THE 7 AND THE 60

THE SIGMA 60mm f2.8 DN – still sharp as a knife.

 

My first mirrorless camera was a used Sony Nex 7, took me a little bit to get used to the diminutive size, but from the start I was sold on the 7 for a number of reasons.

One being the camera’s twenty four megapixel sensor and what it was capable of.

Over time there’s been several different lenses mounted on the 7 and I was never disappointed if I held up my end of the deal.

Time passed and I fell into a used Sony A 6300, a gem of a little camera, same twenty four megapixel capability with some tweaks to the sensor.

The 6300 is a fine camera , a little bigger, a little heavier than the 7 with new features like phase detection , 4k video capability, and others.

There were some initial complaints related to the 6300 about overheating when doing video but Sony released a firmware update to address that issue – and while I don’t do a lot of video I’ve experienced no problems.

It may just be me but I’m inclined to believe that with the same lens, in this case a Sigma 60mm f2.8 DN, which may be the deal of the century cost and IQ wise, the 7 seems to have something of a love affair going on with the Sigma that the 6300 doesn’t.

Mounted on a tripod with the identical settings, same Sigma lens, subject, and lighting the 7 renders a better photo.

I haven’t any complaints about the IQ the 6300 produces with any lens, exceptional seems an apt description, but as I say the 7 just seems to embrace this lens for some reason.

I can’t offer an explanation as it’s something of a mystery to me, but I’m not complaining as both cameras have a place in the backpack and routinely used.

I have no hesitation to switch back and forth between the two when out and about – the Sigma 60mm on the 7 and a Zeiss 32mm f.18 touit on the 6300 plus a couple of other vintage lenses for different situations.

I’m a fan of film photography but slacked off of that due to concerns about the chemicals involved – recently I read an article on fstoppers I believe it was about using beer to develop film.

Sounds kinda bizarre and I haven’t tried it but willing to give it a go – I don’t drink and therefore know nothing about beer “quality”, I assume though any beer would work and be less expensive and more environmentally friendly in the bargain.

For those who have a taste for both beer and film this could be like opening a box of Cracker Jacks and finding a hundred dollar bill.

In telling a friend about this he jokingly said “perfect, a good cover story to tell my wife”, and then asked to borrow my film camera.

Truthfully though he’s not much of a drinker, just has a good sense of humor.

I’m not looking to start a riot in saying so but for me at least mirrorless has become what it’s all about as more and more companies are embracing the technology.

Doesn’t mean I’ll give up film if the beer formula actually works only that I believe as I’ve said previously that mirrorless will become to the traditional dslr what the same traditional dslr was to film.

Sony apparently is on the verge of releasing a new mirrorless model named the A9, and though I’m not one to go with pre release reviews or the immediate reviews upon release it sounds amazing.

Amazing, along with a price tag of $4,500 – which translates for me and others no doubt of having to sell a kidney – in the interim as I ponder that decision (not) I’m a happy camper with the 6300, the 7, and my old Pentax Spotmatic.

Life is good whether you have the “newest” and the “greatest” or not.

 

 

PENTAX SPOTMATIC

I can’t say enough about the Pentax Spotmatic, I’ve had this one for a while and still impressed with it’s build quality and dependability.

By today’s standards it is a very basic film camera – often to be found in thrift stores, flea markets, and yard sales for next to nothing, and usually with a Takumar lens attached to it.

The only issue I had with this particular one was it was lacking a battery, but they can be readily found on the net – the best are what are referred to as “Wein cells” made by Wein – the correct voltage, long lasting, non corrosive, and inexpensive.

As can it be seen it is in near mint condition, and I do my best to keep it that way.I have the original case for it and when not in use it awaits it’s next outing snuggled away.

It has what was the then standard m42 screw mount and will accept just about any lens of that variety made by any manufacturer.

Increasingly people are turning their back on film cameras, but signs indicate a resurrection of interest with new companies appearing who devote themselves entirely to producing film.

There are also a lot of great lenses made with the m39 mount that can be used with a m39 to m42 adapter, some adapters running less than ten dollars.

This a fun camera with it’s own distinct characteristics, battleship build, and not so subtle nuances from the manual film advance to the unmistakeable clunk when the shutter is activated.

I ran into some people whose house I worked on a while back and they told me they were cleaning out closets etc and ran across a vintage Russian made Zenit camera with a Helios lens on it – said they had no use for it and would I like to have it. If not they would donate it to Goodwill.

The Zenit has a pretty good reputation, battleship build, black, and looks like it means business – but it’s the lens I’m really interested in as they are noted for some over the top bokeh under certain conditions, so next time I’m in that area I’ll stop by and pick it up. They say it is in fine condition and everything works as it should but new batteries wouldn’t be a bad idea.

M42 and manual whether film or digital – the best of both worlds.

TEST CARDS

I don’t have “test cards” or “sheets” to check the sharpness and IQ of the photo a lens will produce, and not really interested in them either.

But there is an old blanket/cover with a color and weave some lenses seem to struggle with, so occasionally I will use it as a test.

The above is the result of a Super Takumar 100mm f2.8 mounted on a K50 set to the manual mode taken indoors without flash – judging by the results I’d say it is an excellent lens. Accurate color and well defined detail with the lens set wide open.

When stopping down this lens incrementally becomes even sharper – I seem to favor the vicinity of f5.6 to f8 across the board, or maybe a little more depending on the situation with any lens I may be using, though some have a particular sweet spot and that’s the place to go.

No scenic vista, no dreamy waterfall, no bracketed composition or carefully enhanced color, just an old blanket that says this is a lens worth keeping.

Shooting in RAW manual or aperture priority isn’t rocket science, the RAW format captures more information and detail – those unfamiliar with the process should give it a try -jpeg can be convenient, but RAW puts it to shame.

The interesting thing about vision is that at least for humans it is center focused – we see everything within our field of vision but the focus is on the center.

A lens has the same attributes but with the added ability to manipulate depth of field by “stopping down” aperture.

When wide open a lens more closely resembles the human eye in that it focuses to the center and produces a blur or bokeh moving away from that point.

Takumar lenses are noted for their center focus and the bokeh they produce, stop down the aperture and the focus, or depth of field, increases.

That’s true of any lens, but what separates them is how good they are at it – I’ve seen lenses you would swear needed a visit to the optometrist, others that are natural born wonders.

There is said to be a silver lining to every cloud, mine is though I can’t afford those new lenses people rave about that inability led me to vintage lenses, and thankfully the Taks…I’m convinced I’m not missing a thing.

Pentax Taks and SMCs, add a little Yashinon, Chinon, Zeiss, and Voightlander into the mix and you’re as good to go as anyone at a fraction of the cost.

LENSES AND CAMERAS

 

My collection of Pentax Super Takumars and SMC Takumars – I wouldn’t part with a single one of them, and as accurately as I can calculate it the total investment is $103.00 spread out over a few years.

The majority coming from thrift stores and flea markets, sometimes attached to a camera that I would tune and pass on or barter for something else.

The Pentax Spotmatic is one I hung on to, it’s in great condition and something of a basic mechanical marvel, the first of it’s kind to come with TTL, or through the lens metering.

It originally came with a Mercury battery, they have since been banned but there are a few batteries for watches like the Bulova Accutron that will work, or the Weincell (MRB400  Z400PX PX 400 EPX400 RM400 Zinc Air Battery) that will match up perfectly and can be found on the net for around five or six dollars.

The thing I like about these old film cameras is they keep you honest, there’s no monitor to preview a photo you’ve taken, no deleting if you don’t like it, when you activate the shutter it’s your’s, and if you don’t think a photo through before snapping the shutter there’s no going back – but that lends itself to learning what you’re about and once having done that, confidence – an important part of any endeavor.

This photo was taken with a Yashica Yashinon DX f2.0 on a Canon dslr with an adapter that allows mounting.

I’ve been pretty lucky when it comes to lenses, they often turn up in the most unexpected places.

As can be seen these taks aren’t cosmetically perfect, but then the tools I use for work aren’t either, yet they both get the job done as I take care of what I own , and they are mechanically and optically all a ten.

I admit a bias when it comes to old lenses and cameras, just recently I read that a 35mm negative is the equivalent of a 25 mega pixel photo. I don’t know if that’s true or not but either way it’s nice to have something in your hands that is well made and feels solid.

I know someone who has a Pentax K50 dslr, nice camera, and when it becomes “vintage” I may wind up with one.

He says you can run the ISO setting up past 50,000 – that’s huge, but if accompanied by an abundance of “noise” what’s the purpose?

Some people will focus singularly on film while others will focus on digital, for me it’s all part and parcel of the same pursuit.

For those who believe it’s an entirely digital world they might want to follow the link and consider Rockwell’s viewpoint.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/why-we-love-film.htm