My Life In Cameras

My days of camera love began here. Strange isn't it? Of course, being a child of the 60's and 70's, it should be no surprise given the dominance of Kodak in those days. I don't remember where it came from or what the circumstances were surrounding this 126 cartridge loading Instamatic. I just remember it being around the house when I was young. It was heavy. Everything had a weight to it back in those days when most anything even remotely substantial was made of metal. Anyway, I also remember that I never could get it to work right so I took most of my pictures on this.....

I know, I know... these were barely cameras. But hey, it was cheap (mowing lawns didn't pay a lot), and the film was cheap to buy and have processed. Plus it was very small and portable. I mostly went everywhere on my Sears "Free Spirit" 10-Speed, so something that fit in my overly-tight bluejeans pocket was perfect. Only super geeks wore backpacks and no self-respecting teenage boy had a luggage rack, much less a basket on his bike! On a regular basis, I road down to the train depot, took pictures of the passing freight engines and chatted with the station master. Little did I know that it was the last of those days as well. Both station and master are long gone now from little towns in the Texas panhandle like Abernathy. On the way back, I'd swing by the library and pick up some "Rick Brant Electronic Adventures" or "Hardy Boys Mysteries" that I'd already read several times.You know; I still read to books for relaxation.

Real photography came in this form. My dad's Voigtlander Bessamatic Deluxe. I can't imagine a better camera on which to learn photography. It had one lens, a 50mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar. It had a coupled "match-needle" selenium meter visible in the viewfinder. This "deluxe" version had a reflecting mirror system which gave the ability to see the aperture and shutter speed in the finder. The Synchro-Compur leaf shutter allowed flash synchronization at all shutter speeds. For a late 60's and early 70's kid, I was photographically spoiled. I got to use this camera under the supervision of my father on our seemingly annual summer trips into mountains of northern New Mexico and Colorado. For those of you who have been up there in the summer time, you won't be surprised that experience helped me learn to handle rapidly changing lighting conditions. I sometimes tell people that I "cut my photographic teeth" on that camera. Although I had loan of it any time I wanted; of course this wasn't my camera. That would come later.

In a dusty little West Texas town like ours, there were very few kids who grew up handling a SLR (single lens reflex), so I supposed it shouldn't surprise anyone that I landed the post of "Annual Staff Photographer" my Freshman year of high school. The school owned a Mamiya/Sekor 1000DTL, along with the requisite 50mm f/1.8 and 135mm f/2.8 lens, as well as a Yashica Mat 124G twin lens reflex. My 14 year-old self though, turned up his nose at them, and continued to use my dad's Voigtlander instead. If I knew then what I know now, I'd have jumped all over that 1000DTL with it's built-in spot metering. The whole time though, I was pining away for the latest and the greatest from the "land of the rising sun". This was the later part of the 70's and the electronic revolution was sweeping the photographic industry. It had begun almost a decade before with cameras like the Pentax ES, and Nikkormat EL, but after the middle part of the decade when Olympus turned every other company on it's ear with the M-1 (OM-1, Olympus Model 1) with it's compact size and every feature under the sun, the handwriting was on the wall. Everyone needed to get smaller, lighter and more electronic! In April of 1976, Canon took things to the "next level" with the AE-1. Relatively small, light, and electronically advanced, with the ability to take most of the professional grade Canon system. However it's real secret was really the construction technology which jumped to a different level entirely with polycarbonate body components! Canon didn't invent these things. They're just the ones that combined it all together. This completely shifted the SLR market from typically doctors, engineers, scientist and such to include the everyday common man/woman. They invented today's DSLR-toting soccer moms. Although, I was able to talk the school into this camera the following fall, it wasn't my camera either. What I wanted came along in the Spring of '78. The great Canon A-1. Although, it shot film; this camera can be considered the progenitor of today's DSLRs. All electronic, with the now familiar PASM shooting modes, controlled by a control wheel for every function. Yes; you are correct, that the Minolta XD-11 of 1977 came first, but it's functional layout for controls was traditional and it never dominated the top end of what would later become know as the "pro-sumer" market like the Canon. The A-1 was the camera I had to have. After a lot of scraping and scrounging from working part-time jobs and the participation of my brother who was also fascinated by the camera, I bought it during the summer of 1978. I actually shot with it for less than 2 years, it had a major impact on my Psyche. 

Although, the A-1 was the camera that I remember so completely it seems that it was around longer than it really was; it was this camera that changed me as a photographer. The Canon 7s, introduced in 1961! If the A-1 was the "bombshell cheerleader" dream-date that makes everybody stare and drool everywhere you go (make no mistake: when I went anywhere shooting yearbook photos with it, every other yearbook photographer wanted to talk about it!), then this was the girl next door. One the eye-catching (with the blond Farrah Fawcett hair-do), the other the slender brunette with her hair pulled back in a pony-tail and no make-up. It was a little angular, with very few controls, but everything operated smoothly and quietly (almost silently). The summer after I graduated before heading off to college, I worked in the booming metropolis of Lubbock, at a photo studio long since gone called Reeves Photography, as the "black and white" technician. When I wasn't standing in the darkroom over a Dektol tray or prowling the basement full of old equipment, I haunted the camera shops all over town....both of them. One day, as I was hanging around in Plains Camera on 34th St., I spotted it; the Canon 7s in a glass case. It was mounted with the 50mm f/1.2 lens. I think I went back every day for a week to look at that camera. In the end, I cut a deal with my brother, where he help me buy it, and we'd split the cameras up when I went to college in the fall. I kept the 7s and he got the A-1. Shooting with this camera was at once, both work and joy. You had to know the light in your head and set the controls accordingly. When you knew what you were doing, this camera became a part of you. When you didn't, the results weren't very good. Unlike the A-1 with all the automation, there was no safety net. At this point, I might have been the best photographer that I ever was or will be. No, really; I'm just being honest. I've always had a "good eye", but at that point, I hadn't yet over developed my left-brain with the abundance of Masters Degree analytics followed by decades of classroom and administrative work.

Speaking of classroom. I eventually got out of college.... twice. By the late 80's, ensconced in a paying position as a teacher and coach, I was finally in a position take my old hobby back up. In case you haven't heard, photography can be a little expensive! Although I wanted to take up where I left off, it's not as easy as that. A decade before, in the last years of high school, I was as close as I ever would be to professional photography. I was in the darkroom every day, and shot lots of photos, especially model portfolio regularly. After a decade hiatus; it doesn't just all come back. On top of that, I was a teacher, a coach, and a student again, pursuing his Master's Degree..... all at the same time. One of things I learned at that time is that a rangefinder camera, is not something you just kind of pick up randomly and get good results. You have to kind of become "one" with the camera. Besides which, I wasn't shooting much (if any) portraiture and that bit of "softness" from the Canon was unneeded and unwanted for what I was doing. What I needed and wanted was a relatively "up-to-date" system SLR that was quick to use and had some basic metering capability. So I made the decision to sell the Canon 7s, which made me sad (then and now). Around this time, I had found a little camera shop on the outskirts of town that dealt exclusively in used equipment. There was a lot of that in those "Mind of Minolta", and "EOS Rebel" (remember those Agassi commercials?) days. People were dumping older non-auto-focusing/non-automatic exposure cameras right and left! I knew I didn't have the money for the Nikon FM/FM2 that I wanted. Well, actually, I did have the money for the camera and a lens, but not for any other Nikon lenses. After all; what's the point of owning a Nikon if you don't put Nikon glass on it! Small, light camera with a good system and had excellent glass: not surprisingly, it came down to Olympus (OM-1n, OM-2n), or Pentax (MX, ME-Super). I bought an MX in nice condition with a SMC-M 50mm f/1.4 for $140. Later I traded it for an almost identical black-bodied version, then came the ME-Super and eventually about 12 lenses, ranging from 24mm to 200mm, plus various zooms. This went on happily for almost 2 decades.

Then came digital. In an early post, I had talked about my progression beginning with a Kodak DC4800. I'll at least hit the high points here. I was working at the University of Illinois at the time as the Area Coordinator for IT. Under my purview was all items digital, including the cameras. No one was an expert photographer in our department so we used the fairly nice performing Kodak DC cameras of that time to shoot photos of events that we could use in our literature and website. Of course, since I was in charge of them, I had access. I soon found that the only photos I ever did anything with were the ones that were digital. So, I started doing research. I learned the the 3Mp was the break point where you just generally couldn't tell the difference between film and digital. The DSLR market at that time was still over the $2000 per, so that was out. Almost all the other cameras were completely automated and really not suited for a photographer (vs. a snap-shooter). So, I got a DC4800 and shot digital increasingly as my film use decreased over the next several years. My detour into the compact "super-zoom" cameras in the form of the Nikon CoolPix 8800 has been previously covered enough so I won't get into that again other than to say that I did manage to catch my mistake quickly enough to land on my feet and purchase the Nikon D70. Although, I've moved on from that model, it sure fired-off my continued affection for 6 megapixel DSLRs though!

The first 5 or 10 post of this blog details how I went from the 8800 to the D70, then on to this camera, the D200. I probably consider this my first real Nikon. Not that the D70 was deficient in any way. It was just that this magnesium bodied "pro-sumer" camera embodied the sense of what I always felt using a Nikon was all about. That came through in every Nikon I've touched ranging from my friend Eric's mom's "F", to the "FM" that I owned for a while a few years ago. I'll probably always consider this model to be my first "big boy" Nikon. 

Today, I have these to use. The D300 (successor to the D200) and the newly acquired "walk-around" camera, the D40. It's been a long road to get here over these last 45 years or so. It's been an enjoyable hobby, as much for the equipment as the photography. This last Saturday, I met a father who had come with his daughter to buy the "plastic fantastic" D50. I had a good time just sitting with them and watching her hold and try that camera out then nodding to her dad when she had decided that it "was the one". I pegged her at somewhere between 18 and 20. She was excited and her dad was happy that she was happy. I'm just glad that the camera went to somebody that had to scrape and work to get it, just like all those cameras have been a part of my life these last 45 years.

It's tough to be Frugal

It’s rough, but it's gotta be done. These days, I’m in a partially self-imposed austerity program. This is of course partially due to a lack of liquid assets, and partially due to just plain having too much stuff! However, that doesn’t mean I’m not on Craig’s List and eBay. In order to “stay in the game”, even when you aren't buying, you can’t afford to let knowledge about the market to slip. The other important factor is that the key of being frugal, is long-range planning! For me, that planning includes the growth in all three of my hobby areas. Today, I’ll discuss my photography “roadmap”.

I have for some time decided that I’d really like to develop in a several areas of photography. The first being in portraiture. To this end, I’d like to add one or more remotely controllable strobes, as well as the adapters, light stands, and modifiers necessary give me project flexibility. Ideally, that would be at least one more Speedlight which would give me a portable and powerful flash that’s compatible with the Nikon CLS system that I use. This would give me great flexibility in being able to set up multiple light sources in virtually any location at any time. In the same vein, I’d really like to have a relatively short zoom that would make a good balanced match on my D300. When shooting portraiture, I rarely if ever need the 18-200mm “do everything” super-zoom, and I just think that a smaller range lens is a better physical fit on my camera, especially when I’m not using it without the battery grip. Another eventual photographic target would be a “super-wide”, which would be something in the 24mm (35mm equivelant) range, that would give me the ability to set up and shoot interiors. I’ve been interested in lighting and shooting architectural interiors for some time. Maybe I might even be able to turn that into a business opportunity with real estate at some point in the future. Which brings up another item that would probably become a “need” down the road. For my own needs, not having a backup isn’t an issue, but when you are being paid by others for a specific job, non-performance due to equipment failure isn’t really acceptable, which means that there’ll probably need to be a “backup” camera at some point in the future.

This time of budgetary frugality where I’m just planning and not buying anything can be critical in helping me get the equipment that I need/want without make costly mistakes. So let’s look at the areas of future need and what I might want to keep tabs on now.

Lenses: Basically, I need something in the medium, norm-short telephoto range for a primary portraiture lens. Of course the most obvious would be to get into something with a nice wide aperture like f2.8, however after looking into it, I found that you can get more than adequate background blur by using f4 which bring the much more common f3.5 maximum aperture lenses into play. This one change alters the cost landscape by dropping the price by $200 or more. Typically the most flattering focal length used for this type of photography runs in the 75-105mm range which for a DX camera like mine comes out to be 50-70mm after the 1.5x conversion factor. In that case, there are a number of nice old Nikon lenses which are generally pretty inexpensive. In this group there is of course the 28-80mm that Nikon began producing in mass almost as soon as they started making auto-focus film cameras. There are of course others such as the 35-70/35-80mm range as well. These are full-on consumer lens, while-functionally and optically adequate, are often lacking somewhat in build quality, typically having lightweight plastic barrels as well as mounts. That being said, they can often be had for a song…down to the sub-$50 range. One factor for me though, is that I find myself increasingly using the wider focal lengths while shooting portraits and those lenses have ranges that translate to having starting points of 42mm and 52mm converted focal length respectively. Which brings us to the 18-70mm Nikon AF-S. This lens converts to a neat 27-105mm focal length that covers what I’d want to do very well. Plus this lens is considered to be optically very good, a mid-line lens with a metal mount AND was made in relatively large numbers since it was a “kit” lens often included with the D70, D70s and some D200s. This brings the typical price to be somewhere in the palatable $135-150 range. So why not theinexpensive and optically decent 18-55mm? Not much cheaper at around $100, plus hate the “cheap” feel of the build and on top of that, the 18-70mm is thought to be significantly superior on the optical front.

Now the "wide" lens. A long-standing buggaboo for DX cameras due to the smaller than 35mm sensor creates a 1.5x conversion factor often turning a very nice and wide optical formula into something "mid-range"! My widest lens goes down to 18mm (27mm converted) which isn't very wide to start with and at that setting comes with a VERY complex "mustache" shaped distortion as well. What I'd really like to be able to have to shoot indoors or covering large groups is something in the old 24mm range as related to 35mm film cameras. This is fairly wide without introducing a lot of distortion. Nikon makes such a lens, however it sells for a hefty $1000 + or -, used! Luckily, this is an area that all the independent manufacturers out there have had a lot of experience designing in and there are lots of choices. After quite a bit of internet research, I've found that all of the "big three" (Sigma, Tamron & Tokina) have well thought of lenses in this category, and the best balance of optical quality, cost and build is generally acknowledged to be the Tokina 12-24mm/f4. They tend to sell in the $325 to 425 range, but sometimes can be had for slightly less.

Most of the lens research is done and all that really needs to happen is for me to monitor it over time so I can detect trends and be able to differentiate any anomalies. Next on the agenda is the flash. Nikon has 4 flashes that are compatible with their Creative Lighting System (CLS): the current SB-900, SB-700 and the older SB-800, SB-600. They are all great and love the SB-600 that I've had for a couple of years now. Although, I have an old SB-26 with the built-in optical trigger, it's not CLS capable and therefore not directly controllable from the master. And although, the SB-600 has been a revelation, it can't be a "master", nor is it as powerful as the 800/900 strobes. Obviously, since the SB-900 is the newest and biggest, it's also the most expensive. Which leave the SB-800. This is one powerful and flexible flash! If you have any doubts; do yourself a favor, go over to YouTube and watch some of the Joe McNally videos on what can be done with these things. I've found that they routinely sell for $300+, so clearly I'm going to need to find a "deal" or save lots of money!

Which brings us to the last item: the back-up camera. As a back-up, there are certain criteria that it needs to meet. The main one that causes a difficult decision is whether or not you want it to be part your "system". I've decided the answer is YES and in my case, that's Nikon, CLS, and possibly "screw-drive" capability so it can function with the older non-AF-S Nikon lenses (of which I have 2). Of course ideally, a "back-up" should be identical or as much like your primary camera as possible. But obviously, I'm not in a position to buy another D300, or even a D200, nor could I see myself being able to rationalize it in my wildest dreams! This leaves the D70s, D70, D50 and D40. You guys that read this blog on a regular basis already know that I've owned both the D70 and D70s and liked them a lot, so those could be considered no brainers, especially given that they can take the same lenses (screw-drive), flashes (CLS), batteries as well as memory cards as the D300. Unfortunately, there's a downside to them......in that they are virtually identical in size to the D300.....although quite a bit lighter. Of all the candidates, the D40, is by far the smallest, lightest, and the newest (read: most advanced). There are downsides though: that small size and light weight comes at a price, which is the missing screw-drive motor and by extension an inability to focus older lenses. It also takes a different battery as well as SD memory cards instead of the CF cards of the D70/D200/D300. Then there's the D50. Essentially, it's a slightly more modern (but de-featured) D70, which is both smaller and ligthter, but as a consequence, uses the SD memory card as well. On the plus side though, it does have the screw-drive focusing motor and will take the EN-EL3e that the D300 uses. My research has shown that it typically sells in a similar range as the D70 so there's not much to give there. This price point seems to run in the $150 to 200 area so it's a good candidate from a budgetary standpoint.

My reality is that, at the moment, I can't spend much money, but I can plan, plot and watch. So when the time comes, I can pounce!