So, I suppose the answer to Shel's question is "none", with the thread
gone into a reminiscing conversation--as it should be.

I like having a meter in the camera, although I've shot Tri-x on the
shadow side of the street for so long that I don't look at it too much
(1/250, f4.5 to f8 depending on how bright it is). I also dislike AF,
and my ist D is in manual all the time.

I was starting to pack my equipment for London last night, and I
picked up the M6. I do miss that thing, and I think I'll try to finish
the few rolls of Tri-X I still have while in London. Scanning film is
a hassle though...

As for cameras, the M6 and the MX have been my main ones for years.
Also own a ZX5n, which was on a diet of TMZ but that kind of doesn't
make sense now with the istD. I have lots of odd little soviet
cameras, like Feds and Zorkis, Lubitels (2 and 166), some Lomos. Also
a pristine K1000 that doesn't see much use either (but I can't make
myself part with it), and a few 60's Japanese fixed lens rangefinders
(there's a like new Minolta 7s, everything working, that's begging to
have some film run through it). Oh, and a few Kodak Brownies (the
Hawkeye is a beautiful piece of American deco--a nice p&s too)

So, it was kind of a vice a few years back. I'm off of it now, no more
cameras that I won't use...

j


On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:56:45 -0800, Shel Belinkoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was talking with a friend earlier and the conversation got around to
> modern cameras as he's thinking about getting a digi for his daughter.
> There wasn't much i could help him with since I know so little about modern
> cameras, and apart from shooting a few frames with John's istD and a lesser
> number of frames with Juan's istD, and one frame with a Minolta a couple of
> years ago, I've never used or even handled a modern autofocus camera.
> That's probably quite unusual for this list.  That got me to wondering how
> many people here have never used a fully manual camera - no autofocus, no
> modes, no built-in meter.  Anyone?
> 
> Shel
> 
> 


-- 
Juan Buhler
http://www.jbuhler.com
blog at http://www.jbuhler.com/blog

Reply via email to