File :-(, x, )
Pretentious Black and White Thread Anonymous
I'm looking at the vintage cameras on ebay and thinking to myself "I'm a pretentious fellow who really likes black and white photography because (FILL IN THE BLANK). But how would a person who has barely even held a camera in his life know what to get or where to start?"
>> Anonymous
don't get some rusty old piece of crap even if it has a good name on it.

it'll just feel dirty and frustrate you.

just get a cheap manual slr rom the 70s or 80s (olympus om-1, om-2, canon ae-1, pentax k1000, nikon f series, whatever)

get some c41 black and white film, put it in the camera you get, and learn how to use it. since you don't know much, go for the c-41 black and white, so you can get it printed easily and cheaply before you decide to start using real black and white film and developing it yourself.
>> Anonymous
Most of those old vintage cameras dont have metering so its going to be a problem unless you buy some vintage light meter to go with it or do the metering with some other camera.

If you want to go cheap look for old russian rangefinders like fed and zorki.
>> Anonymous
>>148167
Vintage cameras are for collectors who know their stuff. I wouldn't really use one of these for serious picture taking, but for fun. What good is a camera if you're not using it? Anyway, good glass would probably also be a pain to hunt down as well.

I would buy a tried a true amateur film camera like a Canon AE-1, Nikon FE/FE2 or even a Pentax K1000. It all depends on how much money you're willing to spend, but in any case, usually someone is selling one on eBay or some secondhand store.

But if you're really a true beginner, you might as well buy a digital p&s (which has some practical use as well) and convert them to b&w with photoshop. With some you could even take pictures directly in b&w if you want practice seeing this way. But generally, some pictures look better in color than in b&w and so it's nice to have a color copy than nothing at all.
>> Anonymous
WTF!? HELPFUL PEOPLE ON 4CHAN!
Those Zorkis actually look pretty cool, even if they were made by dirty, dirty commies. To be honest, I probably would admire the camera itself more than I would take many pictures with it. I'm a sucker for old crap like that but I vastly prefer I actually be able to USE the old crap should I wish to do so.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>148178
Casting another vote for the K1000. Dead simple to use, great lenses, and they're super cheap. Shutter speed and ISO (for the meter, obviously) are controlled via the body, and the aperture ring is on the lens. Wind, shoot. Couldn't be simpler. It's got a very trustworthy meter, too, it'll give you good results.
>> Anonymous
I'll probably end up getting one of those cheapo Zorkis and use half a roll before I get tired of it, but I appreciate the help anyway.
If this had been any other board I would have worried about a lemonparty post after I admitted I liked old crap.
In summation, out BEFORE lemonparty, whooooo!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Back in for a second.
I saw this camera on Ebay and thought "F-Yeah". THEN I scrolled down to the additional pictures. I'll give you guys one guess as to what my only problem with it's appearance is. I thought I'd only see collectable things like this at gun shows.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSC-W80Camera SoftwareACD Systems Digital ImagingMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:12:19 17:50:03Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating320Exposure Bias0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceCloudy WeatherFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.80 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height487RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastSoftSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>148202
if anything that will make it even more of a collectors item
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>148202
I fucking love fake leicas

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDMC-LC50Camera SoftwareACD Systems Digital ImagingMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern2409Focal Length (35mm Equiv)35 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:10:15 14:51:26Exposure Time1/8 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.80 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width650Image Height468RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpSaturationLowSharpnessSoftSubject Distance RangeMacroImage QualityFineWhite BalanceAutoFocus ModeAutoSpot ModeOffImage StabilizerOffMacro ModeMacroShooting ModeMacroAudioNoFlash Bias0.00 EVColor EffectOffContrastStandard
>> Anonymous
>>148211
Granted I probably could use it until I was bored with it (which would leave it in nearly the same condition as it came in) and then trade it to one of those freaks for a couple of boxes of ammo or something like that. FYI: Nazi guns do not exactly count in the same manner as that camera does because, in my mind, I can imagine that every ding, dent, and chip in the stock was where some Nazi got it taken from him and then had his skull bashed in like a Gallagher routine. A little dark, but I cant stop watching Shootout! on the History Channel.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
On an only semi-related note: WTF?
I'm sure you've all seen this before, but it's new to me, so it must therefore be new to you.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKONCamera ModelE5000Camera SoftwareE5000v1.8Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)35 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2005:11:04 12:48:36Exposure Time2/39 secF-Numberf/4.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length9.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2560Image Height1920RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownColor ModeCOLORImage QualityNORMALWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-CISO SelectionAUTOImage AdjustmentAUTOLens AdapterOFFAuto FocusCenterSaturationNormalNoise ReductionOFF
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>148247

It reminds me that technique where people make a pinhole camera out of a match box... Would it be the same?
>> Anonymous
>>148247
>>148252
Id cover the whole thing up with black electric tape before even thinking about trying to use those
>> Anonymous
>>148252
I'm the OP and posted that just thinking it was weird/ kinda neat. I know jack crap about film and photography of any sort other than the fact that you can use film to capture an image. I found that because I was looking for 35mm film to (hopefuly) use in a future Zorki purchase.
>> Anonymous
>>148255
I'm also wanting to get into it because I want to steal some souls. I cannot just pull them out of people's bodies with my hands like Chang Tsung.
>> Anonymous
>>148188
Why a K1000? Pentax made better cameras that sell for cheaper now. I forget the name of it, but there was one exactly like the K1000, but with more features. And the LX, of course.

>>148172
More in the same vein, ignore this post. If the camera still works, it's still for taking pictures, no matter what crazy collectors do with it. You want an old Leica screwmount rangefinder? Go for it.

Also, forget all three cameras mentioned there. Old professional SLRs are so cheap now it makes no sense to go for anything but the top of each line: Canon F-1, Nikon F2, Pentax LX, and the Olympus OM-1, too.
>> Anonymous
>>148271
I'm sure I will not end up really appreciating a really good collector camera if I get one because this is just not my bag. It would be akin to putting up a real genuine Picasso or Monet over the toilet because you do not know any better. Are there any problems/ advantages with the Zorki line of cameras? Besides the suspiciously cheap prices.
>> Anonymous
>>148291
Keeping in mind that getting anything much more expensive would be like getting a Hummer to go to the corner store for me.
>> Anonymous
>>148291
I'm pretty sure the Zorkis are kosher. From a website called Cameraquest, written by Stephen Gandy:

>What about VERY LOW PRICED interchangeable lens rangefinders -- Do they Exist ? YES. Russian made Leica screw mount bodies and lenses are cheap, often running $75 or less per body or lens. Personally I much prefer the later Zorki 4, 5, 6 with a large combined viewfinder over the earlier and more plentiful Fed / Zorki Leica II copies. Incidentally, the Zorki 4/5/6 finder is much larger and easier to see than the Leica screw mount finders. Quality control is spotty, and the film advance can feel like a ratchet wrench, but they are very inexpensive and they do take pictures. Their nicest feature is upward compatibility. The beginner on a budget can start out with a Zorki body and normal lens for less than $75. Inexpensive Russian lenses can be added, or you also have the choice of modern Voigtlander screw mount designs. Best of all, add a set of screw mount to bayonet mount adapters and you can treat yourself to the ultimate rangefinder upgrade: a Leica M body. If your Zorki breaks, don't waste money fixing it. Either fix it yourself or just buy another. I once bought five Russian made Leica screw mount lenses, only to have four of them NOT screw on a Leica! -- it seems the production line had a little too much Vodka that day. My mint Zorki 4 looked great, but it was defective from the factory. Eventually my repair guys gave up on its poor interior workmanship, using it for parts. Even so, these Russian beauties are the lowest cost route to a working Leica screw mount outfit.

Don't get into the collectors' bullshit. Cameras are tools. Find one you like and shoot with it.

I meant "top of the line" in terms of their capability, not collector value. The cameras I listed were the D3s of their time; the cameras he listed were the D40s. And now they're all really cheap.
>> Anonymous
>>148271
By collectors who know their stuff, I meant gear-wise, not necessarily skill at photography. A camera is a camera after all. Why not use a camera that's known very well in the community and be able to ask others questions about it? Otherwise, you'll be stuck with a obscure camera that not might have some annoying quirks with no one available to help you out with.

Also, your description of "so cheap" is rather relative. If this person is just getting into photography and has no idea whether or not he will pursue it later one, there's really no sense in spending more overall. heavyweather has already given a reason for the K1000. It's simple to use. If you don't have a lot of features, you'll be forced to play around with the basics and have a better understanding of photography. The "better" K1000 you're referring to is probably the KM.

>>148291
Other than face price, I see none unless of course you consider saying "hey, I have a Zorki" an advantage.
>> Anonymous
>>148305
Depth of field preview isn't exactly an advanced feature, and these old professional bodies are just as simple, full-manual and all as the old consumer bodies. And he'll probably sell it if he doesn't want to.

All the cameras mentioned ITT are common enough and simple enough that people know about them, including these Russian Leica copies. Plenty of people shoot with them. It's not like they're a production run of five ultra-exclusive cameras found in an old German's cupboard after he died that were formed from Oscar Barnack's rib.
>> Anonymous
>>148305
You make some very valid arguements. The only appeal of the Zorki over the K1000 is the visual appeal. Keep in mind it would probably more be used as a showpiece to make me look like something more than a guy who haunts the /x boards all morning long. But, like I said earlier, taking pictures would be important and, like the earlier mentioned guns, I would be irritated if it broke and nobody could fix it. Look up the Mateba revolver for a gun-oriented example of this if you are so inclined and you will get an insight into my mind.
>> Anonymous
Went to two seedy pawn shops today looking for some old timey goodness. Both had cameras which appealed to me. Both looked at me like I was the a-hole for asking if any of them were for sale. You'd think pawn shops would be selling everything that was not nailed down. You'd be wrong: they like to display personal collections as much as anyone. I think eBay is going to be the place of my continued, lazy search.
>> Anonymous
>>148271
the pentax LX isnt exactly cheap, it's about 500 bucks. a k1000 is 50 bucks with a lens on it. the k1000 is better anyways since it forces you to learn about exposure instead of just sticking it on auto and forgetting about it. i like the MX better because its pretty much a smaller, lighter k1000 with DOF preview & a solid state light meter, but the k1000 is still a damn good camera.
>> Anonymous
>>148312
You're probably not going to get a K1000 fixed if it breaks either, at least not once you find out it will cost twice what a new camera would.