What are you looking to get out of your next lens?
Me? I wanted a superzoom. Why? After a few times carrying around two camera bodies with two zooms to cover near anything that came my way that got old really quickly.
What to do? Superzoom! One huge problem. From everything I have read superzooms are usually awful or mediocre at best optically… and big and heavy… …and typically expensive. That is not a good combination. But I really wanted some of that one lens does all action. Continue reading When not awful is a high compliment: Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS→
Done buying digital lenses. Well at a minimum I have everything I need covered. Never done. Thought I was done buying Hasselblad lenses. Those I did not have that I wanted were out of my budget range. Had a normal and a tele. Wide Hasselblad lenses are usually eye-watering-ly expensive. Made my peace with this. Minding my own business. Then Professor Lonnie Graham (check out his book here), who I interviewed for my first KEH blog post, sends me this:
If photography needs to make sense you are probably not doing it right.
I started uttering this half-jokingly some time ago in response to being drawn to a piece of gear or a photo idea that steps outside the realm of the reasoned. Usually having to do with film somehow. (Brace yourself. This is a long one.)
No difference here. The usual starting place…
So there I was surfing the interwebs researching some random notion that washed over my psyche with no warning and I realized that there existed an Alpha 7 before the Alpha 7. More specifically the Minolta Alpha 7. And it was gorgeous. Was a good camera also I heard.
Never knew this camera existed, but now that I did I must have one.
I have dabbled with a few medium format film cameras in recent years. Wonderful devices, but practical is not a word that jumps to mind. They kind of make no sense admittedly. If you want to use film 35mm cameras should do the job. Plenty of sharp lenses on 35mm. Plenty of great 35mm cameras. Nikon F-something, Leica M-anything, Contax G or T then number and on and on. But if you are looking for those things many like in pictures without even knowing why, like DOF, focus fall off and detail, it is hard to beat medium format film. Why not digital medium format? Go check out the prices of even years old, used medium format digital cameras at the big sites and come back. Start out with the son of Pentax 645N, the 645D, not even the more recent 645Z. I’ll wait…
You back? I know, right? Ok. As I was saying medium format film cameras.
Started with my wanting to get my mitts on a Rolleiflex TLR. At first an f/2.8… Wait, how much? Ok, an f/3.5 then. That settles it. Wait, a Yashica f/3.5 for what now? So why an LM with an old tech selenium meter
Being smitten with the Contax G Boys I wanted more, but less. More of that Contax/Zeiss goodness, but in a smaller package. Decided on the T range. Ruled out the Contax T since it was MF only and the flash was not built in (Personal preference. Don’t come at me T fans.). Went for the Contax T2. Why not the Contax T3? Because I did not see a great gain for the extra cost and I was not as enamored with the aesthetics as the T2 (Again. Personal preference. Don’t come at me T3 fans.). Plus neither has a slidey door thing that I have already lost minutes potentially wearing out. Continue reading This Old Camera/Scanner Files: The mighty little Contax T2→
This post is all out of order, but I am impressed by a peculiar piece of hardware I picked up recently. More specifically a peculiar piece of camera hardware for a peculiar camera. The camera in question? The (deep breath) Zeiss Ikon Contaflex II.
One lens I first had a hard time parting with the money for was the Minolta Maxxum 20mm f/2.8. But then I realized that it was good enough that
