am thinking perhaps of streamlining my system. Here's my gear, and my
 > excuses for keeping it:
 >
 > Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting with it,
 > and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the flash off, no-one
 > even looks twice at me when I use it.
 >
 > Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR outfit, I
 > am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I enter full-time
 > employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture useful, great picture quality.
 >
 > Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily researched in
 > advance, does pretty much everything I want from a medium format. Two- to-
 > three more lenses wanted, but I can't afford them now (or for a while to
 > come)
 >
 > Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a
replacement
 > for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder makes for smaller kit.
 > Practice: rightangle viewing makes for limited application, older Zeiss
 > lenses leave much to be desired ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I
 > thought I wanted her- until I got her, and found nothing there. Will most
 > definitely sell.
 >
 > Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for exposure tests
and
 > frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many applications.
 >
 > I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing 35mm
 > SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4" replacing Bronica
AND
 > 'Blad....
 >
 > Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone might
give.
 >
 > (NOTE- Bronica gift from late Grandmother, reluctant to sell without
worthy
 > replacement; E10 21st birthday gift from mother, will die if I sell it)
 >
 > --
 > Here lies the late Martin Francis
 > He couldn't tell you the technical merits of Leitz and Zeiss
 > But he did take some photographs once.
 >
Sorry Martin; but the Bronica and Mamiya 645 was the sorriest excuses
for a camera I've ever used. Fortunately, most don't last long enough to get
used to. Looking down for horizontal shots, then fliping the camera and
looking eye level at an upside down image is nuts. With a 6x6 you can
control convergence to a large degree just by deciding where to crop in the
finder. There is no crop in a 645. Bad move. OTOH, I seldom focused my
Hassys. The curtain DOF scale and the EV lock made that unnecessary and all
is done in one look. Bob Hickey<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

"Martin Francis" <removethisbeforeyoureplytoMcsalty.DeleteThis@btinternet.com> wrote in
message news:c3ngs2$5m3$1@titan.btinternet.com...
 > Okay, okay, you can never have too many cameras... but I suppose
 > there is a line, and i'm coming close to it.

Aaargh heresy, heresy!....

OK, joking aside, I see the point. I do have a lot of cameras (and a lot
more lenses) because I've accumulated some things over the years - but I
only have four 'systems' that see significant use: 35mm SLR (Pentax); 35mm
panoramic (X-Pan); 6x6 SLR (P6 mount - Exacta 66 & P6 bodies, Zeiss,
Schneider & FSU lenses); and 6x9 technical camera (giving my 6x6, 6x7, 6x8
and 6x9 options).

To these add a 5x7 monorail used rarely (and mostly with a 4x5 reducing
back) a pocketable 35mm compact, and a large 4x5 stand camera used mostly
with a 6x7 rollfilm back.

That covers just about everything for me. And I can hire if it doesn't.
Everything else is either special purpose or very old, or backup, or
whatever. A couple of MF folders, for example, and the Contax/kiev
rangefinder system that I used to use for flower shows and for
deserts/mountains/cycling.

These days I use the monorail so rarely that I wouldn't replace it if I lost
it - but that reflects what I do and for some people they remain vital
(architecture, some advertising, some industrial, etc.). Also, if I didn't
have the technical camera and its movements, then the monorail would get
used a lot more.

 >
 > Until today, I had a 35mm SLR, two medium format SLRs
 > (different systems), and a digital fixed-lens SLR. Today I bought a
 > 35mm point and shoot, and soon I plan to buy a 5x4" monorail.
 > As a student whose money is currently coming from taxpayers
 > moreso than wages, this is most definitely overkill. I am thinking
 > perhaps of streamlining my system. Here's my gear, and my
 > excuses for keeping it:
 >
 > Olympus Mju II- just bought, very handy- aready started shooting
 > with it, and it's so compact as to fit in my pocket- and with the
 > flash off, no-one even looks twice at me when I use it.

Something you can have with you all the time is useful to everyone. I use a
Ricoh GR1v (mostly) which I know you said wasn't for you when you chose the
Oly ? - but the principle is the same. Keep that one.

 >
 > Contax 139, one lens- originally my idea of a minimal useful SLR
 > outfit, I am now considering returning to a Nikon MF kit once I
 > enter full-time employment. TTL viewing and wide aperture
 > useful, great picture quality.

Why change? Only reasons I could see would be: ease of hiring Nikon glass;
cost of Contax glass; possible issues about future move to digital; possible
ergonomic issues. Against this, the Contax glass is a lot nicer for many
subjects.

Absent a good reason to change, I would stay with the Contax. If hiring is
the issue then it would make sense to change, to Nikon or Canon (Minolta can
be hired in some places too, and has glass a bit nearer in 'character' to
the Contax than Canikon's). If digital is the issue, personally I'd wait
and see. If cost of glass (esp. used) I'd look at Pentax - nearest glass in
'character' to your Contax of any of the 'big' names, lots of used glass at
good prices, bodies that are ergonomic and compact. Nikon glass is _very_
different to Contax Zeiss.

 >
 > Bronica ETRSi, one lens- my first medium format kit, heavily
 > researched in advance, does pretty much everything I want from a
 > medium format. Two- to- three more lenses wanted, but I can't
 > afford them now (or for a while to come)

You'll be able to afford them sooner than you would 'blad glass though...

 >
 > Hasselblad 500CM, two lenses- a mistake, bought on impulse as a
 > replacement for the Bronica. Theory: no prism and no winder
 > makes for smaller kit. Practice: rightangle viewing makes for
 > limited application, older Zeiss lenses leave much to be desired
 > ergonomically. She is my supermodel- I thought I wanted her- until
 > I got her, and found nothing there. Will most definitely sell.

Actually all three of the models I ever went out with had a lot more to them
than just what met the eye (nice though that was). But that's a whole other
story...

I think selling does make sense. You've said you want multiple lenses in
your MF kit, and that is precisely where 'blad ownership gets pricey. If it
was just the 80mm you wanted, or maybe just that plus a short-tele, it would
be a tougher choice - but if you want "two or three" more _now_ , never
mind what you might want in future, the Bronny makes a lot more sense to me.

 >
 > Olympus E10- 4 megapixel digital camera, very useful for
 > exposure tests and frequently replaces my 35mm SLR for many
 > applications.

Don't know this one, but some sort of digital is a useful thing - especially
for experimental work, exposure tests, and for getting your thoughts
together on digital workflow before spending anything on a DSLR or MF
digital back. (Still haven't got one myself though - apart from a 1.3MP
keyring sized thingy that doesn't, really, count.)

 >
 > I have turned the topic over and over in my head- digital replacing
 > 35mm SLR altogether, Bronica replacing 'Blad, or even 5x4"
 > replacing Bronica AND 'Blad....
 >
 > Frankly i'm stumped. I'm willing to listewn to any advice anyone
 > might give.
 >
 > (NOTE- Bronica gift from late Grandmother, reluctant to sell
 > without worthy replacement; E10 21st birthday gift from mother,
 > will die if I sell it)
 >

I suspect what I've said above may mirror some of your own feelings. I'd
definitely sell the 'blad, and definitely keep the ?. If you like the E10
I'd keep that too, otherwise some other digital.

I personally wouldn't change from the Contax to Nikon, but if you have a
good reason to then that makes sense - certainly I wouldn't run both in
parallel! If I was changing from Contax, Nikon might not be my choice
though, much as I respect a lot of Nikon lenses and bodies. I use Pentax,
so "I would say that wouldn't I" - but this is a very personal choice.

As for the monorail, well, I don't know why you want it, so you may have a
real need. If, as you say elsewhere, it's only costing you 100 beer tokens,
then get it and sell it later if it isn't for you. Having it now to learn
movements really well would stand you in good stead for future hiring in any
case. I would definitely not see it as a replacement for the MF (Bronny)
system - a field camera just _maybe_ but not a monorail. You won't want
to use it outside the studio much, and when you do it'll be for landscape,
not for anything that moves. This is why I have a MF SLR system and a 6x9
technical camera as well - they are very different animals.

Was that any help?



Peter<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras? 

tendim.RemoveThis@vex.net (tendim) wrote:
 >
 >Mju II? What's an Mju? Sorry, I know nothing of Olympus gear. Searching
 >the Olympus site for "Mju" yields nothing.


To 96% of the world's population, the Olympus Mju II (named after the
letter of the greek alphabet) is a 35mm p+s camera with a clamshell
casing and a fine 35mm f/2.8 lens. To the other 4%, it is the Olympus
Stylus Epic.

The other 4% are the people of the USA, who are generally too badly
educated to understand that the Greek alphabet exists at all.

<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: [OT] Too many cameras?