Discussion in 'Photos & Videos' started by shamus, Dec 28, 2003.
Cool!:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Hi Tony, wish I could help but I am having problems even trying to get my own movies to run on my machine from the digital camera. Anyone why a" .mov" won't run.?
You need to have Apple's "Quick Time" movie player installed. There is a version of it on your Olympus CD, if not, you can download the free player here...
Thanks a lot.
That set me thinking - do you think we should be designing layouts so that they look good not only to the viewer but also to an engineer of a locomotive (i.e. a liny camera on the front of a train.
Would this include modelling the insides of tunnels, or at least baffles so that light doesn't get in. How would we plan the scenery so that the camera doesn't accidentally show the isle and any other 1:1 features that would spoil the illusion.
How can we see in without "them" seeing out?
Anyone seen John Armstrong recently?
Yup, Total refocus, Not necessarily what I was intending to do but that fun little camera was annoyingly quick to point out all those things that just look wrong. I didn't build to photograph but I have rebuilt to accomodate the ever growing camera collection.
Camera blocks to avoid scenes that include 'the gods' never seem to work 100% if you want to be able to see the layout. I've been trying removable screens with limited success. I have sad mountain innards but even more sad is the fact that I am blessed with whimsical friends that would like to fill the mountains with lit fantasy scenes. Oh well that's what editing is all about.
Canon A60 digital. New at it and no pics yet.
I quite like the idea of having the insides of the mountains filled with Discworld style Dwarf mining scenes - You could even have stations in the tunnels and put passenger cars with tinted windows (so the dwarfs don't get dazzled) in your trains!
At the front of the layout you could have removable backdrops but since we tend to put the tracks near the front of the layout so we can see the trains then the backdrops would be too close.
By the way - I like your railway. I haven't got a Roco 0-4-4-0T yet but I have found one on the web and am very tempted.
My Olympus C700UZ is up for sale as I am getting a new camera within the next 2 weeks. It is a Fuji Finepix S7000. I have had a real good look around at various camera's (In my price range) and read all manuals. To me, this S7000 will do me very well indeed.
Sorry I missed this thread before. I love talking cameras so better late than never.
Bought my first 35mm camera(Minolta XE-7) in 1976 because I had to write a magazine article on a radio controlled boat for RC Modeler. I shot one roll of color film to make sure I could take a decent picture and my second roll was B/W which I mailed to the magazine so they could develop it for my article.
Then I bought a Minolta XK, Minolta SRT 102, Minolta XD-11 and finally a Minolta X-700. I sold off the black 102 but still have the rest and they all work.
Somewhere along the line I picked up an Olympus A-1 and an A-2 because I liked their tiny size...they still work too.
Then I discovered Digital....my wife picked up a Ricoh RDC6000 (2mp) from the QVC channel. I had a lot of fun getting instant pictures until it fell off a chair and landed on the tarmac at a local model airplane contest. I was taking digital pictures to see how they compared with my ASA 200 shots on conventional film cameras.
I could hear the Ricoh trying to focus but something must be adrift because it just doesn't focus unless you hold the shutter release half way down and move the camera in and out until it looks like it's in focus. In sunlight this is pretty hard to do.
I then decided to get a good digital camera and started reading up on the latest stuff on Steve's Digicams.
I agonized over the Minolta Dimage-7I, Sony DSC707 and the Nikon Coolpix 5700. I went with the Nikon because of the tilt viewing screen and reputation. There was a lot of nonsense about the Minolta being a battery eater and the Sony was not a name I recognized from the film days. Since then I've been told the Sony is a great camera.
When my wife saw the Nikon 5700 (5mp)and all the options she said she wanted a simple point 'n shoot type so I bought her a Nikon Coolpix 2500 (2mp). When she saw the difference in the quality of the pictures she gave the 2500 to our son and we ordered a Nikon coolpix 4300 (4mp...which takes beautiful pictures; incidently, I would recommend that 4300 to anyone, it is a quality picture taker.
Dan, IMHO get the Minolta, your a Minolta man to the bone I've never held a 7I, but I love my Z1 because it feels like my 20 year romance with my X-700. BTW: Did you know they continued the X-700 body until about a year ago? I guess it was ahead of it's time I don't know why, but I picked up a Z1 at the display at Walmart and was able to breeze through the menus like it was mine for 20 years, an dit all just seemed to maek sense. I dunno, I could probably get soemthing better for the money, but I just plain like it and feel at home with it.
When I was in the service in the Philippines (1982) I picked up the X-700 and a couple thousand worth of gadgets at wholesale prices. Funny, the Z1 replaces it all except for a 500MM lense, a 28MM and off camera strobes. Shamus also used a Minolta X series for many years.
Too late, I already purchased the Nikon Coolpix 5700. I love that tilting, rotating LCD display. Try one in a Circuit City store, you'll soon see the advantages.
I forgot to mention we also have an older Minolta 8mm video camera and a 35mm "Talker." My wife used that "Talker" from around 1986 'til just recently and has tons of great pictures.
Yes, the X700 is a great camera but my personal favorite has to be the old XE-7. The shutter release sounds like a whisper and it never failed to give outstanding pictures. Everything was smooth as butter...it's a classic. The shutter was a vertical metal affair made by Copal-Leitz and was quiet enough to be approved for use in a court room. Other quiet cameras at that time were the Fuji 705, Olympus OM-1 and the Leica M-2.
The Minolta XK featured a removable viewfinder like a Nikon F or a Canon F1. The XK had a titanium foil shutter and was quite exotic and popular with pros. I found it heavy and cumbersome compared to the XE-7.
The XD-11 was Minolta's first compact, lightweight SLR and it was also the first dual mode camera on the market. It featured the first really bright viewing screen in any 35mm. The XD-11 is still a favorite of mine but you have to watch the exposure compensation knob as you can inadvertantly knock it one way or the other. I wish mine was the black version.
The X-700 was great, black finish and feather light but it was also the only Minolta I ever had a problem with; the frame counter stopped working but I just keep shooting 'til it stops cocking.
I have several Minolta Lenses from 24mm to a 100-200 Zoom. A Tokina 28-75 Zoom comes in very handy and my Soligar 600MM mirror lens is great for catching birds in the feeder. The 600 has a Macro mode and the closest focusing distance is 13'.
Never could understand why people would plop down big bucks for a fish-eye lens. After you take that roll of wierd pictures what do you do with that expensive piece of glass you don't use any more? There have to be thousands of low usage fish-eyes laying about.
All this talk about the great old film cameras has me thinking about running a roll through some of them. I do cock the shutter now and then and fire them off just to keep them limber.
LOL I see now... Nikon always makes a fine product.
The Z1 has sound, as I'm sure many do, and it can mimick a Maxum 9 or a CL
I went to Steve's Digicams and looked at the pictures of the Minolta Z1...what a tricky looking machine. I'll bet people do a double take when they see it.
Steve's has a photo of the day feature and there are many pictures taken with older Olympus and Sony and other digital cameras with 2.1 to 3. mp. Some of the macro bug shots are amazing.
BTW, when you mentioned the Minolta CL are you talking about the old compact rangefinder camera. Leica also had Minolta make a CL with the Leica name on the case. Leica used the Minolta XE-7 chassis for their own Automatic SLR.
Back in the '70's many camera dealers were mad at Minolta because they made their cameras available through outlets like K-Mart and others. There was a lot of undeserved, unfavorable press about Minolta because the dealers couldn't extract top dollar for them. Minolta wide angle lenses were legends...much sharper on the edges than the more expensive glass offered by the recognized thorough-breds.
My sister decided she wanted a camera after she saw some shots I took with my Minolta XE-7. She decided to go with the SRT-101. We went out on a picture taking expedition and I took the same pictures. When we got the film developed I was amazed at how her pictures had such brilliant colors while mine looked flat. She had a 1.7 lens and I had a 1.4.
I called my friend, Jason Schneider, who wrote articles for Modern Photography and was an editor for Popular Photography, and asked him if there was a trade-off for color rendition and lens speed.
Jason said yes, it was true of every lens line except for Pentex. Their fast lens was better than their slower offering.
Needless to say I quickly added a Minolta 1.7 lens for scenery shots.
Great site, Steve's. I do get a lot of comments
And now you can have an electronic fisheye for free
BTW: I have a 500 MM mirror. and my favorite use is "concealed" portraits.
Very fishy Jon
I have just bought a new digital camera, the Fuji Finepix S7000, it is a very good camera for my needs, i.e. Model Photography and the odd photo outside.(Don't do much outside work)
Anyway, it is a 6.3 megapixel and I think it's brilliant. After taking a photo, there is know need to enhance it apart from cropping and re-sizing it. The photo's are very sharp and the white balance is almost right. (Need to play around some more). Or maybe my fluorescent Daylight Tubes need cleaning. If these are dirty, the colour balance shifts slightly.
Here's a photo I took today.
As a new forum member I wanted to join the crowd in telling you your models and photography are nothing short of stunning.
I'm particularly interested in your lighting. I'd like to start taking some shots of my models so I can upload them to the site. What kind of lighting do you use for your photos?
Hello and welcome to the gauge.
Well I use FLUORESCENT DAYLIGHT TUBES, these tubes are rated at 55OO degrees Kelvin and are perfect match for colour photography, when using daylight type slide or print film. Also I might add that these are not what some people call "Cool Whites" as these are NOT daylight type tubes.
A little explanation on colour temperature verses colour prints, or for that matter colour slides. Light is measured in degrees Kelvin, and at around mid-day outside, is roughly 55OO degrees Kelvin. These tubes come in 4’ 5’ and 6’ lengths, and are only a little bit more expensive than normal household fluorescent tubes, and as they match daylight temperature, no filters i.e. 8OA or 8OB are required.
Unfortunately, Household fluorescent tubes cannot be used because they give a greenish cast to slide or colour prints. You can buy a filter for use using these tubes, but I wouldn’t recommend it.
Oh yes, I know that with a digital camera you can alter the "White Balance" if needed, but why not do it right the first time, and buy proper Daylight tubes. Philips TL'D 58Watt are what I use.
There is one point about the fluorescent tubes, and that is to keep them clean, as they collect dust, the colour temperature of 55OO degrees. Kelvin shifts a little, although you might not notice this, the camera will. I tend to clean mine just before a photo session, to make sure all will be well.
Separate names with a comma.