My wife has very tough time shopping for me because I’m so wrapped up in the digital age (at least from a hobbyist point) and she knows fairly little.
So when asked what I want for christmas the first thing out of my mouth was a new Canon Rebel. After doing a little homework I see the retail of around 8-900 bucks is without a lens or a CF card. Kinda drives the price up a bit.
Anyway …. a search at the forum here I see some older threads discussing the rebel and am wondering if there is any more current feedback regarding it. I see there is the ‘G’ and the ‘G QD’ models, any input on the differences there?
Probably won’t get it, but when asked ….. what’s a guy to do? – 😉
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
I’m not sure what your specific question is regarding the Rebel. The only G I know of is the Canon G series. Currently at G5.
I have heard nothing but the most positive things regarding the digital REbel. Leen, who is the only professional photographer I know of on this forum, at least ‘regular’ member, has praised this camera.
Buz, if you want a SLR, but the price tag of the Rebel is too high, why not have a look at the "semi-SLR" category like the Fuji 5000, 7000 or the Minolta A1. These cameras have a fixed lens, an electronic viewfinder, but work similar to a real SLR. The zoomrange of the quality optics will cover 99% of your neds. And, just think about the additional costs of this extra 1%.
I own a G3 (same as the G5 but with a million less pixels) It’s a nice camera. A very nice camera. But having played with a 300D (digital Rebel in America) extensively in a shop – well they are light years apart. The speed of focusing and the ability to add extra lenses are the big sellers for me. I don’t know whether the pseudo SLR cameras that Leen mentions have the same focusing system that the true SLRs do – if they do then they would be worth a look as the focusing system is the real weakness of the compact cameras. The Digital Rebel comes in a kit for an extra 100$US (still under $1000 I believe) with a kit lens – not brilliant, but it will give you something to work with until your birthday!
If the Digital Rebel had been out at that price at the beginning of the year I would have got that instead of a G3 – but having bought the G3 I can’t now justify another big purchase for a while. In any case, I keep on telling myself that the Canon 10D feature set is closer to what I am looking for (the Rebel has some of the options – including some I use a lot in the G3-like flash exposure compensation – crippled to provide some justification for its cheaper price…).
I have had my digital rebel since before Thanksgiving and absolutly love it. first thing you will notice is how fast it focuses compared to a "prosumer" digi cam. it can fire off shots almost as fast as a film camera. next thing is battery life. with my minolta several sets of spare batteries were needed. with the rebel i have one extra battery and quite honestly i don’t need it. unlike the rechargables used in minolta cameras where they have to be drained before recharging with this battery you can charge it whenever you want and it does not effect the memory. this battery lasts for days. image quality is outstanding although straight out of the camera some sharpening is needed, as the camera doesn’t do the sharpening for you but lets you choose how much or little you want to sharpen an image. there are lots of posts on the 300D forum about the poor flash. i have not noticed this at all, my flash works just fine, although it does have a limited range. the lens supplied with kit is great and i highly recomend getting it. another thing i would recomend getting is the eye piece extender. without it when you look through the viewfinder your nose will hit the back of the camera. i am not a pro, but i would recomend this camera very highly.
The Rebel G and Rebel G QD are not digital cameras. Only the Rebel Digital (or 300D depending where you live) are digital. If you’d like a review, point your browser to this site : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos300d.as p It got a 4.63 out 5 rating.
Rebel G is the regular one, G QD has the date function (to print date on the bottom of the picture).
Raymond is correct, the G and GQD refer to the film Rebels. You may want to check out B&H. I got a magzine with their sales in the mail the other day, and they had a package deal on the Rebel Kit, which includes the Digital SLR body and a Zoom lens specially made for this camera, along with a 1 gigabyte microdrive card for aroun $1150.
Side note on that included lense: A friend of mine got it with his Rebel Digital and he said it’s not worth it. He took it off and is using his older lense (28-90mm USM I think it is).
WOW! What can i say …. you folks are great as always. My construction business has been booming, demanding 12 -14 hour days, not leaving much time to pursue hobby’s (photograhy, golf, etc) …. consequently, my time in the forum here has been ….. non existant. It’s nice to be able to ‘drop’ in and still receive all the great opinion. As it’s been said so many times over in this forum, "I don’t believe there’s a forum with a better bunch of folks".
The digital Rebel is on my list because I miss my old Minolta SRT 101 (SLR) and all the latitude SLR’s provide, particularly the interchangeable lens. Like they say …. the only difference between men and boys is the price of their toys <grin>.
Maybe if my wife enlisted my two sisters and father …………. just maybe if I go into ‘best behavior mode’ …… just maybe <grin> … between ’em they can get me my ‘rebel’.
any other insights? – not that there haven’t been enough already.
buz, Once you have used an SLR, you will never be satisfied with a lesser camera. Whether it’s digital or 35mm. There is just no substitute for looking through the lens, in my humble opinion. Bert
Buz, I just got a 300D last week and am very satisfied with it. Wolf Camera (a division of Ritz) was running a special with two Sigma lenses, 28 -80 and 70-300, for $1129.
One thing to watch out for is that you don’t get a "gray market" camera – that’s a camera that has been made for the non-US market and imported into the States. There’s some seemingly good deals but the problem is you don’t get the warranty
Chris, You got a fantastic deal. Those are THE two lenses to have with that camera. I saw that same deal, and was salivating, but I can’t really find any justification for replacing my Oly E-20. Sure would like that 300mm zoom for my wildlife pix, though… Bert
Bert.. on the 300D / 10D, that 300mm becomes a 480 with the FOV… 🙂 Now, couple that with a doubler (my case) and you have a superb 960mm lense. Granted, the optics aren’t fantastic, but… when you really want to see Apolo’s remaining on the Moon, that’s the way to go !
Ray (kidding, I can’t see that far even with a 980mm lense, but I really wish I could !).
but…when you really want to see Apolo’s remaining on the Moon
Ray, Yeah, I was thinking you have to multiply that by about 1.5 or so for a digital cam. At full zoom, that might be tough to hold steady without a tripod.
Speaking of the viewing the moon, I just bought a telescope for my grandson for Christmas, and I’ve been checking it out. It’s an Orion Skyquest 4.5 inch reflector. I was looking at the full moon last night, and it was so bright through the eyepiece! It comes with two eyepieces which give different levels of magnification. With the hi-mag eyepiece, I couldn’t get the whole moon in the field of view, and you could see incredible detail. Couldn’t see the Apollo sites, though…:) bert
Buz, I forgot the best part: when you press the shutter release you don’t hear a beep, you hear the actual shutter doing it’s thing. I’d almost forgotten what that was like.Funny the differance small things can make.
BUZ, Hmmm, Are you the Buz on our Artists page? If so, I haven’t seen you around lately. (I’m a Nikon Nut so plan on getting the 5700 … if I ever get nerve enough to invest that much). Marty
<grin> – same Buz Marty …. guess I should have myself deleted from the ‘Artists’ page since I am not a contributor these days. I’ve just been terribly busy at work …. speaking of which I better get back to drafting the contract for my latest customer.
I had been eying the Nikon Coolpsix 5700 too. Don’t know if you notice it. The LCD screen is kind of small, 1.5 inches. For my poor eyesight, I’ll need to use a loupe to see what’s in the frame. That calls for a third hand! 🙂
Shan – I have the G3 rather than the G5, and the purple fringing at wide apertures is a bit of a nuisance – the G5 is supposed to be marginally worse. You can get around it by shooting to make sure that if you have strong contrast areas(tree branches silhouetted against a sky) you expose to make sure that the sky is correctly exposed and the aperture is set to no wider than f4 or so. I beleive that with the G5 the aperture needs to be a bit narrower to eliminate the problem.
I am not sure if you are aware but it seems that Nikon is developing a dslr for under $1000 to compete with the Rebel I guess. It should be on the market in 2004.
Shan and Marty: I looked at the 5700 before buying my Canon 10D and I was somewhat disappointed; didn’t seem like enough camera for the money at the time. Not sure whether the price has come down, but…
BERT, Brief me here! At my photography class the instructor said SLR was not the same as the "See through the Lens". SLR meaning Single Lens Reflex. All I understood was that my old camera was the "See thru… and the old old accordian type cameras were the SLR. So, Bert, can you tell me the difference between the two? Marty
I noticed the purple fringing the first time I had the images of my G2 printed to 8×10. It’s nice that you can follow certain guidelines to avoid that. But I’ll probably forget them and have myself another feast of fringes. 🙂 Of the few under $1000 SLR-wanna-be’s I am considering, each has something that prevents it from coming out a real winner. Guess I’ll just sit tight and wait until something better comes up.
Shan, I’ve only noticed the purple fringing in my G2 in severe conditions – like dark trees against a very light sky. As you mention, it’s not that difficult to correct. I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s no ideal camera for me, although the G2 still is my camera of choice over my 10D.
You’re correct about the dark Electronic View Finder. It just skipped my mind. The salesperson was kind enough to put in a flash card to show me the Coolpix 5700, and understood my disappointment. Maybe I am trying too hard to turn a prosumer toy into a waist level reflex camera.
Shan, speaking of waist level reflex cameras, I noticed that Rollei still makes a twin lens reflex that looks the same as ever. My late father had a Yashica TLR that was basically a cheap knockoff of the Rolleiflex. I think my sister must have that camera…
I’ve still got an original Mamiyaflex that I used for wedding photography for about 15 years. Now it makes a nice conversation piece on the curio shelf.
While the Yashica was a cheap knockoff it was only cheap as far as cost goes. I had one then moved up to a Mamiya C330 which I still have and use to date. The TLR Rolleiflex is still manufactured but it sells for …. hand on to you hat … $7099 Canadian. For that cost you can buy both a Hasselblad and a Digital rebel.
Thanks for the heads-up on Nikon. I have a bunch of their lenses accumnulated over nearly forty years that hopefully can be put to some use. For a while, I was tempted by the Canon digital SLR that comes with the 18-55 mm small zoom for around $1000. But a couple of reviews did not give that lens a good pass, and that was that. Wide angle zooms tend to have more problems with distortions at both ends of the zoom range. My Nikon 24-120 mm zoom has those distortions and the resolution is quite a lot less than my longer zooms. I’ll wait and see how the Nikon turns out, hoping it will not be too heavy to carry. Thanks.
Marty, My understanding is that an SLR camera (Single Lens Reflex) has a mirror that allows you to view through the lens when you are composing the picture. As far as I know, that is THE definition of an SLR, whether it’s digital or 35mm. The mirror flips up out of the way when you press the shutter button. I had two 35mm SLR cameras back in the 70’s. I have never been happy with any other kind of camera since. My Olympus E-20 is a digital SLR, but it does not have a mirror. Instead, it has a beamsplitter prism which sends light to the viewfinder and to the CCD sensor. The advantage of this is that you don’t have the "clack-clack" mirror flipping mechanism when you press the shutter button. A Twin-Lens Reflex, like a Rollei, or a Mamiyaflex, has a separate lens for viewing the subject. TLR’s are very good cameras. I think they are all 2.25×3.25 or 2.25×2.25. I believe you can use them either way. Then there is the Hasselblad and the Bronica, which are the same film format, but they are SLR’s. I always wanted a Bronica…I knew I couldn’t afford a Hasselblad. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong on all of this. Bert
Bert, very nice explanation! As I recall, the twin lens reflex approached worked very well except for closeups, where you get into the same problem (parallax error?) that you do with a rangefinder, i.e., the view in the finder (lens #1) is offset from the actual image as captured in the main lens (lens #2) by virtue of the distance between the two lenses. Or something like that….
This is correct but you could get aids to help you overcome this. One of the advantages of TLR is that they do not have focal plain shutters so you can use them at any F stop for flash photography. Well now that I think of it there are a bazillion advantages with these cameras as well as some disadvantages.
I just re-read your post about SLR and STTL (my acronym). I suppose the instructor could be said to be technically correct. A 4×5 or 8×10 is most certainly STTL but not an SLR. 🙂
I have a friend in NYC that has just taken up the exalted art of the 8×10 view camera. I’m not sure that I’d be up to that challenge.
Grant, I thought I remembered that the Rolleis and their ilk could shoot in either 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 or 2-1/4 x 3-1/4. Maybe I’m confusing them with a camera I had back in the 60’s…an Agfa. It was a 120-film rangefinder camera. It had a bellows on the front that extended the lens out when you were shooting. If I remember correctly, it would shoot either of the above formats. But maybe I am having a Senior Moment…..:( Bert
What they could do is take two different films one that would shoot 12 frames the other 24 but both at 2 1/4 square. But them maybe there was a hybrid that I am not aware of.
Grant, What I seem to remember is that it was the same film…you selected the format, and that determined how many pix you got on a roll. This is terrible…I should remember this stuff! I’ll see if I can find anything on the Web that refreshes my memory. Bert
I see that the Rebel captures two images for each image shot – Canon RAW and JPEG medium. Seems this would take up quite a bit of card space – any recommendations on cards – anyone think the 256MB card ‘could’ be sufficient. 512MB and 1Gig are certainly tempting, but …….. sure boots the price up.
Buz, I have the 10D and you can’t get rid of the extra embedded JPEG; a real pain. I use 256 cards (three of them), a 640 MB microdrive, and a 512. You’re right – one of the hidden costs. For answering a survey for Canon, I was sent a free CF card – 96 MB. Wow….
About medium format films. The usual 120 film produces 12 or 16 images in a square format or 8, 10, 15 or 16 images in square formats, depending on the kind of camera. The 220 film is twice as long. Anyone interested in 2 Mamiya 645 cameras and a lot of lenses? These cameras are gathering dust since I went digital.
The usual 120 film produces 12 or 16 images in a square format or 8, 10, 15 or 16 images in square formats
Leen, Could explain that, please? Do you mean that the same film strip can be used to produce different numbers of images? Over 40 years ago, I had a 120-film camera…an Agfa. I thought I remembered that I could select the image size somehow. Bert
My prefered memory card is a 512Mb (I have over 1Gb worth of memory cards), and shooting RAW + small JPEG, at ISO 400, I can fit 66 pictures (more or less). Avoid microdrives, if you can. On the 10D, cards with higher speed than 12X aren’t worth it, so I suspect the same is true for the 300D. You’ll gain speed on the download time if you have a faster USB 2.0 or FireWire memory card reader. However, 12X is about the speed the camera will make use of.
Chuck, Raymond – thanks for that re the card size. Seems as though for starters a 512 card is probably a good place to start (if the pocket book allows). Of course, I’m only dreaming at this point anyway, not real sure what Santa will do.
SHAN & SCHRAVEN, My eyes are getting pretty lousy too, new perscription every year. I haven’t been able to find a good holiday price on the Nikon 5700 so was thinking of waiting for the Tax Time sales. Now I might as well wait for the SLR. Schraven, is there a review on the one you are talking about? Under $1000 is OK if it includes the Lens. About 15 minutes ago I missed getting 3 deer about 40 feet from my house. It’s a very dull day and I got some faintly gray deer. Marty
I’ve got a 645 as well. Great camera, used it for lots of weddings but hasn’t been out of hibernation for more than a year now.
Grant-
As I recall, the 220 film was packaged without a paper backings just a paper leader. Am I right? I never used it because the knock early one was it was prone to light leaks, etc.
One thing about 120, I alwasy found it eacy to lot on stainless reels. That was the toughest thing for the kids in my photo classes…..loading film reels in the dark!
Bert, I only do know the metric sizes, so you will have to do a little math. On one 120 film you can shoot: 8 images 6×9 10 images 6×7 12 images 6×6 15 (Mamiya) or 16 (Bronica) images 6×4.5 16 images 4×4
This is on a 129 film that comes with a paper backing; 220 film has just only a paper leader at the beginning and the end and it is twice as long, so you can double the number of images. Not every MF camera can take 220 film; usually you need a special film holder or reset a something inside the camera (Yashica/Mamiya TLR).
There are some other formats too, like panorama (Noblex)and 6×8 (Fuji) etc, but these are rather rare.
Dick, my Mamiya cameras have seen about 1000 weddings and thousands of portraits. I bought one of the first cameras that came on the market after it was released. Later I bought a 645J as a back up camera (and used it just only for B&W images), sold it again when I bought myself a 645 Pro. Covering weddings I usually use 220 films like Agfa Optima 400, Kodak VPS etc. Portraiture always on 120 film.
If you think 120 film is difficult to load to a reel, just try 220 film….. 😉
Leen, Thanks…but it’s still a little confusing. I converted your cm values to inches and nothing makes sense unless those are approximate values.
8 images 6×9
10 images 6×7
12 images 6×6
15 (Mamiya) or 16 (Bronica) images 6×4.5
16 images 4×4
6 cm = 2.36 inches. So, the 6×6 is close to what we call 120 size…2.25 inches square, but not exact.
4 cm = 1.58 inches. This seems to be about what we call 127 film size. I don’t know if it’s available any more, but I have scanned a bunch of old Anscochrome slides in that size that my father-in-law took in the sixties.
I am not sure if a description of the Nikon D70 already exists. I just know from "Thom Hogan’s predictions for 2004", see another thread on this forum, that Nikon finally is going to act upon the Canon Rebel. There is going to be a lense with it and it will have 6 Mp. It will sell for under $1000 to keep up with Canon.
Hogan expects the Nikon to be on the market by april where alledgedly it will be launched on a big photo exhibition.
May be dpreview.com has it already on their site. They are usually pretty fast with these kind of things.
After looking at some of the digicams in the stores, I am with you in liking my G2 all the more for how it handles and meet most of my needs. The exception is the lack of a longer reach in zoom range. Overheard the wife talking with her friends about dragging the husbands to go on a safari trip to Kenya and Tanzania sometime next year. That would call for a longer zoom. Other than that, long focus lenses are no longer so attractive to me because of the need to carry the extra weight of a tripot. These days, my hands are not steady enough to handhold a 200 mm lens even at 1/250 sec.!
For my arthritis, I need a waist level view finder so I don’t to stoop so much. I read somewhere that the revived Rollei is very well made, just like the previous incarnation, and therefore around two-pounds heavy. If I know ahead that I would get a lot of time in a good spot on a day tour off the cruise ship, I may just bring lots of pain killers to brave the vigorous demands of toting my old Hasslblad with just a wide-angle lens in a soft bag, a light-weight tripot and a small light meter. One of the things I like in a Rollei is that it’s very easy to hold steady since there is no flipping reflex mirror. Years ago, I borrowed a Rolleicord from my brother for a trip. With the the camera firmly fixed in place by pulling down on the neck strap, shots taken at less than 1/50 seconds turned out pin sharp! That Schneider lense was also a nice piece of glass too.
Robert’s post mentioned Nikon is coming out with a cheaper DSLR next year. Hopefully it may be just the ticket to make use of my Nikkor lenses.
Chuck, I know about this -and other- digital backs in the same price range. Unfortunately this back only fits the Mamiya 645AF, the autofocus camera. Although I still can use my non-AF lenses on this camera, I will be waiting for other 12+ megapixel cameras, preferably with Nikon or Minolta mount. And then I will wait another 6 month as I expect the prices to drop after the first months after the introduction.
In my opinion I suppose these "multi-megapixel" cameras will -after an initial price drop- retain pretty much of their value as these cameras will probably stay away from the amateur market where manufacturers compete.
Re; Yopur #65 Talk about lousy eyesight. I may have to wait up to two years to get my cataract surgery. I can only go back to the same surgeon who didn’t do much for me in two failed laser correction attempts the year before. Some fine prints in the pre-op contract stated that the tomographic (or some such?) mapping which I paid for turns out to his property and not available to other surgeons! 🙁
Sorry you missed your chance of filling up your meat locker for the winter. Just kidding! 🙂 🙂
Bert, your guess was right: these sizes are approximately. So don’t worry. In Europe, where everything is metric we say usually 6×6 for 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 negatives. The 4×4 and 4×6 were standard sizes for 127 film; but there have been some 4×4 cameras that used 120 film. (or 620 film)
Yes, indeed, I’m that old that I still do remember loading cameras and selling these 127 and 620 films when I worked in the photo retail.
Leen, I had a couple cheap cameras as a young boy and I recall one of them using 120 film and the other 127 film. I’ll bet there are still some blurry old pictures around here taken with them….
Re: your #69 The 120 roll film offers different height formats although the width remains the nominal 2 1/4". The most common one is the 2 1/4"x2 1/4". Then came the 2 1/4"x1 3/4" giving 16 frames per 120 roll. There were only a few of the 16 shot roll-film folding concertina cameras.
I remember my brother’s old Rolleicord had an optional attachment that you place inside the open back on the side of the leaf shutter lens. The smaller frames for the 16-shot adapter made the same 80mm focal length slightly longer that normal and was supposed to eb good for portraits. Except for the fact that the view finder image is left-to-right and you have to shot holding the camera sideways for a portrait format, resulting in a view-camera like up-side-down image! :p
The next size up is the 2 1/4"x3 1/4" (I don’t know the metric equivalent) giving 8 frames on 120 roll. Quite a few of the slightly larger size folding cameras made by Zeiss Ikon, Agfa, Kodak and Balda (among others) were used for larger enlargements. Perhaps because of the larger opening of the lens board or other reasons, these folders were not as sturdily built as the more numerous 2 1/4’s. There were also some problems with focus on the film plane as well (structural distortion?). In my younger days I had a 2 1/4"x3 1/4" baby Lindhof with interchangeable lens boards and a roll film back that shot 120 or 220. To my deepest regret, I had to sell it to finaance my first trip to Europe. 🙁
Thanks, Shan. Very interesting post. My Agfa was one of those folding cameras, with a bellows that extended out in front for shooting. It was a pretty cheap camera that I bought in England in an AFEX store in 1960 when I was working there. The lens was not very good. I also bought a 35mm Agfa which was a much better camera. I can’t remember what I did with either one of them, but when I bought my first SLR, a Pentax Spotmatic, they disappeared. I think I gave them to somebody. Bert
Overheard the wife talking with her friends about dragging the husbands to go on a safari trip to Kenya and Tanzania sometime next year. That would call for a longer zoom.
Shan, We went to Africa in April this year for three weeks. I did a lot of wildlife photography with my Olympus E-20 which has a 35-140 zoom…equivalent to about 50-200 on a 35mm camera. There were very few times when I felt the need for a longer zoom, and probably could not have held it steady enough anyway. In this kind of situation, there is no way you would have time to set up a tripod. The game drives are done in an open-air Land Rover, so you are seated when you shoot, which helps. I don’t know how you happened to pick Kenya and Tanzania, but most people would say that the best countries to visit are South Africa, Botswana and Zambia. My wife is an Africa travel specialist, has been there many times. If you would like to discuss this more, maybe we should go offline via Email. My address is in my profile. Bert
Thanks for the info on both the focal lenghth and Africa travel. I didn’t know you have an equivalent of 50-200 in a 35-140 zoom. Maybe your Oly has a different sized sensor? What I got is from the blurbs by digicam manufacturers giving equivalents to 35mmm range. In my Canon G2, the lens is marked as 7-21mm as being the same as 35-105mm in 35mm. I have checked my SLR and the G2 LCD finder at both 35 and 105mm. To all intents and purpose, lens coverage is practically the same in the same marked focal lengths.
For shooting wildlife from the jeeps, friends who went to Kenya and Tanzania (three went back on the same tour two more times) brought back pictures of good sharpness. Their film SLR’s were rested on camera bags. Where the tour guides allowed, cameras/lenses were on rolled-up lackets on window sills. I was told some guides do not permit that. The longest focal length used was a fixed 300mm. My friends told me that wild life migrates with season. Their usually pick the best times weatherwise to go to Kenya and Tanzania and those more or less coincide with abundance of of picture opportunities.
Last spring, some friends went to South Africa and Botswana. The occasional lions they saw in two parks were drowsy with sleep and lousy with flies! Their only half decent photos I saw were some kind of funny looking cattle. 🙂
Once again, thank you for your kind offer to help. The thing is, I’ll be traveling with a whole bunch of friends in the Bay Area as a group. The obvious disadvatage is that I got to follow the herd. But at our geriatric stage, we have to band together to help one another from getting confused and possibly hopelessly lost, or just to get out of bed in the morning. :p
Shan, The sensor size in virtually all digital cameras is smaller than a 35mm negative which is 24 x 36 mm. Therefore, the lens focal length becomes effectively longer. For most of today’s digital SLR’s, the multipication factor is around 1.6, as it is for my Oly E-20. In South AFrica, we were in Land Rovers which were completely open. There were no window sills to rest a camera on. In Kenya and Tanzania, my wife tells me they use microbuses or vans with open tops. The windows stay closed at all times, You have to stand up to take pictures, and you can rest the camera on the van top…maybe padded with a bag or jacket. As for South African animals being a)occasional b)drowsy with sleep or c)lousy with flies, I can only ask you to view my website at <http://community.webshots.com/user/bigelowrs> and see what you think. The wildlife was abundant, active and obviously very healthy. Of course, if you are looking for animals, you don’t go out in midday, because they ARE asleep then. You go early in the morning and just before sundown. Whatever you choose to do, I hope you have a wonderful trip. Bert EDIT: The funny looking cattle were probably Cape Buffalo. EDIT AGAIN: I just told my wife about your comments on South African wildlife. She has been to Kenya and Tanzania. She said that both countries have fine animal parks, but in general the tourist facilities are not as well developed as they are in other countries…not necessarily a bad thing. She also said that the FLIES were a lot worse in Kenya than in South Africa, and that the summer is not a good time to see the animals, because of the heat and bugs. We were there in April, which is Fall there. The summer is the rainy season, so everything was very green and verdant, and it is cooler in the fall.
CHUCK, Pack Rat as I am…. I still have my Yashica TL Super. When I switched to Nikon the old lenses wouldn’t fit and I don’t think they continued making the Threaded or Screw on type. I also have the Reflex (I call, accordian type). It could be Agfa, I forget. Last time I opened it the Camera Shop man had to show me how to close it. He estimated it worth at least $50 in its mint condition. I figure holding it a short while then trying to find a collector & sell it. I’ve tried for several years to get a used telephoto for my Nikon FG and they are $50 or more when found. Marty
I too had a very old camera that was the folding type. It was ancient when I got it but loved the fabric bellows. I took a whole whack of images with it just to be really retro. I lovingly called the camera Feininger after a very famous photographer Andreas Feininger.
Thank you once more for your helpful details of African safaris. I’ve visited your web site before and studied your wildlife images with wonder and admiration. Your wife is right about the mini vans with the tops cut off? I can remember those funny vehicles from the pictures my firends brought back. Also it’s true about the flies. I was thinking of getting a bee keeper’s hat with a drop-down face mesh net if I get to go. I had a vision of trying to take a photo with one hand while swatting flies with the other. 🙂
Now, armed with your info, I’ll most likely try to talk to my friends about changing the venue. The three couples who went last April to Kenya/Tanzania, for the third time in the last five years, prolly developed thicker skin from all those fly bites and are kind of immune to them.
A younger friend in his mid fifties confirmed the strange cattle as being Cape Buffalo, from a e-mailed photo that I asked the safarian (?) to send him. This young guy ought to know because he paid real good money to have a 358 magnum custom made for big game in the Cape. That was a few years back. He never get to go over there to use the huge rifle on account of shoulder injury in an auto accident. Lucky buffalo.
If you don’t mind, I would like to share your safari experience with my friends. Thanks again.
If you don’t mind the nomenclature that may seem second tier, Nikon made a few inexpensive E series lenses to go with the FG body.These are ligh weight and simpler in construction than the regular Nikkor lenses. Nevertheless, the optics are still remarkably good.
The standard in f1.8 is fair, the 28f2.8 is real dainty and the optics are unxpectedly good. The 105f2.8 is a fantastic portrait lense. It renders a creamy complexon and delightful skin tones. I still remember seeing the prints made by a kid technician in my office using the FG and the E-lenses some long years back.
If you can find them in a good clean condition nearby, take your camera body and ask to take some test shots right there to check out the lens in larger prints. Then go back and buy it if the lens is good. I am sure it can be had for a song. So many people are switching over to digital these days, a lot of them will be glad to just be rid of older photgraphic equipment no longer in use.
If you don’t mind, I would like to share your safari experience with my friends. Thanks again.
Shan, Please feel free to share my posts…and my website…with anyone. If you would like a detailed account of the whole trip, I wrote one right after we got back in May. It’s a Word document, and it’s too long to post here. If you send me your Email address, I will Email it to you. If anyone else in the forum would like it, just let me know. I already sent it to Beth, as I recall. Bert
So many people are switching over to digital these days, a lot of them will be glad to just be rid of older photgraphic equipment no longer in use.
Shan, I am watching for a good old 35mm SLR camera and lenses. As you say, there should be a lot of them sitting on shelves in peoples’ closets, untouched for years. Naturally, I don’t want to pay much. I’ve looked on EBay, but haven’t seen much. Where would one look for something like that. Anybody got any ideas? Bert
I saw an ad in the most recent issue of PC Photo for a hood which fits over the LCD screen, touted to facilitate focusing by reducing glare. Has anyone had experience with this product? I called them and in approx. 2 weeks they plan also to market a hood with a magnifier as an integral part of the unit. Here is the link: <http://www.hoodmanusa.com/H180_Hood_New.asp> Ken
Phoned a friend last night on something else. When I brought up the your Safari experience and the flies, he told me that the cruise on the new Queen Mary (QM?) has been brought forward from 2005 to 2004. I felt such a dope not checking my e-mail every day. My wife’s excuse is that I am so forgetful that I’ll be more likely to notice it on my puter! So all bets are off with the wildlife safari at least for the next eight or nine months. The cuise wouldn’t be too bad. We’ll be traveling with over a dozen friends. Still more may sign up yet. The only apprension I have that there are three port of call in Spain. I had some bad experience in Madrid four years ago. Got mugged and beaten up the very first day, and my favorite Nikon F801 with a 24-50 zoom robbed off me.
For the good old 35mm cameras. Check out camera stores in your area and see if they have any trade-ins or on consignment. Also the ads in papers. I don’t know if the ones advertised in "Shutterbug" monthly magazine are available with a limited return policy. But if the seller is a reputable dealer, they may. In my own experience I’ve not bought from commercial or unknown sources. Bought a couple of lenses and some accessories from people I knew that took care of their gear.
With lenses, there are all kinds of problems that are not evident even after using it for some time. Some really jambed up old lenses had been found to have extreme lube jobs to make the focusing ring turn smoother. An old friend bought a Contaflex with three lenses from a used dealer. After a year or so, you need to be the new governor of California to turn the focusing rings. Apparently the helical sleeves were damaged and a repairman found axle grease and soap inside! Something like putting bananas in the engine oil to "tighten" the cylinders in a car.
I am sending you my e-mail address for your trip account. Appreciate it.
Shan, Thanks for the info. I’m a little worried about buying used camera gear from someone I don’t know. I bought my Oly E-20 from a friend that I met here in this forum. It was in absolutely pristine condition, as I knew it would be from my acquaintance with him. But, buying from someone on EBay, or through an ad in a newspaper would be chancy. I’m hoping a friend of a friend will appear… Bert PS – I Emailed my Africa trip report to you.
Well folks ……. such an innocent topic and look what happens – 92 replies later 🙂
It is currently sitting in the living room complete with a 1 Gig card, she got it from Camera World, essentially the same deal as elsewhere wih the two lens (18-55 and 70-300 I think) ………..BUT …………
she won’t let me open it …………… grrrrrrrrr
I said well at least charge the battery for me and while you’re at it maybe let me have a look at the owners manual …….. no decision yet on that ….. but I may get a peak at the manual before St Nick comes.
One other trick to get the package open before x-mas is to make sure all works as it may not be returnable if defective passed a certain delay (here it’s usually 10 days).
any and all suggestion/hints/coersions(sp) gladly accepted.
no – haven’t tried that yet Chuck, but it’s worth a shot.
My biggest problem will be with my 6 year old boy who has had access to my Olympus 550D and I must say – he has quite an eye for compostion – but keeping him from the Rebel will be a constant battle.
Ray – thanks for that link – but it’s contrary to my intended purpose < grin >. I’ll take a look but not let her know it’s available on line – hehehehe
ai – yi Cap’n (Chuck) – how do you spell that ‘what swabbies say to their captain’, you’re absolutely right – I need to get in there and learn more from you folks. Particularly now with this new toy.
First I need to learn how to turn my 12 hour business day into an 8 hour day – and really all that has to happen there is to quit answering the phone and maybe hire a bookkeeper.
EF-S are Canon’s new mount. Currently, the only camera making use this mount is the 300D (Rebel Digital). The distance between the lense the mirror is different in the 300D, so an EF-S won’t fit on an a reguler EOS camera. Otherwise, all EF lense will fit on the 300D. That’s really all there is.
Ray, I think it should be pointed out to anyone who owns a Canon EOS cmaera other than the Digital Rebel that trying to use an EF-S lens on another EOS camera could be hazardous to the mirror. At least I think that’s what I read…
As they say here before every TV shows now.. "The following program contains scenes of an adult matter. Viewer discretion is advised" 😉
Chuck, I can’t tell for sure, but from all I read, it’s virtually impossible to attach an EF-S lense to an EF mount. Canon made a special attachment ring for the Digital Rebel so that EF-S simply won’t fit onto other EOS cameras. But, you’re right, people, don’t try this at home. I’ve seen people try very strange thing…
Btw, there was a thread on dpreview about hacking the micro code of the 300D / Digital Rebel to gain back functions that were removed from the 10D (to justify the lower price). Someone had discovered a way to access the files inside the camera’s memory and was attempting to decompile. They discoverd one file nammed command.com (or .exe, I’m not sure). Anyway, it appears to be based on an "ancient" version of DOS. Guess we’ll start seeing threads like "My Rebel Digital doesn’t work anymore since I upgraded it to 10D"
Well, interesting coincidence what happened to me today. Suzanne and I visited her sister and husband in Palm Desert, about a hundred miles from here. Yesterday, he bought a new Canon 300D Rebel! He’s an old 35mm guy (also has a Bronica with all the accessories) but knows little about digital cams> He was asking me for advice on setup, etc. So, I got a chance to play with it for awhile (drool). He bought the last one in a local store, the one in the case, and they knocked $100 off the price. So he got it with the kit lens for $900. One of the reasons he decided on the Rebel is that he has an old EOS 620 35mm with a 35-105 zoom and a 500mm monster telephoto. By the way, the body of the Rebel has two little dots…white and red. To install an EF-S, you align the lens with the white dot. To put an EF lens in, you align with the red dot…or was it the other way? DUH! Anyway, I ended my hunt for a nice 35mm camera. He loaned me the EOS 620 with the 35-105 lens. He wants to use the Rebel with the EF-S lens for awhile. Bert
Bert, I hope you told him he needs to take some of the money he saved and go out and get Elements, then visit this forum to jump-start his digital career!!
Chuck, Yeah, I noticed the PSE 2.0 in the box. However, he already has PS 7.0, which he doesn’t even know how to use! He is a retired MD, now in his mid-70’s. He never used a PC until avout a year ago! He’s a really smart guy, but I’m not sure he will ever become very proficient on the computer. He’s so afraid of using the computer to upload images that he bought an HP photoprinter that he can stick the CF cards in and print snapshots! Sigh. The retirement community where they live has computer classes…Hell, they might even have PS classes! I dunno, maybe he’ll get motivated now that he has the Rebel. All he does on the computer now is Email. If I lived closer, I’d give him lessons myself. I spent about an hour with him yesterday, just trying to get him familiar with basic Windows functions. But if he doesn’t practice and use those things, he quickly forgets. Bert
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
