GAS GAS: Please Share your Latest Desires Big and Small

I found the second gen one pictured above to be much better in the hand then the first one. The addition of the second dial was a must. The EVF was nothing to write home about, and there’s a bit of a hanging pinky going on, but I liked it.
Without wanting to get too deeply into this, I have to second the EVF issue - maybe I shouldn't have tried the A7C R coming directly from a stroll with the Z f, but the EVF is decidely sub-par; visibly worse in fact than the comparable unit in my Z DX bodies ... The rest of the camera, body and working speed, are both truely impressive, even if I freel I'd need to tune down the super-busy display (info galore getting in the way of framing) and generally work out settings to make things work for me. But yes, technologically, it's a little marvel. That said, for the price you pay, I'd personally pick a different camera, but that's down to taste and preference. At the size, nothing comes close - but that also needs to be top priority to make up for the compromises. Just my opinion, of course.

M.
 
Without wanting to get too deeply into this, I have to second the EVF issue - maybe I shouldn't have tried the A7C R coming directly from a stroll with the Z f, but the EVF is decidely sub-par; visibly worse in fact than the comparable unit in my Z DX bodies ... The rest of the camera, body and working speed, are both truely impressive, even if I freel I'd need to tune down the super-busy display (info galore getting in the way of framing) and generally work out settings to make things work for me. But yes, technologically, it's a little marvel. That said, for the price you pay, I'd personally pick a different camera, but that's down to taste and preference. At the size, nothing comes close - but that also needs to be top priority to make up for the compromises. Just my opinion, of course.

M.
Ignoring issues of fitting a nice EVF into a compact body, It does seem that the camera companies have settled in on being really stingy with the quality of the EVF. This especially annoying since I bet most of their customer demographics are on the older side. I have two bodies with 3.69 megadots and I really don't want to go back to anything with 2.36.
 
Soo, a friend from the gym wanted to hang one of my recent film photos on his wall. And he wanted it as a "real" photographic print, not some inkjet print. And he has a darkroom.

"Sure, I'll lend you the negative," I said. "No way, you'll need to print it yourself," he said. So he sat me next to his enlarger, gave me some pointers, and in a few moments I had produced a test strip, and a test print, and a final print, and that was FUN! Smelly, but fun!

So he got his print, and I got the itch, and now I want a darkroom of my own, with the enlargers and the safelights and the developing trays... :D

2023-12-10_1718_PC101572.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I really should resist this urge. After all, I can make nice inkjet prints for myself if I need to hang something on my walls. Which never happens. And the inkjet prints look just as good as the "real" prints, if not better. And they don't smell like the chemicals do. Right? Right?
 
Last edited:
Soo, a friend from the gym wanted to hang one of my recent film photos on his wall. And he wanted it as a "real" photographic print, not some inkjet print. And he has a darkroom.

"Sure, I'll lend you the negative," I said. "No way, you'll need to print it yourself," he said. So he sat me next to his enlarger, gave me some pointers, and in a few moments I had produced a test strip, and a test print, and a final print, and that was FUN! Smelly, but fun!

So he got his print, and I got the itch, and now I want a darkroom of my own, with the enlargers and the safelights and the developing trays... :D

View attachment 434589
I really should resist this urge. After all, I can make nice inkjet prints for myself if I need to hang something on my walls. Which never happens. And the inkjet prints look just as good as the "real" prints, if not better. And they don't smell like the chemicals do. Right? Right?
No, they don't. Look as good, that is. And the wonderful smells are an essential part of the whole experience.
 
Soo, a friend from the gym wanted to hang one of my recent film photos on his wall. And he wanted it as a "real" photographic print, not some inkjet print. And he has a darkroom.

"Sure, I'll lend you the negative," I said. "No way, you'll need to print it yourself," he said. So he sat me next to his enlarger, gave me some pointers, and in a few moments I had produced a test strip, and a test print, and a final print, and that was FUN! Smelly, but fun!

So he got his print, and I got the itch, and now I want a darkroom of my own, with the enlargers and the safelights and the developing trays... :D

View attachment 434589
I really should resist this urge. After all, I can make nice inkjet prints for myself if I need to hang something on my walls. Which never happens. And the inkjet prints look just as good as the "real" prints, if not better. And they don't smell like the chemicals do. Right? Right?
You're doomed, dude. I had a darkroom when I was younger, and you can spend hours making three prints. Maybe one print. It is an incredibly satisfying pastime.
 
Well, I once took a whiff out of a bottle of concentrated sulfuric toner. Didn't make that mistake twice. Instead learned not to breathe while diluting that stuff.

I'm starting to miss the feel of cranking the Bronica ETRS again. No matter how much measurably better today's digital sensors are compared to even those smaller medium format film options, there's no denying the experience has nowhere near the zen of a bronica ETRS with a waist level viewfinder and a hand crank. No quick grip, no prism. Handheld meter.

And if I keep gushing about it any more, things will get 'spensive very soon.
 
Lately I’ve been doing more B&W photos, even trying monochrome Fuji film sims. The danger of this is that I might be able to justify a monochrome sensor camera to myself. The only one I really could afford would be the Pentax Kiii, which, as a former Pentax user, would be tempting. I’m hoping for used bodies, but not that hopeful.
 
Last edited:
Been using my Rolleicord III a lot more again lately. Thinking about getting some Bay 1 filters and a hood for it. There's some good 3D printed hoods now much cheaper than the old metal ones.

Might get a shoulder strap for it so I can carry it without the Rollei case I have for it - the case is nice, but I don't want to be taking off the hood and putting it back on all the time.
 
Been using my Rolleicord III a lot more again lately. Thinking about getting some Bay 1 filters and a hood for it. There's some good 3D printed hoods now much cheaper than the old metal ones.

Might get a shoulder strap for it so I can carry it without the Rollei case I have for it - the case is nice, but I don't want to be taking off the hood and putting it back on all the time.
William, if the case is anything like the one on my Rolleiflex 2.8f, you can just disconnect it at the bottom, and leave it at home ... :) .
 
Kirk Tuck, the brilliant Austin-based photographer whose intelligent and eclectic blog is one of the more entertaining ones I read regularly, posted the following vitally useful formula today on his Instagram account, which finally clarifies, after years of confusion, what camera G.A.S. is really all about. According to Mr. Tuck:

"The optimum number of cameras = N + 1 with N = the number of cameras you currently have."

So simple, really.
And so true.
 
Kirk Tuck, the brilliant Austin-based photographer whose intelligent and eclectic blog is one of the more entertaining ones I read regularly, posted the following vitally useful formula today on his Instagram account, which finally clarifies, after years of confusion, what camera G.A.S. is really all about. According to Mr. Tuck:

"The optimum number of cameras = N + 1 with N = the number of cameras you currently have."

So simple, really.
And so true.
I've heard N + 1 invoked in bicycle shops and musical instrument forums, as well. Gear lust is almost as universal as breathing.
 
I haven't bought anything photographic since my 8-25, quite a while ago now.

After getting back from our holiday in points North, I think that maybe I should spend some time on keywording my many thousands of images.
Made a start on this project last week. So far, have keyworded all the images I took, nearly 2,000 RAW+JPEG pairs with basic information, i.e. which part of the trip they were taken.

My "new" PC does that pretty fast.

My wife took about half that number.

However, I need to put another 8 GB RAM in her PC (total of 16 GB), then install my other licence for Adobe CC on it, as it doesn't recognise the E-M1 MkI RAW files.

Maybe see if I can resurrect another SSD I have on hand for her primary image storage, with automatic backup to one of the HDDs in her PC.
 
I've heard N + 1 invoked in bicycle shops and musical instrument forums, as well. Gear lust is almost as universal as breathing.
It's probably also a personality thing. I cannot get into something in earnest and not want to explore it extensively; computers (laptops!), bikes, saxophones, tin whistles, ukuleles, and, of course, camera gear: I always end up with multitudes. That said, what happened with saxophones and tin whistles was interesting: There was a point when I obviously felt I had (at least) what I wanted and needed, and it has since stayed pretty much that way (in fact, I'm considering selling some instruments in due course - but it'll be somewhat tough to decide which ones). I actually may be there with film gear at the moment, but I'm not sure yet.

Though to be honest, technology is way more enticing than it ought to be for me - there are so many (new) things to explore, it probably never ends. But after the arrival of the Nikon Z system, things have slowed down considerably, have become kind of focused (no pun intended). The mount that spells trouble is the M mount, however - I could go on and on acquiring stuff lenses. But I actually haven't, in a little while. But there are still some things I crave, mostly small primes (a hypothetical Z 35mm f/1.7 DX and the improbable Z 45mm f/2.8 FX pancake, but also the Voigtländer Ultron 27mm f/2 for Z mount - come on Cosina, you know you want it too ...). In the meantime, there are the nicely done ArtraLab lenses ... I'm waiting for more coverage on those before committing, though.

M.
 
Soo, a friend from the gym wanted to hang one of my recent film photos on his wall. And he wanted it as a "real" photographic print, not some inkjet print. And he has a darkroom.

"Sure, I'll lend you the negative," I said. "No way, you'll need to print it yourself," he said. So he sat me next to his enlarger, gave me some pointers, and in a few moments I had produced a test strip, and a test print, and a final print, and that was FUN! Smelly, but fun!

So he got his print, and I got the itch, and now I want a darkroom of my own, with the enlargers and the safelights and the developing trays... :D

View attachment 434589
I really should resist this urge. After all, I can make nice inkjet prints for myself if I need to hang something on my walls. Which never happens. And the inkjet prints look just as good as the "real" prints, if not better. And they don't smell like the chemicals do. Right? Right?
I have one at home. I used it sporadically in the past and it was my main hobby during covid but I have been using it less and less over the years. This year I didn't use it at all and only a few times last year.
While it is a good fun, I find printing to be the most difficult of the photographic arts - it has a long learning curve.

I might go back to it next year, part of new years resolutions.
IMG_20231221_065143_(850_x_603_pixel).jpg


IMG_20180721_153613.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Back
Top