kodachromeproject.com Forums  

Go Back   kodachromeproject.com Forums > Main Category > Kodachrome, The Film

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-24-2012, 03:45 PM
nzoomed nzoomed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 136
nzoomed is on a distinguished road
Default Whats a good compact camera to shoot Ektachrome????

Ive come across a virtually new Nikon One Touch Zoom 90s AF camera which i was thinking of using on the go to shoot some ektachrome while tramping and snowboarding etc, since i dont want to carry a bulky SLR camera with me, im happy to make a compromise.
From what im reading on the internet, it is designed to take DX coded film, but i cant find enough data regarding exposure control etc, i know that some cameras only read the speed of the film and not the exposure tolerance. If this camera can handle an 1/2 stop tolerance then im OK, any info would be great.
I expect it should be OK being a nikon.
Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-24-2012, 04:58 PM
sdkodachrome sdkodachrome is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 211
sdkodachrome is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzoomed View Post
Ive come across a virtually new Nikon One Touch Zoom 90s AF camera which i was thinking of using on the go to shoot some ektachrome while tramping and snowboarding etc, since i dont want to carry a bulky SLR camera with me, im happy to make a compromise.
From what im reading on the internet, it is designed to take DX coded film, but i cant find enough data regarding exposure control etc, i know that some cameras only read the speed of the film and not the exposure tolerance. If this camera can handle an 1/2 stop tolerance then im OK, any info would be great.
I expect it should be OK being a nikon.
Thanks
I understand snowboarding, but what is tramping?

The issue with a compact camera with DX coding and snow (boarding or otherwise) is that in a scene with snow, it's going to severely underexpose, because it'll assume snow is 18% grey, which of course it's nothing close to.

Even though E100G has more latitude than Kodachrome 64, if you can't set up the camera to expose on the high side in snow, then I'm not sure how great it's going to work. (I'm not saying you necessarily need fine, by the shot, exposure control, but you want to be able to tell the camera somehow that it should act like E100G is ASA 50 or 32 film in an environment where snow is all around.)

By "exposure tolerance" did you mean "exposure compensation" (like telling it overexpose by 1 stop)? "Exposure tolerance" is a term I associate with film, not with a camera.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-24-2012, 08:37 PM
nzoomed nzoomed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 136
nzoomed is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdkodachrome View Post
I understand snowboarding, but what is tramping?

The issue with a compact camera with DX coding and snow (boarding or otherwise) is that in a scene with snow, it's going to severely underexpose, because it'll assume snow is 18% grey, which of course it's nothing close to.

Even though E100G has more latitude than Kodachrome 64, if you can't set up the camera to expose on the high side in snow, then I'm not sure how great it's going to work. (I'm not saying you necessarily need fine, by the shot, exposure control, but you want to be able to tell the camera somehow that it should act like E100G is ASA 50 or 32 film in an environment where snow is all around.)

By "exposure tolerance" did you mean "exposure compensation" (like telling it overexpose by 1 stop)? "Exposure tolerance" is a term I associate with film, not with a camera.
LOL at this!
I guess what we refer to tramping down here is actually what you guys call "hiking" I do alot in the outdoors, stay up in back country huts in the bush (forest), mountains etc.
I wouldnt expect a compact camera to give me 100% perfect shots in the snow, especially on a cloudy day, on a blue sky, probably not so much of an issue.
Some compact cameras do have manual mode to all you to compensate for exposure yourself.
You are correct in regards to exposure tolerance, that is associated with the film, my biggest concern is that whatever camera i use will either under or over expose the film, and since any reversal film has low tolerance, i expect this is quite crucial.

However i dont know how these people who shoot with holgas get such good photos, since there is no real way to control the exposure with them.

Last edited by nzoomed; 03-24-2012 at 08:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-25-2012, 04:13 AM
sdkodachrome sdkodachrome is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 211
sdkodachrome is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nzoomed View Post
However i dont know how these people who shoot with holgas get such good photos, since there is no real way to control the exposure with them.
First of all, probably most shoot negative film, not reversal film, and negative film is much more forgiving (and you can compensate for modest exposure issues in developing/post-processing. Kodak is discontinuing reversal films precisely because they are such a small seller compared to negative films. Never assume that pictures you see out there taken with a particular camera were taken with reversal film unless you're told they were.

Second, do you see their raw collections (ie, every shot they took on a trip), or do you only see the best shots? Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and even a camera with no exposure controls will by chance expose some shots perfectly.

Third, the Holga has very poor quality control, but is very cheap. They encourage people to buy several and figure out the quirks in each! I wouldn't be surprised if some people test each one to figure out how it exposes, and maybe even carry around a couple that happened to have (because of quality control variations) consistently different exposures!

Back to the Nikon 90s, I do not see any indication that it's got exposure control. Furthermore, it seems to have issues being handheld in anything other than bright sunlight, and I can see why: About f/5 at the 38mm end of the zoom range, about f/10 a the 90mm range. The f/16 rule is 1 over the film speed at f/16 at midday on a sunny day. That's f/16 at 1/100 for E100G or E100VS. At the 90mm zoom end, 1/100 is roughly the limit of handholding, so any shots taken in cloudy conditions or shade will already have issues.

How do you know that even if reversal film, most of the shots taken with this camera aren't with 400 speed film? (Kodak may not make it, but Fuji does.)

(I suspect, though, that the vast majority of the good shots taken with this camera are taken with 400-speed negative film. 400 is a very common speed these days for negative film.)

The fact that you want this instead of a "bulky" SLR implies you won't be taking a tripod with you. But a tripod may be what's needed to make this camera work well in anything but the best lighting (if you don't want to or can't use its flash). At the very least, I would consider something like Not-a-Pod (http://www.not-a-pod.com/Default.asp).

Or else keep looking for another compact camera, one which is better suited for reversal film and varied lighting. The typical rangefinder was great for reversal film because it had a fast lens and exposure controls (and yet was compact-sized). There's of course a reason, though, that it may be harder to find a low-priced good rangefinder as easily as a low-priced Nikon OneTouch 90s. (The Nikon 90s was good quality at an affordable price precisely because it chose poor lens speed as the compromise. And it was designed in an era when 400-speed film was already very common, so Nikon had no qualms about designing something that may not work so well with 100 speed film handheld.)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-25-2012, 03:26 PM
nzoomed nzoomed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 136
nzoomed is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdkodachrome View Post
First of all, probably most shoot negative film, not reversal film, and negative film is much more forgiving (and you can compensate for modest exposure issues in developing/post-processing. Kodak is discontinuing reversal films precisely because they are such a small seller compared to negative films. Never assume that pictures you see out there taken with a particular camera were taken with reversal film unless you're told they were.

Second, do you see their raw collections (ie, every shot they took on a trip), or do you only see the best shots? Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and even a camera with no exposure controls will by chance expose some shots perfectly.

Third, the Holga has very poor quality control, but is very cheap. They encourage people to buy several and figure out the quirks in each! I wouldn't be surprised if some people test each one to figure out how it exposes, and maybe even carry around a couple that happened to have (because of quality control variations) consistently different exposures!

Back to the Nikon 90s, I do not see any indication that it's got exposure control. Furthermore, it seems to have issues being handheld in anything other than bright sunlight, and I can see why: About f/5 at the 38mm end of the zoom range, about f/10 a the 90mm range. The f/16 rule is 1 over the film speed at f/16 at midday on a sunny day. That's f/16 at 1/100 for E100G or E100VS. At the 90mm zoom end, 1/100 is roughly the limit of handholding, so any shots taken in cloudy conditions or shade will already have issues.

How do you know that even if reversal film, most of the shots taken with this camera aren't with 400 speed film? (Kodak may not make it, but Fuji does.)

(I suspect, though, that the vast majority of the good shots taken with this camera are taken with 400-speed negative film. 400 is a very common speed these days for negative film.)

The fact that you want this instead of a "bulky" SLR implies you won't be taking a tripod with you. But a tripod may be what's needed to make this camera work well in anything but the best lighting (if you don't want to or can't use its flash). At the very least, I would consider something like Not-a-Pod (http://www.not-a-pod.com/Default.asp).

Or else keep looking for another compact camera, one which is better suited for reversal film and varied lighting. The typical rangefinder was great for reversal film because it had a fast lens and exposure controls (and yet was compact-sized). There's of course a reason, though, that it may be harder to find a low-priced good rangefinder as easily as a low-priced Nikon OneTouch 90s. (The Nikon 90s was good quality at an affordable price precisely because it chose poor lens speed as the compromise. And it was designed in an era when 400-speed film was already very common, so Nikon had no qualms about designing something that may not work so well with 100 speed film handheld.)
Thanks for that info,
Yes your more than likley right about the holgas, i expect that a great number of shots failed out of the few i see posted on flickr, but i do know alot do shoot slide film and then cross process it in C41 chemistry.
lomography.com does sell e100g and e100vs for this purpose, and they even are repackaging it under their own brand.
I know they prefer using kodak over fuji, as it seems to cross process better than fuji does. The flickr posts said what films were being used and at what speed etc.

Back to the Nikon,
I probably will not bother using it, now that i know this, i will keep looking for a better camera, theres a flood of unwanted compact cameras on the market, if i can find a good rangefinder camera, i will get one, or else if worst comes to worst i will use my pentax spotmatic which is far less bulky than my old nikon f-401.
I have located a Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII which looks like a good rangefinder, but only slightly smaller in size than the spotmatic.
Ive located several pentax Espio cameras such as a Espio 738 or Espio 80V, again, i cant fund much on specs, other than ive found a blog where someone has shot trains with the Espio 738 using Fujichrome sensia.

Ive also found this canon 90U
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/suppor...Specifications
Ideally i want something i can "point and shoot" up on the slopes, but taking an SLR or rangefinder camera in my backpack is not so much of a problem in the outdoors, these are the sorts of places in New Zealand that i want to photograph
http://www.remotehuts.co.nz/huts/county/pic/

Last edited by nzoomed; 03-25-2012 at 10:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-26-2012, 06:38 AM
Clay Clay is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minden Hills,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 68
Clay is on a distinguished road
Default Light Camera (weight not spectrum)

Go for the Minolta Hi-Matic. I have 2 of the 7s types and
they have fine Rokkor lenses. I use a hand-held metre if
the camera metre goes funny on me.
Best regards,
/Clay
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-26-2012, 10:13 AM
KR4myF2AS KR4myF2AS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 239
KR4myF2AS is on a distinguished road
Default

Just a suggestion from a guy who owns and shoots Nikons/Leicas/Hasselblads: Look for a used Olympus XA/XA2. I have had one for over 30 years. It has stood the test of time; it has performed under every conceivable weather condition; and I trusted its meter enough to run Kodachrome through it!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-26-2012, 02:34 PM
Prest_64's Avatar
Prest_64 Prest_64 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 72
Prest_64 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KR4myF2AS View Post
Just a suggestion from a guy who owns and shoots Nikons/Leicas/Hasselblads: Look for a used Olympus XA/XA2. I have had one for over 30 years. It has stood the test of time; it has performed under every conceivable weather condition; and I trusted its meter enough to run Kodachrome through it!
I second this. Although I don't have experience on the XA's, my dad used his Olympus Trip 35 extensively with Agfachrome (1975-1994), aside of negative. The thing is excellent for having just 2 shutter speeds. Curiously, he replaced it with an f401s.

It's ironic how such a simple camera beats the whiz fancy 90's P&S. Most might have lost some of it's accuracy, though. Mine has a fungus filled lens and a sticking diaphragm. I might CLA it some day, but having the OM-1, it just fills all my needs. Also, the OM-1 is quite an RF esque SLR; a pleasure to use.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-26-2012, 02:50 PM
nzoomed nzoomed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 136
nzoomed is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KR4myF2AS View Post
Just a suggestion from a guy who owns and shoots Nikons/Leicas/Hasselblads: Look for a used Olympus XA/XA2. I have had one for over 30 years. It has stood the test of time; it has performed under every conceivable weather condition; and I trusted its meter enough to run Kodachrome through it!
Ive found an XA3, seems to be the same as an XA2 with additional support of ISO 1600.
If its fit for kodachrome, then it must be fit for anything!

Last edited by nzoomed; 03-26-2012 at 05:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-27-2012, 02:28 PM
nzoomed nzoomed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 136
nzoomed is on a distinguished road
Default

I bought the XA3, and got it at a good price of $32NZD, ive seen others that have sold for up to more than 3 times as much!
Hopefully this does me the trick, as with the flash removed, its quite a compact camera.
If you can advise me on the canon 90U, that would be great, as i may purchase ita s its going for a good price.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.