I took a physics class in college and several of the classes covered
"light". Several years before getting my first decent
camera, a Canon TX, followed by an AE-1, A-1, EOS 659, EOS 630 and
finally the leap to digital, I knew all about hows and whys on the
filtering of light and exposure.
I sort'a feel sorry for those that never had manual focus or manual
I agree. My first decent camera was a fully manual Yashika TL-Electro
X. If you wanted to double expose a frame in that camera, you had to
actually (try to...) rewind the film after cocking the aperture for the
second shot. But - that was an early '70's camera and lacked any of the
modern conveniences. You had to learn about taking pictures to get
anything more than snapshot quality out of it. That's why we read books
by people like Ansel Adams...
The Canon TX, AE-1, and IIRC A-1 had a button on the bottom of the
camera to release the advance lever so that it would not advance the
film and that release allowed the crank to rewind the film into the
The advance lever also set the shutter for the next shot. Double,
triple exposure etc was simple.
Today I use Fugi brand cameras with non removable lenses. I really
really miss the fast lenses, fast compared to today's standards. DOF
really comes into it's own when you have the aperture wide open and your
are shooting closer to you vs. focused closer to infinity.
I am however considering going back to a Canon DSLR, probably one of
the Rebels. I still have my old EOS 630 and IIRC my old lenses will
work on the new EOS DSLR's.
I resemble this!
I have (still) an A-1, Built like a tank, made with RTL (resistor
transistor logic), precursor to TTL (transistor-transistor logic).
I "upgraded" to a digital Rebel with the same idea of using my old
lenses as a bonus, that doesn't work. If I recall correctly, the old
mounts have some doo-wah-jabber that interferes.
I have been buying lenses for my Rebel that are for full frame sensors
so I can still use them when I upgrade to a more professional body.
Yes - I sure did. Started at it when I was stationed in Okinawa, and
spend many hours in a blacked out bathroom. It was fascinating turning
out some really cool pictures - generally somewhat tweaked. Used to
have a supply of paper free from a buddy that worked in the photo lab,
so I got to play and experiment to my heart's desire.
Ditto. Many/most have no idea what they are doing or how to do it again.
I messed with cameras for more than 50 years, from sub-niniature to 11 x 14.
When I retired, I kept three...a Canon A-1 with a few lenses and two
Rolleiflexes. The Rolleis aren't very versatile but they were far and away
my favorites although they got little use after the early 60s.
Now, I use a Fuji "bridge" camera, spend an inordinate amount of time trying
to remember how to access what I want in the menus. Easier in the old
days...SAFE (shutter, aperture focus, expose),
My current is a Fugi F100FS whick looks a lot like a typical 35mm SLR.
Lens goes, 35mm equivalent, 28-400mm optically and will double that
digitally. I don't digitally zoom for any other reason than to see
something closer, never for actual printing. ;~)
Unfortunately its fastest F-Stop is 2.8, not really slow but I had 1.8
years ago and that was significantly faster. and that might explain why
most digital cameras don't go below 100 on film speed. I remember when
ASA 160 was HOT! LOL I mostly used 64 or 120 and occasionally 25.
And you are right about the menu's. I can never remember how to view a
picture and zoom or crop it and save on the camera.
My first "real" camera was a Rollei. Using a light meter you set the
exposure value and the aperture and speed rings locked together.
Loved that feature--if you needed a fast exposure the aperture was
automatically right for that speed.
I had a Canon FTb when I was in college. I put around 20-36exp rolls
of Tri-X and perhaps 10 x 20exp rolls of infrared B&W though it a
week. After I graduated, some moron swiped it (and everything else of
value in our apartment). I replaced it with a AE-1 that I absolutely
hated. Too automatic and too difficult to use manually (no match
needle but that was only the obvious loss).
In later years I bought a bunch of very nice black-body FTbs and
lenses that cost more than my annual salary, at the time. Of course I
generally use my cell phone as a camera now. ;-)
Red Oak has more tannin and decays faster. Large pore and such.
It has reddish color and 'bleads' if cut when sap is running.
I just had a dozen logs sawed in the back yard. I had a massive 35" to
30" log that yielded a stack of 4x4's.
It was funny watching sometimes - he used a medium size tractor trying
to pick up 22' log like that and it was to heavy. It drove the tractor
into the ground with the weight. It was cut to 11 feet and he could
just make it.
Not sure on what he was trying to say.
Red is red when dripping sap. White like winter wood or dried.
I'd look at leaves and bark and cells to call an oak an oak. They morph
easily between each other.
On 1/13/2016 4:33 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.