PDA

View Full Version : You have $3000, what would you buy?


Pages : [1] 2

raid
01-05-2018, 08:48
I don't have the $3000 yet. Maybe never :cool:

The new CL is not a full frame camera. However, it is brand new, and it may have some advantages over older digital cameras.
A M9 with new sensor may be an attractive alternative if you don't need high ISO performance.
The M8 is great overall, but it has a 33% crop and is aging (gracefully).
The Q requires taste for the 28mm view, It is one lens that cannot change or add to. Saves money?

Another source for burning $3000 may be a Hologon 16/8 lens or a Hasselblad SWC camera?
Of course, the other alternative is to keep the $3000 safe in the bank!

Ko.Fe.
01-05-2018, 09:07
If 3K$ is available, I would get M-E new sensor, sell it, add little more and get NiB M-D.
I like to have film M and digital M to look the same and operate the same.

Or add little more and get used M240. To have two film M, two digital M and two M lenses :D.

Or just get 28 Cron...

Personally, I have zero 3K$ taste for any other cameras, lenses, manufactures. They are amazing one grand or less cameras, lenses. :)

narsuitus
01-05-2018, 09:08
If I had not just purchased an M10, I would have used the money as a partial payment for it.

raid
01-05-2018, 09:19
Who accepts partial payment towards the M10?
I guess, the $3k could be the start of a savings campaign!

splitimageview
01-05-2018, 09:54
doubt you can get a Q for $3k.

nukecoke
01-05-2018, 09:57
Might be a Bessa R3A. Or just a better film scanner.

Huss
01-05-2018, 09:57
After the new CL locked up twice on me while testing it at the Leica store, and having the sales rep saying 'must have been something you did', it reminded me why I will never buy another new digital Leica.

brobbins
01-05-2018, 10:04
I think you can get an M240 for around that amount.

f16sunshine
01-05-2018, 10:06
I would put a down payment on some travel :)

If it has to be Photo-gear, The Contax 645 system has been calling again.
$3000 would make it time to pick up the phone!

bigeye
01-05-2018, 10:21
I tried the new CL for a morning and liked it very much. It's a tidy design that "just works."

You'll need another $1800 for the 23mm, which is the lens I'd pair with it.

The 11-23mm TL floats my boat, too, but I'd start with the small 23mm. I'm not that fond of carrying small cameras with larger lenses.

I bought a used X-E2 to fill this space last month. I still sorting it out - it's fiddly to operate and its images are erratic, ranging from awful-to-excellent, being quite demanding to fix in post. It has not been that satisfying, but it is 6x cheaper used than a new CL kit.

A modern IIIc/50 Elmar equivalent travel camera remains my nirvana. A 'full frame" that is still smaller and fits the hand better than these croppers. But, the CL is, finally, close.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4690/24653554417_4426b24c7d_k.jpg

JChrome
01-05-2018, 10:23
Instead of the Hassy SWC, go with a Rollei 6008 and Schneider 40mm F3.5. But I thought you already had the SWC (unless you’ve mentioned elsewhere you sold it).

If memory serves you live in a good state for firearms. I'll undoubtedly get flack for this but you could get a Weatherby Accumark Mk V rifle chambered in 257 Magnum (or 6.5-300) and have a 1000 yard capable rifle for hunting. Optics will cost you extra but you could do the whole package around $3K.

As far as camera analogies go, I'd say that rifle is like a Hasselblad 500 CX with a Zeiss 110mm F2. A sweet shooter.

zuiko85
01-05-2018, 10:27
None of the above?
But, that said, If I had to spend it on equipment then probably some nice used 4X5 field camera and some film.

Steve Bellayr
01-05-2018, 10:31
I looked at both the CL & Q. I thought long and hard and came to the conclusion that neither met my needs or desires. Since I already have Leica M lenses the only reasonable conclusion to go from a Leica M6 to a digital Leica would be the Leica M10. However, the 7k is a major drawback.

bayernfan
01-05-2018, 10:45
if it's gotta be digital, then an M240 with a warranty.

if it's anything: a Leica M2/3/4 + Summicron lens, and a Rolleiflex

Daryl J.
01-05-2018, 10:46
M4-P
28mm Elmarit ASPH V.1
100' roll of Eastman 5222
Walking shoes.
Cheese

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 10:56
I'd like some piece of mind, how much do I have left after that?

;)

Deardorff38
01-05-2018, 11:39
$3000 USD? 1/3 for more paper, darkroom chems & film, the remainder for travel

Emile de Leon
01-05-2018, 11:39
Only buy what you absolutely need to perform a specific task or function..or just get what you want...for fun in the sun..
3K..is enough to get you something..but not enough to change the playing field..like a Thambar or some thing like that..

bigeye
01-05-2018, 11:48
I suggest lensrentals, the methadone treatment for GAS.

f16sunshine
01-05-2018, 11:51
With all your Lenses Raid, Why not buy a full frame universal Back?

The M240 with evf would probably be your best bet as it can pull duty as a Rangefinder as well.
It's your best move.
The CL is cute but it's aps and still new and overpriced.
You could buy a CPO m240 from Leica store or Popflash(?) if a warranty is important.

Speaking for myself, If I could have the M240 and VF, It would eliminate the need for nearly all the other digital cameras in my set... Simplicity is worth $3000 :D



I'm thinking of all your Sonnars and also the Rollei 1.4/85 and 1.4/35 lenses.
You've used them on m4/3. Using them on Full frame would change the way one thinks of these lenses.
Full frame Mirrorless is a real "Game Changer".

oftheherd
01-05-2018, 12:01
Me personally, I already have cameras I don't get to use. I just haven't been able to get out and take photos lately. And if I did, it would eat into the time I have to develop film, which is already zero. I have no idea what I would use it for. Maybe a trip for the wife and I. Then I could take some more photos I wouldn't have time to develop, much less print. :D :D :D

EDIT: I didn't check any boxes since I don't need anything and don't really want anything Leica. Just not for me.

But WOW WOW WOW, Raid. Over on the MF subforum, I found you this: https://www.ebay.com/itm/HUGE-LINHOF-SUPER-TECHNIKA-70-KIT-W-6-LENSES-53MM-BIOGON-5-BACKS-MORE-/332431301396?rmvSB=true which obviously is a must have for you. :p

BillBingham2
01-05-2018, 12:11
I'd invest half in the DOW, one quarter in a very aggressive investment, and keep the other quarter to buy a XE-3.

Once your investments grow to the point and Leica comes out with a CL 3 (full frame) buy it.

B2 (;->

raid
01-05-2018, 12:15
doubt you can get a Q for $3k.

A well used Q maybe?

raid
01-05-2018, 12:16
Raid, how about a Holga? You'll have $2960.01 left over. And in your part of the world the light will be perfect for it.

John

AHolga fits under "another model". :D

raid
01-05-2018, 12:19
I'm thinking of all your Sonnars and also the Rollei 1.4/85 and 1.4/35 lenses.
You've used them on m4/3. Using them on Full frame would change the way one thinks of these lenses.
Full frame Mirrorless is a real "Game Changer".

Food for thought! I would love to be able to use my old (excellent) lenses on a full frame digital camera for sure.

raid
01-05-2018, 12:22
Instead of the Hassy SWC, go with a Rollei 6008 and Schneider 40mm F3.5. But I thought you already had the SWC (unless you’ve mentioned elsewhere you sold it).

If memory serves you live in a good state for firearms. I'll undoubtedly get flack for this but you could get a Weatherby Accumark Mk V rifle chambered in 257 Magnum (or 6.5-300) and have a 1000 yard capable rifle for hunting. Optics will cost you extra but you could do the whole package around $3K.

As far as camera analogies go, I'd say that rifle is like a Hasselblad 500 CX with a Zeiss 110mm F2. A sweet shooter.

I still have and use my SWC. I was thinking of using two SWC together :D:cool::angel:

Axel
01-05-2018, 12:27
AHolga fits under "another model". :D
Holgas seem to make the race - 87.88% :D

With your lens collection I would buy a Sony A7x Body.

steveyork
01-05-2018, 12:52
I'd buy more film. Then maybe some underpriced film gear. Then buy more film. Some developer. More film.

x-ray
01-05-2018, 12:58
I'd buy another $3000 worth of Visa or Master Card stock and make money off you guys running up your credit cards buying cameras. ;~)

aizan
01-05-2018, 13:12
what are your current needs?

raid
01-05-2018, 13:20
what are your current needs?

Who said anything about "needs" ?

This is RFF after all. GAS rules. :D

michaelwj
01-05-2018, 13:25
An M-A, just for fun (somehow I feel like I will eventually end up with one). Or a 35mm Cron. Or a bucket of film.

mynikonf2
01-05-2018, 13:27
Someone just put a M240 in the classified for $2700... not associated with this sale but it has ignited a small flame of GAS under me. Kinda wish I had not looked at it...

raid
01-05-2018, 13:35
Someone just put a M240 in the classified for $2700... not associated with this sale but it has ignited a small flame of GAS under me. Kinda wish I had not looked at it...

I have $2000 ready to be spent and not $3000. I would otherwise consider maybe a M240. In these times, $2000 don't get you much. Years ago, if I had $1000, I could have a shopping spree for equipment.

Ko.Fe.
01-05-2018, 13:58
I have $2000 ready to be spent and not $3000. I would otherwise consider maybe a M240...

Sell M8 and make it 3000 for M240.

raid
01-05-2018, 13:58
I have had this thought! Or sell my 75/1.4 Lux.

aizan
01-05-2018, 14:00
ah, in that case, i would get all sorts of things.

really right stuff or gitzo tripods
a linhof technika or technikardan
8x10 view camera
hasselblad x-pan/fuji tx
fuji gf670 or mamiya 7ii
nikon f, lnib
make a frankenleica
olympus pen w
densitometer
pricey photobooks!
an alpa 6x9
deluxe camera bags and straps
esoteric lenses
linhof technorama or fuji gx617
g-technology array
photoshop, digital printing, archiving courses

Ko.Fe.
01-05-2018, 14:02
Raid, I made it correct for you. :D

I have had this thought! And sell my 75/1.4 Lux.

raid
01-05-2018, 14:03
ah, in that case, i would get all sorts of things.

really right stuff or gitzo tripods
a linhof technika or technikardan
8x10 view camera
hasselblad x-pan/fuji tx
fuji gf670 or mamiya 7ii
nikon f, lnib
make a frankenleica
olympus pen w
densitometer
pricey photobooks!
an alpa 6x9
deluxe camera bags and straps
esoteric lenses
linhof technorama or fuji gx617
g-technology array
photoshop, digital printing, archiving courses

All of this for $3000? :angel:

raid
01-05-2018, 14:04
Raid, I made it correct for you. :D

Yes, you are right here. I should sell both.

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 14:05
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/355/31455392253_94810e225c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/PVB7ec)
One kit to rule them all (https://flic.kr/p/PVB7ec) by Johan Niels Kuiper (https://www.flickr.com/photos/johannielscom/), on Flickr


ºSony A7
ºTamron Adaptall 17mm 3.5 (type 51B)
ºCanon TS 35mm 2.8 S.S.C.
ºCanon FD 50mm 1.2L
ºCanon FD 85mm 1.2L
ºCanon FD 135mm 2.0

I'll take USD 3000 for it, Raid... ;)

raid
01-05-2018, 14:07
Do all lenses fit the A7 with RF?
This is useful and very good stuff.
I have these:

ºCanon TS 35mm 2.8 S.S.C.
ºCanon FD 50mm 1.2L
ºCanon FD 85mm 1.2L

... and many more :)

madNbad
01-05-2018, 14:12
Help out the Head Bartender and get a couple Voigtlander lenses that are on sale ‘till midnight PST.

Ronald M
01-05-2018, 14:13
If all I had was 3000, a camera would be the last thing.

If 3000 is budget for a camera, buy something else as Leica is a money pit I can confirm. You assume you are buying something of long term value and can be repaired. Not the case.

Nikon D750 and 50 1.8 for 2000 is what you should get. I own Leica and Nikon.

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 14:16
With a single Canon FD adapter they all go on the Sony A7, A7R etc. series of cameras. As well as the A9.

And all Leitz lenses go on the camera too, with a different adapter. Except for the widest, but I find my Tamron 17mm would be hard to beat anyway and it wasn't even that expensive!

I don't even own any AF lenses for the Sony, I like manual shooting most anyway and don't shoot stuff that requires fast AF.
The camera is set up in such a way that I can control all essential setting with the buttons and dials. The only thing I need the menu for is to format the card every now and then.
I'll happily share my settings with you, Raid.

raid
01-05-2018, 14:30
The Sony A7 can be found for under $1000. If such a full frame camera is excellent overall, why isn't everybody getting one in place of a digital Leica that costs much more money?

f16sunshine
01-05-2018, 14:37
The Sony A7 can be found for under $1000. If such a full frame camera is excellent overall, why isn't everybody getting one in place of a digital Leica that costs much more money?

I did.
It's great. Performance for the range of lenses I use is great. Some with wide M lenses will have issues in corners.
The thing about the Sony is .... it's not a Rangefinder.
You said $3000. That says M240 to me not A7 :D

Axel
01-05-2018, 14:54
Raid - didn´t you consider to grow up your MFT-System with a new body recently?

Have a look... (http://camerasize.com/compare/#698,724)

:D

raid
01-05-2018, 15:09
Yes, I was/am thinking of the slick looking Olympus Pen-F. A Leica would be better for me though.

raid
01-05-2018, 15:11
I did.
It's great. Performance for the range of lenses I use is great. Some with wide M lenses will have issues in corners.
The thing about the Sony is .... it's not a Rangefinder.
You said $3000. That says M240 to me not A7 :D

I said $3000, but I also said that I do not yet have $3000. :bang:

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 15:21
The Sony A7 can be found for under $1000. If such a full frame camera is excellent overall, why isn't everybody getting one in place of a digital Leica that costs much more money?

Because the Leica gets you bragging rights and snobbery, and Sony gets you comments like this:

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xm8AAOSwIJlaLyAf/s-l300.jpg


:D :D :D


But the Sony also gets you images like this:

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/643/32118535945_a6df4d1999_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/QWcTK8)
Portrait of Belle (https://flic.kr/p/QWcTK8) by Johan Niels Kuiper (https://www.flickr.com/photos/johannielscom/), on Flickr

Sony A7 and Canon FD 85mm 1.2L. First shot I ever took with the combo.



And I'll happily take the silly comments if I can get pictures like this from it! :D

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 15:22
Oh and don't just take my word for it Raid, ask fellow RFF'er Michael Markey too, who bought an A7S for his Leica and Pentax glass...

raid
01-05-2018, 15:40
I did.
It's great. Performance for the range of lenses I use is great. Some with wide M lenses will have issues in corners.
The thing about the Sony is .... it's not a Rangefinder.
You said $3000. That says M240 to me not A7 :D

I said $3000, but I also said that I do not yet have $3000. :bang:

raid
01-05-2018, 15:41
Oh and don't just take my word for it Raid, ask fellow RFF'er Michael Markey too, who bought an A7S for his Leica and Pentax glass...

Other than losing RF focusing, is there any other loss (plus corners for wide angle lenses getting smeared results)?

f16sunshine
01-05-2018, 15:53
The A7ii versions offer Image stabilization and also the ability to use an Autofocus adapter for manual lenses.
The "techart adapter" allows one to adapt there M mount and other lenses to the camera and make use of the Sony AF system.
Read about it .... very cool stuff and useful for photographers.

I bought the basic A7 at a good price second hand.
Since that time, the A7ii and now descendants have come onto the market.
For around $1000 you can get a new A7ii and all that it offers.

Corners??.... there are solutions.
The least invasive solution is to buy wide lenses that work well on the Sony bodies. There are plenty.

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 15:55
Other than losing RF focusing, is there any other loss (plus corners for wide angle lenses getting smeared results)?

Not to my knowledge, Raid.

And using the wide angles from the SLR era on these cameras is no issue at all, just steer away from anything wider than 35mm in RF lenses to totally avoid darker corners etc. Personally, I like darker corners on a wide angle shot, it centers the eye...

This is the Tamron 17mm 3.5 on the Sony A7:

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8020/29275879716_3f518da3fa_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/LB1x5Q)
Schlachtensee (https://flic.kr/p/LB1x5Q) by Johan Niels Kuiper (https://www.flickr.com/photos/johannielscom/), on Flickr

Contrast and tonal range are very good too, this contains anything from almost black to completely white and the camera can render it all in the single shot. It just shows aberrations in the top left corner but I guess any other camera would have done so too, that's a pretty tricky spot with the bright backlighting through the branches...

Mind you this is the 'original' A7, I suppose the later incarnations of the series even improved on this...

Mackinaw
01-05-2018, 15:59
.....The thing about the Sony is .... it's not a Rangefinder. You said $3000. That says M240 to me not A7 :D

I agree with Andy. Something about a rangefinder that just makes things right (which is why I own an M240).

But if I had $3,000 to spend, I'm not sure what I do. Maybe buy an 178mm F2.5 Aero-Ektar for my 4X5. Talk about a lens with a unique signature.

Jim B.

raid
01-05-2018, 15:59
I don't see dark corners from the Tamron 17mm lens. Is it only RF wide angle lenses that mess up the corners?

raid
01-05-2018, 16:01
I wonder if Leica sells me their loaner M240?
The A7 option is also appealing to me. Such a camera would complement my M8 and M9. I could use the wide angle lenses on the M9.

johannielscom
01-05-2018, 16:04
I don't see dark corners from the Tamron 17mm lens. Is it only RF wide angle lenses that mess up the corners?

Correct indeed Raid.

SLR lenses are fine on these cameras and they still are a compact kit! I travelled Berlin with only the 50mm 1.2L (with the aperture stuck wide open, repaired since) and the Tamron Adaptall 17mm 3.5 and these are some of the shots I got:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/johannielscom/albums/72157673118044185

The portrait of me was shot by my best buddy Lem. I was in holiday mode, obviously... ;)

raid
01-05-2018, 16:09
I like using the Canon FD 17/4 and I could then use the 35/2,8TS and the 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L. Is there an adapter for Rollei QBM lenses?

ptpdprinter
01-05-2018, 16:12
Does anybody here actually need another camera or lens? How about a workshop or a trip some place you have never been before?

raid
01-05-2018, 16:30
What is the advantage of using A7iii compared with past SONY models?

Huss
01-05-2018, 16:30
I have had this thought! Or sell my 75/1.4 Lux.

Do not sell that lens! Get an EVF camera to use it on. Sony A7rii are under 3K new now, under $2K used. With that type of camera you can also adapt pretty much any lens.

raid
01-05-2018, 16:32
The lens is difficult to focus, but with the right camera it is a useful lens.

lynnb
01-05-2018, 16:38
Raid, do you have the Nikkor 3.5cm f/1.8 LTM? That will take care of $2000. Then a used A7x.

f16sunshine
01-05-2018, 16:38
The lens is difficult to focus, but with the right camera it is a useful lens.

With the a7 it would become easier to focus.
Nearly Everything becomes more accurate with an evf camera.
Zoom in with 11x magnification and focus in the evf or lcd if you’re in my boat with vision issues.
I’m with Huss. Don’t sell your Summilux75 if you are even considering an a7.

raid
01-05-2018, 16:50
The budget will be the decisive factor in the end.
Leica cameras are expensive.

x-ray
01-05-2018, 16:57
Does anybody here actually need another camera or lens? How about a workshop or a trip some place you have never been before?

I was thinking a workshop would be a really good investment for you Raid. The knowledge you gain will last the rest of your life where as a camera is just another gadget that you'll get bored with and trade. When you mentioned getting a second SWC it was clear you've got everything and just looking to burn money. It's your money but I'd put it into something that would improve my photography like a workshop.

raid
01-05-2018, 17:01
It has been over 20 years since the last workshop I have taken. It is a hobby for me, and I don't aim at making sales.

Emile de Leon
01-05-2018, 17:06
OK..I got it..A7 for 8 bills..and a WATE..used for 3K or so..I have this combo..and luv it..
Or..A7S..for 2K ..and see in the dark..or the A7Sii..for 2.4K..and go up to 400,000 iso..
Which is probably my next step..as I'm always runnin out of light..
Or..a Rolex..which feels great on the wrist..and will get used a lot more than my cams ever will..

Axel
01-05-2018, 17:08
What is the advantage of using A7iii compared with past SONY models?
Nothing in details I mean.
It´s a combination of a small body, a full frame sensor and a good EVF.
Plus some additional advantages in details. And the price for it.

What makes a good picture and what is responsible for what?
The body is relatively easy in this regard. Reliable functions (...), a good shape and a high resolution sensor that performs also at high sensitives.

The really new and outstanding feature of this combination is the small
flange focal length of the Sony E-Mount. This allows the use of nearly every lens ever produced without optical limitation.
Call it Sony, call it A7 - you get a body that takes your M-Lens with its real focal length like all other lenses.
An 1,8/50mm stays what it is constructed for - whatever bells and whistles will tell you different.
And you will find the advantages of your favorite lenses in your picture 1:1.

raid
01-05-2018, 17:15
You have a point, Axel. I admit it,

x-ray
01-05-2018, 17:21
It has been over 20 years since the last workshop I have taken. It is a hobby for me, and I don't aim at making sales.

It's got nothing to do with sales. It's all to do with improving ones skillls. Wouldn't you like to produce better work or are you satisfied? Even if I didn't make a living with my photography I'd still want to produce the best images I can.

TR3B
01-05-2018, 17:25
Raid:
Sell the M9 with new sensor- you'll never get more.
Buy Sony A7II-$1000 - Mint
You now have a great full frame sensor camera with a swivel finder that you can rely on and perfect B/W rangefinder camera for that experience. You'll never regret it.
Need wide on the Sony? Voigtlander 21mm f/1.8 works well and as a very useful 28mm on the M8. Adapted, all lens mount up to the A7II.
You've spent the wad, but you're not 3K down either.
Save the coin and take a vacation.
Shoot! Shoot Shoot!

P.S. Regarding Leica, I put a second M8 away with 500 clicks, just in case she breaks.

raid
01-05-2018, 17:26
It's got nothing to do with sales. It's all to do with improving ones skillls. Wouldn't you like to produce better work or are you satisfied? Even if I didn't make a living with my photography I'd still want to produce the best images I can.

Give me an example for a suitable workshop.

raid
01-05-2018, 17:28
Raid, do you have the Nikkor 3.5cm f/1.8 LTM? That will take care of $2000. Then a used A7x.

It is a lens that I use very rarely, Lynn. I prefer the Summicron 35mm.

Axel
01-05-2018, 17:36
You have a point, Axel. I admit it,

Just thoughts raid. If we agree in buying what we want we must see the opposite site of arguing details to death.
Not my way.
I love Leicas but I don´t want to pay relevant amounts of money for a body that´s delivering "not so much" percents of my needs.

Story goes on... ;)

x-ray
01-05-2018, 17:44
Give me an example for a suitable workshop.

I cant tell you what would be of interest to you any more than I can tell you what food you'd like. Look around at what's available and what strikes your fancy. Everyone can learn new shooting skills, learn their software better, make better prints and better scans. There are hundreds if not thousands of workshops and classes that improve your skills. Surely you feel like you could improve your photography. One more camera or lens won't make any of us better photographers.

You're an engineer right? Was it the new slide rule or calculator you bought that made you a good engineer or was it what you learned in class? Same with photography. Anyone can buy a camera but not everyone can produce really impressive images. A calculator doesn't make you an engineer and a camera doesn't make you a fine photographer. It really comes down to whether people are satisfied with the level of photography where they're at or do they want to produce exceptional images. Please don't think I'm getting on anyone's case. It's an individual choice as to whether equipment is the priority Or making fine photographs.

raid
01-05-2018, 17:53
x-ray: I may not be so deep into making fine photographs as you are. No, I am not an engineer, but this is another issue. I appreciate your words though. I take photos as they come to me without any previous planning or design. I guess, I am (as you said) satisfied with the level of photography where I am. Such a discussion opens the door for some serious exchanges of thoughts here. I spend much more time thinking about my research each day.

shimokita
01-05-2018, 18:00
If I had the USD 3,000 to burn it would most likely be a
Nikon F2 Titan with eye level finder or LNIB F3P...

For fun a Sekonic C-700 and some filters / film

x-ray
01-05-2018, 18:01
x-ray: I guess, I am (as you said) satisfied with the level of photography where I am.

You've gotten to a point that I guess I'll never reach and honestly do not want to reach. I use my dissatisfaction with my images as motivation to work harder.

Good luck picking your new camera!

raid
01-05-2018, 18:04
I take such issues lightly. My photos don't bother me. Photography makes me and keeps me a very happy person. Whether I actually buy another camera or not is not really important. Different people view photography differently.

raid
01-05-2018, 19:10
This thread was not meant to result in negative feelings by anyone.

Doug
01-05-2018, 19:14
I was thinking of a workshop too, Raid... But as a way to go on a photo-emphasis guided tour to an exotic location. :) You have experience in Europe and the Middle East, but might be inspired by other locations such as the Far East, New Zealand, South Africa, South America...

I'm looking forward to a cruise from Miami along the east coast of Central America, and around to Ecuador and Peru. This will be different! Should I start a "what gear shall I take" thread? :D

raid
01-05-2018, 19:17
Doug: go for it. The tour, I mean. I enjoy each year a trip to some country.

lynnb
01-05-2018, 19:30
Come on a tour to Australia, Raid. We're expecting a moderately warm day tomorrow in Sydney, 45C. This is a good time to photograph wildlife, as they're all lying down in the shade :D

madNbad
01-05-2018, 19:41
Everyone may have a suggestion but it’s your money, spend it on what you want.

raid
01-05-2018, 19:46
Come on a tour to Australia, Raid. We're expecting a moderately warm day tomorrow in Sydney, 45C. This is a good time to photograph wildlife, as they're all lying down in the shade :D

Thank you for the invitation, Lynn. I may one day show up in Sidney! :cool:

raid
01-05-2018, 19:50
Everyone may have a suggestion but it’s your money, spend it on what you want.

This applies to any views on photography here. Each person posting here has some views on some aspects of photography and equipment. This is fine. This is the way it should stay.

Mute-on
01-05-2018, 20:58
If this was a poll from your original post, definitely a Hasselblad SWC. It's unique, produces spectacular images (in the right hands), is no longer made, and is just plain cool.
Either that or something for the family ... Tough choice.
J ��


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dmr
01-05-2018, 20:59
You need a "something other than camera gear" option. :)

Gregm61
01-05-2018, 21:04
$3,000? I just did, except it wasn't $3,000, it was $4,995.....a new 35mm f1.4 Summilux FLE.

Georgiy Romanov
01-05-2018, 22:48
I don't have a 3000. Last time when I travelled to Japan I have less than 2000$ for almost a month. Most of the time I used Fuji Klasse W camera. Nice little full frame cam. I think, If I have such amount of money for camera I go for Leica Q. Full frame, nice looking. Leica CL also a good option but for me it not sexy enough for that price.

benlees
01-05-2018, 23:15
I would love a Q but the fact the lens sucks so bad that it must "corrected" all the time by software, and someone selling one recently (here on RFF) commented that it "made a noise" when being turned on, would leave me to believe it is best avoided. But I would still like one.

Tim Murphy
01-05-2018, 23:58
Dear Raid,

I'll be honest and say that I visit this site to read and learn.

I shoot wildlife and nature. I'm as big as a moose so stealth is not my strong suit. I'd drop the coin on something long and bright, and probably white too.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg, PA :)

jsrockit
01-06-2018, 05:10
Out of your options... the Q. However, I think I'd buy a used Sony A7R II w/ a used 55mm 1.8. The CL is nice, but not for the price.

jsrockit
01-06-2018, 05:11
I would love a Q but the fact the lens sucks so bad that it must "corrected" all the time by software, and someone selling one recently (here on RFF) commented that it "made a noise" when being turned on, would leave me to believe it is best avoided. But I would still like one.

Are the end results great? Yes.

raid
01-06-2018, 06:45
The end results are most important. I agree.

Rob-F
01-06-2018, 07:16
Getting back to the original "gearhead" focus of the thread:

Raid, you listed an M9 as one of your options. But you already have an M9, no? I have one myself (or will have, if it ever comes back from N.J.) and it seems to meet all my needs or wants. Still, I think I would like an M9P. I think I would keep the M9 and just have two bodies. So that's one idea.

Another idea: I miss my M8.2. What I don't miss is that it didn't let me enter my lens manually, like I can on the M9. That way, I don't have to get my lenses coded. Buy I might like to use some of the money to get them coded, which would be convenient (though not necessary) when using them on the M9.

As to the M240: I'm sure it's a great camera. I don't seem to want one, though. Isn't it even thicker front to back than the M9? And the electronic framelines. I don't know it would feel Leica-like enough for me.

OK, I know. I would inherit $6000 or $8000 and get an M10. That should do it.

raid
01-06-2018, 07:22
Rob: I never claimed that this post was about my quest to spend $3000. I meant it to be addressed to anyone here at RFF.

The M8 does surprisingly well after all these years.
Yes, the M240 appears to be thicker than the M9, and I feel it to be heavier too. The extra thickness caused one of my fingers to get hurt in my first use of the M240. My hand did not hold the camera correctly, I think.

The M10 would be nice ....

Godfrey
01-06-2018, 07:24
hmm. I could have sworn I posted a response to this thread while I was in London the other night, but I don't see it here. In brief:

Yes, I'd get a CL body for that money, if I wanted to spend money on another camera. I wouldn't buy any M8-M9 camera for any money at this point, the Q without interchangeable lenses is not appealing to me at all.

The CL works well with all my current M, R, and SL lenses; it is small and light weight; the sensor performance seems fine; the smaller format nets a difference in what I can do with it compared to the SL or M-D. I don't need any other lenses for it since I'm happy with manual focus and have all the right focal lengths already.

... All that said, I'm not really itching to buy another camera unless I were to do it to replace the SL with something significantly smaller and lighter to carry. The CL would then be the correct choice again, since I could sell the SL plus SL24-90 lens, buy the CL body, and net a $4000-5000 credit back into my bank account.

G

raid
01-06-2018, 07:30
What about the crop factor with the CL, Godfrey? Doesn't this part annoy you somewhat? Are there adapters for "any lens mount" for the CL?

ptpdprinter
01-06-2018, 07:45
What about the crop factor with the CL, Godfrey? Doesn't this part annoy you somewhat? Are there adapters for "any lens mount" for the CL?
I planned on using my manual lenses with my APS-C Fuji, but it doesn't make much sense. I have manual lenses from 18mm-90mm which corresponds to 28-135 on APS-C. Except for the 90mm, all those focal lengths are covered by the little 18-55mm zoom, so I only use my manual macro lenses with the Fuji. It's the same issue with the Leica CL. Using Leica's little 18-56 (28-85) CL zoom sure beats carrying around a bag full of lenses. To appropriate a little Leica marketing, I am sure that is what Oskar Barnack would do if he were alive today. Now, there may be an advantage if you want to shoot just 50mm to putting on a 35mm. Since you are only using the center of the image circle, it should be very sharp, though I would probably trust the auto focus of the dedicated lens over focus peaking for sharpness. YMMV.

raid
01-06-2018, 07:56
A 50mm SLR lens will be a very good 100mm lens on a M 4/3 and it would be a 66mm lens on the APS-C, I think.It is more difficult to find a suitable wide angle lens here that works well.

Godfrey
01-06-2018, 08:12
What about the crop factor with the CL, Godfrey? Doesn't this part annoy you somewhat? Are there adapters for "any lens mount" for the CL?

The crop factor is actually an advantage for what I would have the CL for, Raid. I'd keep the SL90-280mm lens, which with the crop factor nets a 135 to 420mm FoV, image stabilized super-telezoom. I have the right lenses in my more usual focal length range to get the right FoVs too: 35 for normal, 50-60 for 75-90mm, WATE for 24 to 30mm wide, and a few more beyond that. And of course my R lenses would all be fine, including the macro setup for film copying; I'd just be using 1:2 instead of 1:1 as the reference magnification to obtain FF negative copies at 24 Pixel.

So it would be a good choice that doesn't compete directly with either the SL or M-D for lens choices, etc.

G

Godfrey
01-06-2018, 08:17
A 50mm SLR lens will be a very good 100mm lens on a M 4/3 and it would be a 66mm lens on the APS-C, I think.It is more difficult to find a suitable wide angle lens here that works well.

A 50mm lens on the CL's APS-C sensor nets the FoV of a 75mm lens; 60mm goes to 90mm. I have the WATE for the wide end, which nets 24 to 31 mm FoVs, and a Color-Skopar 28mm that nets an old favorite 43mm approximately.

The only 'missing' focal length for me would be the 16mm FF FoV to crop to square for the Hasselblad SWC simulation I like ... for that I'd need to buy a Voigtländer 10mm lens. If I decided it was important: I can always put the WATE on the M-D and crop it to square for that simulation.

I spent an extensive ten years shooting with FourThirds and APS-C format cameras so I'm very familiar with the FoV and DoF characteristics of these two formats.

G

raid
01-06-2018, 08:21
Yes, you are right. The APS-C has a crop that is equivalent to 1.5x of the focal length of the lens.

Emile de Leon
01-06-2018, 09:00
OK..it's decided then...CL..and take your wife out to dinner...done deal..:)

johannielscom
01-06-2018, 09:31
Dave Burnett used to shoot a Ricoh GXR with Leica glass (we wrote about how to set that camera up) but now has also gone the way of the Sony A9, with a Rokkor 58mm 1.2 lens... Just saying...

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/26169358_2065319520149810_1692988036567321909_n.jp g?oh=5e447b5f6cc6871e1867aaf41384a501&oe=5ABDBE81

creenus
01-06-2018, 09:45
A view camera, lens, film holders, developing tank, etc., because I haven't tortured myself enough yet with 35mm and 4.5x6cm gear.

f16sunshine
01-06-2018, 09:59
Dave Burnett used to shoot a Ricoh GXR with Leica glass (we wrote about how to set that camera up) but now has also gone the way of the Sony A9, with a Rokkor 58mm 1.2 lens... Just saying...

https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/26169358_2065319520149810_1692988036567321909_n.jp g?oh=5e447b5f6cc6871e1867aaf41384a501&oe=5ABDBE81
I love David Burnett.
He is the ultimate Hero for Am/ProAm photographers.
Always working a lot! Always hacking gear together to get a special look.
He shows that good work and optical “gimmicks” really can bring great results.

benlees
01-06-2018, 10:25
Are the end results great? Yes.


Agreed. For $3000 I would choose something else. But when the Qii arrives in a year or two... and used prices keep going down then maybe...

raid
01-07-2018, 07:17
He is obviously enjoying photography.

rbiemer
01-07-2018, 07:46
Raid,
None of the poll options thrill me too much, honestly. For digital, my phone and the Fuji X20 serve me plenty well.
That said, $3k would be interesting to spend on gear and I think it would be, for me, something like this:
I have a small (7 1/2' by 10') room in my basement I want to set up as a darkroom and 3k would make that a rather faster project. I can do the basic carpentry aspects of this, the plumbing and wiring, not so much.
IF there were anything left over after that, then a 4x5 enlarger.

Rob

raid
01-07-2018, 08:17
Hi Rob,
This is not a problem since you can write about it here. None of the 4 options are suitable for you. I have not chosen any of the 4 "paths" myself so far. The poll options are just thoughts or suggestions. You have a clear idea about creating a darkroom.

I am thinking of the usefulness of a camera on which I could use many different lenses that I already own. Maybe a SONY or a M 240, but the Leica costs a lot of money. Then again, I don't actually need any equipment for photography. I could never bring myself to sell my Linhof 4x5 camera. I never got to use this heavy camera. I may get to it one day.

willie_901
01-07-2018, 08:21
$500 on the Fujinon 50/2 to complete my 23, 35 XF lens triad.

$2,500 set aside to fund out-sourced printing projects in 2018 (larger single prints, photo books and photozines).

David Hughes
01-07-2018, 09:21
Hmmm, buy a better/bigger fridge and fill it with film and put the change in the bank for when it (the fridge) gets empty...

Or spend the change on equipping a darkroom or getting all my film cameras checked etc.

I'm shocked, shocked, by the number of people wasting the money on digital.

Regards, David

raid
01-07-2018, 09:24
Hi David,
I used to be opposed to any thoughts of digital equipment in photography. The perceived quality of the digital images don't look to my eyes as being as beautiful as the film based images that turned out beautifully. It is mostly a factor of convenience that let me accept for myself the use of digital equipment. I made sure to also get a film camera that I always wanted to have and use; Hasselblad SWC. I refer to it as being my "anchor to film".

f16sunshine
01-07-2018, 12:30
Raid,
I just looked at FM classified where many Sony’s are listd.
A7rii is now getting down to $1500 second hand.... nearl half introduction price.
42mp would give you a chance to print very large.
I can imagine some of those scenes at the marina you make landscapes printed .
Could be a very satisfying adventure.

ptpdprinter
01-07-2018, 12:37
I'm shocked, shocked, by the number of people wasting the money on digital.
I am shocked, shocked by all the people wasting the money on equipment. Will the equipment mentioned really make your images any better?

raid
01-07-2018, 12:39
Raid,
I just looked at FM classified where many Sony’s are listd.
A7rii is now getting down to $1500 second hand.... nearl half introduction price.
42mp would give you a chance to print very large.
I can imagine some of those scenes at the marina you make landscapes printed .
Could be a very satisfying adventure.

Thank you, Andy.
What is FM Classified?

I got it! Fred Miranda .... FM.

raid
01-07-2018, 12:45
I am shocked, shocked by all the people wasting the money on equipment. Will the equipment mentioned really make your images any better?

I don't think that people buying more and more equipment are doing this to make their images "better". Will buying more and more shoes make you walk better? It is the joy of owning equipment that can be admired and used (and resold).

ptpdprinter
01-07-2018, 12:53
Will buying more and more shoes make you walk better?
Thanks. It's exactly the Imelda Marcos meme I was alluding to.

Brian Legge
01-07-2018, 12:59
I picked up a A7rii from usedphotopro in November. I figure I'll be shooting more digital photos over the next year; I don't see myself making time to develop film for a while. The price there was close to used ebay sales at the time and I'd rather have a store backing to deal with returns if something went wrong.

I've been using it with a Nikkor 50/1.4 ltm lens and have really appreciated the results. Its nice to have something compatible with my existing lenses as well as a camera that can go lower iso, has some stabilization for short movies, ability to shoot handheld at isos beyond what I can do with film, etc.

The a6500 would fantastic for anyone who wants the same and can deal with a cropped sensor.

d_c
01-07-2018, 13:00
If the OP has any LTM or M lenses then I would say get a used M240.

Godfrey
01-07-2018, 13:12
...
I'm shocked, shocked, by the number of people wasting the money on digital.

Hmm. For me the waste has been all the money I've spent on film cameras in the past several years. I've gotten virtually no value out of them, where my digital cameras work brilliantly and produce lots of fine photographs: they're worth everything I paid for them.

I'm likely going to sell off all the film cameras other than my Polaroids and the Hasselblad SWC in the coming year. There's little point to them taking up space on the shelf.

raid
01-07-2018, 13:36
Godfrey: I will check out how you sell off the SLR equipment. I should do same. Keep my Land camera and the SWC,

rfaspen
01-07-2018, 14:16
I too will watch for Godfrey's sell-off. Two reasons: 1. There's bound to be some nifty stuff. 2. Inspiration for myself.

I have a fair amount of photo kit. At least 300 cameras, nearly all of them film. I don't need them and I've really pared down to just a few film cameras that receive my attention, along with my digital.

If I can resolve to rid myself of some gear, I'd pare my film holdings down to the Leicas, Nikon SLR, a couple TLRs, an MF folder, an MF SLR, a 4x5 field camera, and my 4x5 studio. ....and that's it. Well OK, maybe a stereo camera too. And my amazing condition Agfa box camera. And at least one of the spy cameras. And the cute little Petri Color 35 -- I'll keep just one of those. The rest should really go (but will it?).

raid
01-07-2018, 14:23
Some stuff will not sell at any price, and other stuff will sell for a symbolic return. Hopefully, it is more than the cost for postage!

f16sunshine
01-07-2018, 14:25
Everything sells at the right price.

raid
01-07-2018, 15:33
The right price ==> whatever the current market values are. A lens that used to sell for $400 may now sell for $35.

x-ray
01-07-2018, 15:52
I am shocked, shocked by all the people wasting the money on equipment. Will the equipment mentioned really make your images any better?

I've seriously over estimated some of the folks here too. I thought most took photography more seriously but I can clearly see it's about what you own not what you produce with it. I'm just the opposite, it's about my images not my image of myself and how much camera gear I can collect in my life. I also find it interesting many of the forum members own more and better equipment than most pros I knew prior to 2000.

Meanwhile I'm buying more Visa and MasterCard stock to make money off these guys. I just funded my Roth and was thinking about some Paypal stock too. Keep buying and selling guys! :p

raid
01-07-2018, 16:53
It is a well known fact that RFF is a website for rangefinder cameras and lenses and of course on photography. Many threads over the past years have focused on lenses and cameras. This does not mean that such an interest leads to low quality photography. Just relax and try to enjoy whatever you are doing.

jsrockit
01-07-2018, 17:26
I'm shocked, shocked, by the number of people wasting the money on digital.


How is using any camera to make photographs a waste? If you think digital is waste because it depreciates then I would argue that we don't have to buy film for the camera.

Ccoppola82
01-07-2018, 18:20
M6 with vintage Summicron 35 or 50. Leftover id find a Hasselblad kit with body and 1 lens

Gary Sandhu
01-07-2018, 23:59
None of the above - I’d hire an assistant to sell all the useless (not used) camera and lenses I’ve got

David Hughes
01-08-2018, 02:50
Hi,

I'm amazed at what people have projected on to my statement that I was shocked; just because I expected more film choices based on experience and thinking about things like prices, reality etc.

FWIW, I don't regard film as a major expense, compared to (say) a good digital camera, a back-up and the inevitable loss when the digital body dies on me and the lenses then become worthless. Then you have to spend a lot of money for an even weirder camera and learn the contents of a 150 page manual (without an index).

Most of the counter arguments to that statement will be based on hindsight but I've never had hindsight before the event, especially with digital cameras, which makes my life difficult.

Worse still, digital cameras don't seem to last long enough for hindsight to work. By the time we know what works and behaves itself the makers will have moved on; neither new cameras nor parts will be available and so on...

Regards, David

PS (A later edit) and add to that the cost of a dedicated flash gun and the fact that they usually don't work with other digital cameras and so on.

Axel
01-08-2018, 04:30
Hi,

I'm amazed at what people have projected on to my statement that I was shocked; just because I expected more film choices based on experience and thinking about things like prices, reality etc.

FWIW, I don't regard film as a major expense, compared to (say) a good digital camera, a back-up and the inevitable loss when the digital body dies on me and the lenses then become worthless. Then you have to spend a lot of money for an even weirder camera and learn the contents of a 150 page manual (without an index).

Most of the counter arguments to that statement will be based on hindsight but I've never had hindsight before the event, especially with digital cameras, which makes my life difficult.

Worse still, digital cameras don't seem to last long enough for hindsight to work. By the time we know what works and behaves itself the makers will have moved on; neither new cameras nor parts will be available and so on...

Regards, David

PS (A later edit) and add to that the cost of a dedicated flash gun and the fact that they usually don't work with other digital cameras and so on.
Lenses don´t become worthless when a body dies. Even not if the body is a digital one.
For none of my cameras, digital or film, I´ve looked to a manual even longer than some seconds. I would instant refuse a device, not only a camera, that demands this.

Digital Cameras can last as long as every other device. If not, the Internet surely has a spare one for less money after short time.
My oldest digital cams are 15 years old now and working fine.
There is no problem to get a spare battery on instant delivery for less than ten dollars today. And a good functional whole device will show up in at most a few days if I should need to replace one.

Dedicated Flash guns and their compatibility and availability are no invention of the digital market, David!
A choice of a system brings dependencies. Nothing new here either since decades ;)

Regards, Axel

David Hughes
01-08-2018, 05:06
Hi,

The crucial word in m y post was "hindsight" as my post is based on bitter experience.

I chose the system as three major makers had backed it with bodies and lenses and then the alternative makers backed it. Now I have three superb to excellent lenses that cost thousands but the bodies for them with the right mount are no longer made. So I have a problem.

Hindsight also tells me that there is limit to how long you can replace digital stuff; I had a very nice small compact digital camera with a very good zoom lens on it; it failed and I replaced it with a secondhand one from a dealer with a year's guarantee.

A short while after the guarantee expired the camera expired. I have replaced it with another one, also secondhand (obviously), but the model that came next and looked similar. Alas, when they replaced it they "improved" it; the result is that I am baffled at times and have to look in the index-less manual.

As for flashes, mine dates from the 80's and works with all my film bodies. It didn't cost hundreds...

There's a sub text to this thread "would you scrap your M2 if I gave you 3 000?" and the answer here is "no" as I'm happy with it.

A more interesting thread would be "if all your cameras were destroyed with the house contents and you had no insurance how little need you spend to start photography again?" Now that would get some interesting answers.

Regards, David

PS And when I'm in your country I still say "Grüß Gott" instead of "Hi" so I guess there's no hope for me...

jsrockit
01-08-2018, 05:45
Worse still, digital cameras don't seem to last long enough for hindsight to work. By the time we know what works and behaves itself the makers will have moved on; neither new cameras nor parts will be available and so on...


What is long enough? A lifetime? Plenty of old working digital cameras out there...

willie_901
01-08-2018, 06:17
I reject the conclusion that digital cameras are inherently fragile and short-lived.

A case can be made battery availability is the most likely cause of end-of-life. A decent Li-ion battery has about 1000 charge cycles. Eventually batteries must be replaced. At some point its will be hard to find batteries for old cameras.

So, a well-cared for film camera will out last a well-cared for digital camera – perhaps by decades.

The total cost of digital camera ownership is eroded by advances in imaging technology. I never replaced a digital camera because of electronic or mechanical failure. I replaced them because I could work more efficiently. Also, the cost to me was reduced by tax deductions and by clients.

Now that I'm not using cameras for work, I don't even think about upgrading.

Capital depreciation is only a cost when you liquidate an asset.

Michiel Fokkema
01-08-2018, 06:24
I'd buy a journey to an interesting country.

David Hughes
01-08-2018, 06:24
What is long enough? A lifetime? Plenty of old working digital cameras out there...

Hi,

And plenty of duds that look as good on the outside. The problem is there's no way of telling, apart from hindsight. And I have my doubts about getting them checked and repaired.

And I prefer to work with cameras who's wicked little ways I know/understand. One of the differences between my old and my newer replacement camera is that the menu system is totally different and far more convoluted. I still intend to set it up the way I want it but have wasted a lot of time and swearing in the process. I've 30/31 years experience of digital cameras but it doesn't help me much...

Regards, David

PS And throw into the mix what happened to my lovely printer and software when Windows 8 and 10 came along...

Axel
01-08-2018, 07:09
Bitter experience is no way limited or connected to the use of digital equipment.
I also have some - who will not?

Come on David! :)

Just came into my house from a longer walk in the ice-cold wind through the landscape I love to live in actually (by the way - there is a small couple of folks in the south that uses "Grüß Gott" I remember - we use to say "Moin!" here in the north ;)).

A bit frustrated from the small range of usability of batteries when things turn colder than the living room is. First camera (the big one hanging on the strap on my shoulder) took about half an hour until the "low battery" warning appeared. The small one living in its
bag on my hip survived one hour in the cold...

But - what hindsights are following from such events?
Take the fully manual mechanic cam with film next time?
Not really.

Regards from the north of Germany,

Axel

dwojr
01-08-2018, 07:16
I would put a down payment on some travel :)



This is what I would do.

jsrockit
01-08-2018, 11:15
Hi,

And plenty of duds that look as good on the outside. The problem is there's no way of telling, apart from hindsight. And I have my doubts about getting them checked and repaired.

And I prefer to work with cameras who's wicked little ways I know/understand. One of the differences between my old and my newer replacement camera is that the menu system is totally different and far more convoluted. I still intend to set it up the way I want it but have wasted a lot of time and swearing in the process. I've 30/31 years experience of digital cameras but it doesn't help me much...

Regards, David

PS And throw into the mix what happened to my lovely printer and software when Windows 8 and 10 came along...

I understand... I just haven't had the same experience. Its only been 20 years for me, but they've been relatively easy to figure out. BUT we don't all photograph the same things the same way.

rfaspen
01-08-2018, 12:16
Not to change the subject, but back to spending that $3000 USD.....

I've always been enamored by panoramic photos (and hence panoramic cameras).

I'm not able to spend $$ on an Xpan, even though I'd like one; but what neat cameras. Or one of those 6x17 jobs (Fuji?). Widelux intrigue me. I guess in the age of digital there's an easy option for panoramics, but is it as fun?

I suspect I'll someday come across a Horizon/Horizont and give it a whirl. But I'm not actively seeking any photo gear these days (with exception of a Viso III so I can use some stuff I've inherited)

pixelvandal
01-08-2018, 13:10
3000, so more like 4000 AUD haha. I would spend 500 on a used CLA'd Olympus Om1, and a cheap set of lenses like the 50 1.4 and 28 3.5. A roll or two of bulk film, and most importantly.... use the remaining 3500 to take a month long, cheap as chips holiday through somewhere in asia, haha.

giganova
01-08-2018, 13:11
I don't have the $3000 yet. Maybe never :cool:
The other alternative is to keep the $3000 safe in the bank!

I don't understand. Do you have $3k to spend or not? :confused:

DougFord
01-08-2018, 13:28
Invest your 3000 clams. If the primary reason needs to be for the purchase of a camera, tell yourself that you're saving for a new Konost digital rangefinder camera. I predict that you will be both a happy and wealthy man in the future...perhaps cameraless though...

ptpdprinter
01-08-2018, 13:31
I guess in the age of digital there's an easy option for panoramics, but is it as fun?
Depends on what you like to do. I'm having fun shooting digital for 7x17 format.

raid
01-08-2018, 13:45
I don't understand. Do you have $3k to spend or not? :confused:

I don't. It is a hypothetical issue. "If I had $3000". :angel:

rfaspen
01-08-2018, 14:51
Did someone mention the Konost? Wow, blast from the past!

Mackinaw
01-08-2018, 15:00
Your question is timely. Somebody on my local Craigslist is offering a DS Leica M3 with 50mm DR Summicron, a 21/4 Super-Angulon with “eyes,” a 135/4 Elmar, a collapsible 90/4 Elmar, and all sorts of filters and finders for $2,500.00. Tempting as hell, but something I don’t need (even though the 21/4 would be interesting). Trying mightily to resist the call of GAS…..

Jim B.

rfaspen
01-08-2018, 15:07
Oh, a Goldberg SA with goggles? Those are uncommon! Wonder if they'd negotiate a sale of that lens....they could still attempt to sell the remainder as a "package" (which is usually a terrible idea as a seller).

Mackinaw
01-08-2018, 15:18
Oh, a Goldberg SA with goggles? Those are uncommon! Wonder if they'd negotiate a sale of that lens....they could still attempt to sell the remainder as a "package" (which is usually a terrible idea as a seller).

I may ask if he’ll separate his package. I live in a rural area and I doubt he’ll get many takers for classic Leica gear, especially at the price he’s asking. And I haven’t seen any of this stuff so for all I know, the lenses are full of fungus. His pictures look nice though.

Jim B.

rfaspen
01-09-2018, 21:15
I may be wrong about the lens being a Goldberg creation (could be a Tom A. contraption), but those goggled 21SA are not at all common. I saw one for sale a few years ago...that's it. Someone around here can probably provide more info.

Good luck! It would be a nice lens to have... Sure hope there's no fungus!

David Hughes
01-10-2018, 01:32
An interesting question, muse, whatever is why was this thread put in the Leica General Discussion range...

Regards, David

raid
01-10-2018, 05:18
It was put here because such discussions have consistently been of interest to many RFF members. If you would do a study on RFF threads, you would see a high concentration of the threads was about such a topic.

David Hughes
01-10-2018, 06:41
It was put here because such discussions have consistently been of interest to many RFF members. If you would do a study on RFF threads, you would see a high concentration of the threads was about such a topic.

Hi,

I was thinking it was a biased (towards Leica) sample and wondering what the response would have been in (say) the P&S threads. As it is Leica came out on top but I still wonder.

Having said that, I can't think of neural thread except "off topic" perhaps.

Regards, David

ptpdprinter
01-10-2018, 08:09
It is biased toward Leica because it is a poll and the choices are among various Leica products or unspecified "other".

Michael Markey
01-10-2018, 09:37
I went for other cameras although I`ve just picked up an A7R2 and don`t feel the need for any other bodies .... maybe a longer Canon lens 300 or so.

Also had it in mind to "upgrade" the 90 Elmarit for an APO but the reality is I`m just fine at present.

back alley
01-10-2018, 10:10
I went for other cameras although I`ve just picked up an A7R2 and don`t feel the need for any other bodies .... maybe a longer Canon lens 300 or so.

Also had it in mind to "upgrade" the 90 Elmarit for an APO but the reality is I`m just fine at present.

what 300 are you looking for?

Godfrey
01-10-2018, 11:04
I'd be curious to know, David, what camera you bought three expensive lenses for that you can no longer get a body to suit them.

This thread is primarily about Leica cameras, however. Leica digital cameras (SL, M, CL, TL) can be fitted and used with Leica lenses from the entire range of Leica thread mount, M, and R cameras going back to the 1930s. My lens kit includes a couple of lenses from the fifties and sixties, lots from the seventies and eighties; the other two or three are current production. They work the same way as they always did. Leica has been very proactive about preserving their users' lens kit usability.

Your vitriol about anything digital is well noted so I'm not going to waste any time trying to convince you of anything to the contrary. But I have to say that many people (myself included) have had the exact opposite of your experiences with respect to the cost and support problems in dealing with mechanical film cameras vs digital cameras. My lovely old film cameras have cost me a bundle to keep working ... and aside from the well known sensor problem that motivated me to update from the M9 to the M-P 240 five years ago, none of my digital cameras have required any service at all.

Michael Markey
01-10-2018, 11:19
what 300 are you looking for?

Well not really actively looking.
I use the ubiquitous 70-200/2.8 IS L at present but there are times when a 300 reach would be useful .. so either the three or the 100 -300
It depends how much of that type of shooting I intend to do in the future
I'm not sure at the moment.

back alley
01-10-2018, 11:26
Well not really actively looking.
I use the ubiquitous 70-200/2.8 IS L at present but there are times when a 300 reach would be useful .. so either the three or the 100 -300
It depends how much of that type of shooting I intend to do in the future
I'm not sure at the moment.

i think i have one at home, i have a bag full of canon film gear...i'll take a look...

Michael Markey
01-10-2018, 11:27
But I have to say that many people (myself included) have had the exact opposite of your experiences with respect to the cost and support problems in dealing with mechanical film cameras vs digital cameras. My lovely old film cameras have cost me a bundle to keep working ... and aside from the well known sensor problem that motivated me to update from the M9 to the M-P 240 five years ago, none of my digital cameras have required any service at all.

That's been my experience too
A few old film camera have bit the dust but the digitals just keep on ticking
Only one has let me down and that got left in the rain ... my fault

ptpdprinter
01-10-2018, 11:50
Cameras and lenses are incredibly reliable. The only problems I have had with a camera or lens - film or digital - in 45 years were 1) in 2012, the door latch on my 30 year old Olympus OM4 broke. Cost to repair, including a CLA, was $60; 2) in 2014, the focus lever on my 60 year old Minolta Autocord became stiff. Cost to repair, including a CLA, was $130. I've never had a problem with a lens.

Bill Clark
01-10-2018, 12:40
With the money, I would make/buy investments that pay dividends. The younger you are the better as time is on your side to have the money compound.

Buying stuff usually is a way to lose money.

David Hughes
01-11-2018, 03:02
I'd be curious to know, David, what camera you bought three expensive lenses for that you can no longer get a body to suit them.

This thread is primarily about Leica cameras, however. Leica digital cameras (SL, M, CL, TL) can be fitted and used with Leica lenses from the entire range of Leica thread mount, M, and R cameras going back to the 1930s. My lens kit includes a couple of lenses from the fifties and sixties, lots from the seventies and eighties; the other two or three are current production. They work the same way as they always did. Leica has been very proactive about preserving their users' lens kit usability.

Your vitriol about anything digital is well noted so I'm not going to waste any time trying to convince you of anything to the contrary. But I have to say that many people (myself included) have had the exact opposite of your experiences with respect to the cost and support problems in dealing with mechanical film cameras vs digital cameras. My lovely old film cameras have cost me a bundle to keep working ... and aside from the well known sensor problem that motivated me to update from the M9 to the M-P 240 five years ago, none of my digital cameras have required any service at all.

Hi,

I don't mention the make of lens or body because the internet, imo, exaggerates poor experiences.

I agree with you about Leica lenses but I have had four digital Leicas over the years; I am not the only person to have had troubles with the Digilux 2 sensor but it was covered by the guarantee and went back to Solms for 2 or 3 months and was returned in 2007. Despite this I have continually praised the design and last used it a week or so ago.

Would you believe that my M9 also went back to Germany for a new sensor? But it did and I'm not the only one to report this. Again I'm still using the M9 and using a wide range of lenses in it dating back to the 30's. It's great to have a camera I can use straight out of the box...

From time to time I have had little choice but to return digital cameras and lenses for repairs and they are expensive repairs. Worse still, they failed when a lot younger than any of my film cameras. I don't regard film cameras as old as my CL or M2, when they needed a complete check and overhaul, as poorly made.

OTOH, I have had to scrap several all electronic film cameras because no one would touch them when they failed. So I think electronics are what I have poor experiences of not digital cameras.

So I don't don't think it is "vitriol" but just plain, simple reporting of the facts. Isn't that what forums are for?

Regards, David

Kent
01-11-2018, 03:18
Perhaps a LensBaby Velvet 85 and another nice holiday for my family. ;)

Godfrey
01-11-2018, 06:52
Hi,

I don't mention the make of lens or body because the internet, imo, exaggerates poor experiences.

I agree with you about Leica lenses but I have had four digital Leicas over the years; I am not the only person to have had troubles with the Digilux 2 sensor but it was covered by the guarantee and went back to Solms for 2 or 3 months and was returned in 2007. Despite this I have continually praised the design and last used it a week or so ago.

Would you believe that my M9 also went back to Germany for a new sensor? But it did and I'm not the only one to report this. Again I'm still using the M9 and using a wide range of lenses in it dating back to the 30's. It's great to have a camera I can use straight out of the box...

From time to time I have had little choice but to return digital cameras and lenses for repairs and they are expensive repairs. Worse still, they failed when a lot younger than any of my film cameras. I don't regard film cameras as old as my CL or M2, when they needed a complete check and overhaul, as poorly made.

OTOH, I have had to scrap several all electronic film cameras because no one would touch them when they failed. So I think electronics are what I have poor experiences of not digital cameras.

So I don't don't think it is "vitriol" but just plain, simple reporting of the facts. Isn't that what forums are for?

Regards, David

If it was "just plain, simple reporting of the facts", David, what you just posted above would have been in your first post. Instead you went the "I'm shocked, shocked to hear that so many people would invest money into digital cameras" route ... which is a lot closer to vitriol than it to any kind of factual reportage.

"Electronics in cameras, regardless of film or digital, have shown that they increased accuracy of operation, even longevity in some cases. But they have also shown that repairs are more difficult due to parts availability and expertise of service technicians." That's a factual statement.

The fact that the Digilux 2 sensor had a problematic run (a Sony problem) is well known. Nowhere did I imply that my film cameras that have required service to keep them running right were poorly made; frankly, at this date, any "poorly made film camera" I pass over or just junk when it fails ... they're not worth spending more money on. But the fact is that these lovely film cameras cost money to service and keep running properly, unless you don't care whether the shutter speeds are accurate or whether the self timer works, etc. I do.

A bit less vitriol and a bit more objectivity would be welcomed. I suspect that the camera system that you descry as no longer being made is the Olympus FourThirds SLRs ... that's the only new all-digital system that has been aged out of current production by the new generation of mirrorless bodies. Of course, the superb Zuiko Digital lenses designed for it were quite expensive in the high grade and super high grade models, but Olympus has provided mount adapters and bodies that work with them very very nicely: the E-M1 and E-M1 II operate my ZD11-22/2.8-3.5, ZD50-200/2.8-3.5, and ZD50/2 Macro very very well: better than my (now ancient) E-1 body does, in fact. Regardless, my E-1 is still going strong despite its extreme age (for a digital camera designed at the beginning of the digital time) and also despite that Olympus has pulled down the curtain on overhaul and repair: the parts are simply too old and not worth stocking any more. I sent it in for a final CLA and tune-up six months before they closed the service, it cost me a flat rate of $250 and came back a new camera in every respect. For a October 2003 camera that's turned tens of thousands of exposures, that I paid $299 for, I think that's pretty darn good. The BLM-5 batteries released with the E-5 model work beautifully in it and give it an additional 75% of shooting time per charge, and the latest raw conversion software from Adobe, Iridient, and others, nets utterly usable exposures even at ISO 3200 ... never possible with the original raw converters in my experience.

As I said, my camera experience is the exact opposite of yours. I choose not to cast judgement on film cameras as "dead" or otherwise disparage them for their cost... I like my film cameras very much. They simply seem to cost me more than I get in use out of them these days where my digital cameras keep on going and producing lovely results, sometimes even better results than they were capable of a decade ago. I'd rather simplify my photographic workflow and go all digital, with the exceptions of my Polaroid and 6x6 SWC obsession, because that will let me concentrate more on the photography and less on what camera needs what repair or service.

G

ptpdprinter
01-11-2018, 08:22
I'd rather simplify my photographic workflow and go all digital, with the exceptions of my Polaroid and 6x6 SWC obsession, because that will let me concentrate more on the photography and less on what camera needs what repair or service.
Simplifying is key. The fewer cameras you have, the less you need to worry about which need service or repair.

x-ray
01-11-2018, 08:29
With the money, I would make/buy investments that pay dividends. The younger you are the better as time is on your side to have the money compound.

Buying stuff usually is a way to lose money.

Fully agree. I said I'd buy more Visa stock and make money on their purchases.

Darthfeeble
01-11-2018, 08:47
I voted the Q, if it's not available at that price it's pretty close. I think that would be the best bang for the buck. Plus I've been lusting for one since they came out.

raid
01-11-2018, 14:22
Since I am expecting to get back my Leica M9 soon with a new sensor, I decided it is best to focus on using this camera and not get another camera at this time. I was drawn to the Zeiss Hologon 16/8 since a while as it will open up a new type of photography for me. I am used to 50mm and 35mm lenses most of the time, and I want to get into wide angle photography with a specialized lens that has challenges and issues that must be dealt with. I found a "new old stock never used" boxed set in Canada, and I placed the order. Before placing the order, I had a quick email exchange with Don Goldberg about having him change the mount from Zeiss G to Leica M. It will hopefully become my "digital SWC", so to speak.

The Hologon has no real issues when used for B&W images, but with color, it may/will display a purple band on the edges. A special ND filter is used to balance the exposure across the lens coverage. Don G asked me to also send him the filter for some reason. If I want less coverage, I can use the Hologon with my M8. Thank you for following this thread and for the useful discussions, including suggestions to bypass any purchases of equipment and to invest instead into some stock.

Darthfeeble
01-11-2018, 14:25
Raid, you might give the latest CV15 a look. It performs extremely well on the M9.

raid
01-11-2018, 14:28
I am sure that the CV15mm is a wonderful lens based on what I have seen posted on it and the images that were taken with it. I am a "mini-collector" or maybe I am a photographer who also appreciates some fine lenses and cameras that I can afford to get and use. The CV is better suited for the M9 than the Hologon, but it is not a Hologon. I could use with an adapter my Canon FD 17/4 as it is a near rectilinear lens, but I want the challenge of using a Hologon. This is part of the joy of having such a hobby.


https://photos.smugmug.com/Zeiss-Hologon/i-mGb39nk/0/88abfac3/XL/Hologon%204-XL.jpg
https://photos.smugmug.com/Zeiss-Hologon/i-RVR3pBc/0/d5cffa2d/XL/Hologon%205-XL.jpg
https://photos.smugmug.com/Zeiss-Hologon/i-WJxT9cr/0/9179401d/L/Hologon%206-L.jpg

Emile de Leon
01-11-2018, 15:18
That Hologon is one sweet lookin lens!

webOSUser
01-11-2018, 17:08
Training. I have plenty of gear, I think at times, too much. What I need is training on how to best use it.

Godfrey
01-11-2018, 18:11
I am sure that the CV15mm is a wonderful lens based on what I have seen posted on it and the images that were taken with it. I am a "mini-collector" or maybe I am a photographer who also appreciates some fine lenses and cameras that I can afford to get and use. The CV is better suited for the M9 than the Hologon, but it is not a Hologon. I could use with an adapter my Canon FD 17/4 as it is a near rectilinear lens, butI want the challenge of using a Hologon. This is part of the joy of having such a hobby.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Zeiss-Hologon/i-mGb39nk/0/88abfac3/XL/Hologon%204-XL.jpg
https://photos.smugmug.com/Zeiss-Hologon/i-RVR3pBc/0/d5cffa2d/XL/Hologon%205-XL.jpg
https://photos.smugmug.com/Zeiss-Hologon/i-WJxT9cr/0/9179401d/L/Hologon%206-L.jpg

Lovely lens, Raid.

Long before the era of digital photography came to my world, I owned a Contax G2 kit for a while in-between various different Leica M cameras. I bought myself the Zeiss Hologon 16mm f/8 T*, new, with a bonus I received about then.

It is a lovely performer, and quite a bit better performer than the CV15 first generation which was also available at that time. I did extensive testing and comparison of the two lenses because, yes, I had both. No question that the Hologon was a far better ultra 16mm thing than the original CV15. (Later revisions of the CV15 are quite different, particularly the CV15 III.)

But, and this is key, it is a ferociously demanding lens to work with, particularly on a rangefinder camera.

The finder is WAY off giving you even a suggestion of its real coverage and the first few dozen rolls of film were pretty much totally wasted due to arms, hands, feet, legs, head tripod bits, and other crap that cluttered up the part of the frame I couldn't see. Much worse than the SWC finder to tell the truth.
You only have ONE aperture to work with: f/8, which is an effective f/16 with the (necessary) central gradient ND filter in place. The reason DAG probably wants the filter is that its alignment on the lens with a new lens mount is absolutely critical or it will miss and give you infuriatingly bad results.
Focusing with it proves critical as well, and you have no easy guide to focusing other than the approximation of DoF lines on the focusing mount. You'd think that an ultrawide gives you lots of DoF to work with, and it does, but with a super-high-resolving lens like this you'll SEE any minor mis-focus in the near field immediately.
I have no idea how well it will work with any digital sensor. It wasn't designed for a digital sensor at all ... the design goes back to the 1950s with the dedicated Zeiss Ikon Hologon camera. The Contax version is a slightly different design but has all the same character ... very close to the film plane rear element, lots of way-off-perpendicular ray traces.


If you're thinking it will give you an effective mini-SWC on your M9, well, honestly if that's what you're after ... Note that this has been a personal "Holy Grail" for me for many years. You're better off with the Leica WATE, which is known to actually perform brilliantly with the digital sensor and for which Leica provides lens profiles to do the appropriate corrections. That's where I went, along with the Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 as well for the SL. The WATE at 16mm cropped square nets just a hair wider FoV than the SWC does and is almost perfectly corrected throughout the focusing range.

The Hologon 16 dream is something that I and several other people have shared over the past 28 years. I don't want to deflate your balloon, but honestly it's a tough game to play...

Good luck with it if you follow through. I'll look forward to seeing your work. :D

G

raid
01-11-2018, 18:18
Thank you for the words of caution, Godfrey. I will go through the stages of learning how to use and to enjoy this lens. I have both film and digital M cameras, so if one doesn't work out, I still have the other. I will practice with the lens until I either learn using it correctly, or I will give up and then sell it. I hope it will be the former and not the latter outcome.
I have practice with my SWC and I quickly learned using it. I realize that using the Hologon will be a larger challenge. Using a digital camera with the lens has its challenges, but it also assist in learning how to frame and avoid getting parts of your body into the images.

Archiver
01-11-2018, 19:14
My first reaction is to get a used Q, as I like the 28mm focal length and use a combination of 28, 35 and 50 with my M9 as a regular arrangement. In fact, I thought a Q would be a great single-camera solution for much of my everyday and travel shooting.

Then I thought about other gear. Nothing that I want right now can be bought for $3000. I'm very intrigued by the Sony A7r III, which retails for about $5000 in Australia, body only. Then I'd need a Canon adapter or Sony lenses.

Another possibility is another m43 camera, like a GH5, GH5s, or G9. Any leftover money could go to faster memory cards.

A second m43 option would be a few Olympus pro lenses, cost permitting. The 40-150/2.8 would be really handy, and I'd like to get the 25/1.2 and 45/1.2.

David Hughes
01-12-2018, 01:36
Godfrey; there are a lot of film cameras out there that I would like to try but they are incredibly expensive* from dealers and, by now, rather old. I can't afford them but I was surprised that others answering the original question didn't mention them much. That was all.

Regards, David

* There's all those posh P&S's and compact cameras like the Contax, Fuji, Hasselblad, Nikon etc and the Olympus OM-4Ti and so on. And some fisheye lenses and the bodies to go with them and so on...

jsrockit
01-12-2018, 04:38
That Hologon is one sweet lookin lens!

I have to agree... :eek:

Godfrey
01-12-2018, 07:49
Godfrey; there are a lot of film cameras out there that I would like to try but they are incredibly expensive* from dealers and, by now, rather old. I can't afford them but I was surprised that others answering the original question didn't mention them much. That was all.

Regards, David

* There's all those posh P&S's and compact cameras like the Contax, Fuji, Hasselblad, Nikon etc and the Olympus OM-4Ti and so on. And some fisheye lenses and the bodies to go with them and so on...

That's much more illuminating again, David. Thank you.

raid
01-12-2018, 07:56
Hi,

I was thinking it was a biased (towards Leica) sample and wondering what the response would have been in (say) the P&S threads. As it is Leica came out on top but I still wonder.

Having said that, I can't think of neural thread except "off topic" perhaps.

Regards, David

Hi David,
I have tried before the OFF TOPIC thread. If you want to have your post buried and have nobody see it, submit your post to that thread. It will never show up unless you click on NEW POSTS. Else, it remains buried. :D

raid
01-12-2018, 07:59
As for good film cameras, I highly recommend the Canon F1N. The FD lenses are first class, and they often sell for very low prices online. The Canon 50/1.4 is a great lens, for example.

The Bessa T is a film camera that I enjoyed using for many years.

The Yashica T with its Zeiss lens is a cheap but excellent film camera.

mich rassena
01-12-2018, 08:47
I'd buy a used Sony full-frame mirrorless, lots of adapters to use my existing lenses.
The almost $2000 remaining, I'd use to go on a trip, and take some pictures.

NaChase
01-12-2018, 09:12
I'd finally get the 43mm for my Mamiya 7ii, some backpacking gear, then head off to the Wind River Range in Wyoming.

David Hughes
01-12-2018, 09:44
In reality, if I was given 30 Pounds, Dollars or Euros I'd know what to do with it and would be happy but if I was given 3 000 etc I'd worry so much about being sensible I'd end up miserable.

FWIW, that was based on bitter experience and a much larger sum of money; in the end it was given to my son towards his mortgage...

Regards, David

Axel
01-12-2018, 16:14
... in the end it was given to my son towards his mortgage...

David, for us "still living guys": isn´t it much better to give our experiences and position to our childs than any amount
of stupid money or personal fears?

Today we are living in a world with photography possibilities that never had existed before.
We will be remembered as members of the world in 2018 and what we did with it.

That is what counts for me.
That´s what stays for my son.
Just thoughts.


Regards, Axel
(father and son)

David Hughes
01-13-2018, 10:10
David, for us "still living guys": isn´t it much better to give our experiences and position to our childs than any amount
of stupid money or personal fears?

Today we are living in a world with photography possibilities that never had existed before.
We will be remembered as members of the world in 2018 and what we did with it.

That is what counts for me.
That´s what stays for my son.
Just thoughts.


Regards, Axel
(father and son)

Hi,

He gets both and so do the grandchildren but try telling them about a time when HD's were 128 KB and people could type faster than the letters appeared on the screen, and as for punched tape and card tickets...

Regards, David

ptpdprinter
01-13-2018, 10:27
...and as for punched tape and card tickets...
I was just having a lucid moment, thinking about cards and punch tape, and then it was time for bingo.

rfaspen
01-13-2018, 10:28
I still have a few cards. Long live FORTRAN!

webOSUser
01-13-2018, 10:38
And COBOL!!

I still have a few cards. Long live FORTRAN!

David Hughes
01-13-2018, 14:56
And buying extra memory as a box of a few chips to be fitted in the PCB and them falling out when it got hot and expanded slightly. And people would steal them one by one and it took a while to be noticed...

Regards, David

Archiver
01-14-2018, 19:33
Oh, the Hologon! I have peculiarly pleasant memories of seeing that lens in a shop window in Hong Kong amidst other Contax G gear. Back then, I was just getting into Contax cameras and everything was new and fresh. The Hologon in the window was almost like an Elvis sighting.

raid
01-16-2018, 17:09
I got an "Elvis" in the form of a Hologon :)

Phil_F_NM
01-16-2018, 18:04
If i had $3000 I'd put about $2500 of it into bills and paying off some student debt. I'd also get this cracked molar i have fixed. Actually, that's going to take the whole $3000, even though I have insurance...

But if I'm limited to spend it on photo stuff, I'd get a decent condition, perfectly working Bell & Howell 70HM or DR with a couple long focus Cine Ektar lenses. If I got the HM, I'd want the 400 foot magazine. Otherwise, I'd split the funds left over for film and processing.

So basically, I'd do what I'm going to do anyway but I'd have my film stock and some processing/telecine paid for.

Phil Forrest

Greyscale
01-17-2018, 06:23
I would travel to an interesting, warm place known for excellent food and friendly people, and use some of the gear that I already own.

robert blu
01-17-2018, 08:26
Interesting thread, I went through all the answers and proposals.
Time now for my idea, I couldn't post earlier because of traveling and I had not my password to access RFF on the phone!

As principle I do not need more gear...but that Rolleiflex 2.8...so beautiful...

I must say that years ago I found more interesting to spend money on workshops than buying gear. This was a good way to meet other people and see what they were doing (or trying to do), get new ideas for new projects and new challenges. The biggest result I got from the WS i took part in between 1995 and 2005 is not a technical knowledge but to know what I want to achieve with my photography. Which style or better which visual language to use in my projects. So this could be an idea, we have an interesting "masterclass" which includes a series of 5/6 weekend with a photographer and later a meeting with an editor, with the aim to learn how to finalized a project into a book.
The total cost (fee + material, printing papers...) is about 2.500/3.000 EUR

Thinking only in terms of gear a Nikon DF seems me the correct complement to my M10 and I already have the lenses I need. But I'm not sure I need more gear, already said, I know!

Because I like printing very much a good inkjet printer (A2 ...) and a stock of inks and high quality paper would be also an interesting idea...

SO, no one of the proposal made by the OP is for me and if I should buy another Leica the TL2 is very appealing...I already have the EVF which is the same of the M10

Thanks Raid for letting me think about what to buy with some money which is not (yet?) in my photo expenses budget :)

robert

Darthfeeble
01-17-2018, 08:37
I don't think that the point of the question is to be practical, thus: I would buy up every Epson R-D1x. s. and blank I could find in good shape. Money in the bank!

jsrockit
01-18-2018, 02:44
I don't think that the point of the question is to be practical, thus:

exactly...

Arbitrarium
01-18-2018, 03:57
Hmmm...

Pentacon Six TL w/Biometar.

Robot Star w/Xenon.

Ricoh Auto Half SL.

Fuji GF670.

A Steinheil Quinon 50mm 1.9 and whatever camera I can mount it on.

Maybe I'd pay someone to make me an Olympus XA with the zone focusing and auto exposure of the XA2.

And get everything serviced.

There's definitely more but I can't think of everything right now.

jsrockit
01-18-2018, 04:26
Nikon Df w/ Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G used
Used Leica Q
Fujifilm X-E3 w/ 56mm 1.2 & 90mm F2
Nikon D850 (used) w/ 50mm 1.8d
Leica CL
Sony A7R II w/ 55mm

Out to Lunch
01-18-2018, 06:07
Probably not the announced Kodak Super 8 camera which is announced at US$ 2,500/3,000.

Godfrey
01-18-2018, 06:41
Well, since the sky is now the limit and I already have both the Berning Robot II and the Robot Star 50, I think my thoughts have to turn to a Linhof Super Technika 23. My grandfather had one of those, with both roll-film and single-shot backs. He never used it, I "stole" it briefly a few times and shot photos for the school yearbook with it: an outstanding 6x9 field camera with glorious lenses.

I was so pissed off when, after my grandfather passed away, my father gave it to my uncle who sold it for another friggin' lens for his Nikon. It was worth five times that!

One of those fitted with a scanning back (and of course with roll-film and single sheet holders) would be a giggle. :)

G

dp13
01-18-2018, 12:32
I am going on my fifth year with the original Sony a7 and rangefinder lenses. I still absolutely love it but it is starting to show signs of age. Eventually, I am looking to see if there will be an a7 III and what it might offer.
If I were to upgrade right now with 3 grand I might look for a bargain on the a7r ii and then slowly add lenses. The 55/1.8 I already own, but it would be first and maybe only AF lens I'd get. Wow, looks like the money's gone.

ptpdprinter
01-18-2018, 12:55
I am going on my fifth year with the original Sony a7 and rangefinder lenses. I still absolutely love it but it is starting to show signs of age.
How is it showing its age?

Big Ursus
01-18-2018, 21:57
I'd hire a personal trainer to get me to the gym!

giganova
01-19-2018, 07:38
For $3k I'd get me the best condition Hasselblad system I could find. Medium format is really something else and leaves a lot of room for giving your photography a different direction.

Peter_S
01-24-2018, 11:52
Contax 645 or a Mamiya AFD with digital back, assuming these 3000$ would be meant for that and no other far more sensible purposes.

al1966
01-24-2018, 14:33
If its cameras then probably a Sony A6000 used and the 85mm 1.8 so I can double duty the lens as an 85 on the A7 and a near 135 on the A6000. Then I am at a loss, I can't bring myself to spend over £1k on a digital so it would be a few odd things that might be interesting to use or try, perhaps the original A7r?
Now if its photography then a load of derv, accommodation (Static caravans) and go round various photographic and linked galleries round Europe as much as the money takes.
Alternatively what about a reasonable used van create a lens mount on the back and make a big camera, that could be fun.

raid
01-24-2018, 14:57
This is a thread about "small dreams". Don't take it too seriously. It is about letting some thoughts out ...

Gary E
01-24-2018, 16:53
I've always wanted a digital Leica M, so I would choose the M9 with lens; not fond of the crop in the M8. I simply cannot support another Leica lens mount like for the new Leica CL. My dream Leica M would be the MM Monochrome, but that's way outside of your 3K limitation.

RObert Budding
01-24-2018, 19:42
Airline tickets.

ozmoose
01-24-2018, 20:41
$3,000? Shrits! If I had a spare three Gs, I could have a new life...

As usual, some excellent posts in this thread.

Me, I'm now retired, so I now have a bare-bones budget for anything photographic.

This is not to criticise those lucky ones with the dosh to buy gear, but as I'm keen on stirring the pot about this, I have today started a new thread, for those who like me, are faced with having much less to spend than a fistful of thirty Ben Franklins for new equipment, have their say about photo gear.

robert blu
02-06-2018, 12:08
Let the fantasy work in a free way...3.000 $ as a bonus to spend in a photo related way?

That Rolleiflex 2.8 ....

robert

jaapv
02-11-2018, 01:47
This is an easy poll for me. I sold my M240 and bought a CL. It was the right decision :)

Dogman
02-11-2018, 05:26
I always wanted a digital M with AF. Since there's no such thing, I'd buy an X-Pro2. I'd hold on to the the rest of the 3 grand while I wait for Fuji to build a 16mm f/2.

Well, it is about dreams and fantasies, right?

jaapv
02-12-2018, 02:20
If you use Leica wideangles, the XPro won't make you happy...

narsuitus
02-12-2018, 04:13
If you use Leica wideangles, the XPro won't make you happy...

Why?

I use a 21mm f/1.4 and 35mm f/1.4 wideangles on my M10 and M6.
I use a 12mm f/2 Rokinon, a 16mm f/1.4 Fujinon, and a 23mm f/1.4 Fujinon on my X-Pro.
I am happy.

Dogman
02-12-2018, 05:33
If you use Leica wideangles, the XPro won't make you happy...

XPro makes me very happy. I've been using multiple XPro1 bodies for the past two years or so and I really love using them. I'd like to try the XPro2 but can't justify it at present.

As for wide angle lenses, the Fuji 14mm is one of the finest lenses I've ever used. And the 23mm and 35mm lenses (both f/1.4 and f/2 models) are excellent. I'm not so keen on the 18mm, however. I long for Fuji to introduce a small 16mm f/2 lens. And, no, I've not used any Leica wide angles lately--haven't owned a Leica in about 10 years. I'm sure the Leica wide angles are superb but without AF they're pretty much useless to me because of my eyesight.

jaapv
02-12-2018, 07:02
Fuji lenses are very good :)

roscoetuff
02-12-2018, 07:24
Taking the intent of "if you suddenly had $3,000 to spend..." as a "gimmie" and nothing but what you fancy, at the moment, I'd fancy spending play money on a B&W-only printer (piezography) and a workshop to learn how to use it. Under this scenario, the downside is zero...

If I had to put skin in the game, I'd probably pick up a lens, flash, or other lighting solution.

As a Sony owner, I would caution that the A7RII fixed bugs with earlier Sony A7's (floating sensors, CMOS memory issues) and so this is the one to chase rather than the others. As a former Fuji X owner, Sony's IBIS has a lot in its favor for adapted lenses, but the menus are a bit less tidy. Not as bad as advertised, but a bit clunky. In my imagination (and perhaps reality) Leica is better at this. And if you're going to run M-mount lenses, that's the best option. Adapters can be clunky. Just sayin'.

jsrockit
02-12-2018, 12:00
Ok... redo. $3000 to waste on camera gear...

Used Nikon Df - $1300
Used Nikon 50mm 1.8d - $75
Used Fujifilm 56mm 1.2 lens - $750
7Artisans 35mm 1.2 - $140
Fujifilm X-T20 - $675
Slide Film & Development - $60

froyd
02-12-2018, 13:50
Your Leica Ms and the SWC had a baby:

- Mamiya 6 w/50mm

or if you sell the M8

- Mamiya 7 and 43mm

jsrockit
02-12-2018, 14:47
Ooh yeah, Mamiya 6 is the one film camera I'm sorry I never tried.

Beemermark
02-20-2018, 13:59
I love this thread. I already have more gear than anyone except maybe KEH. So I'd get rid of my canoe and buy a small flat bottom boat with a motor. Or maybe a cruise to Antarctica. But the boat would be first on my list-:)

jsrockit
02-22-2018, 11:01
Ok, a Leica CL...

rfaspen
02-22-2018, 12:16
I love this thread. I already have more gear than anyone except maybe KEH. So I'd get rid of my canoe and buy a small flat bottom boat with a motor. Or maybe a cruise to Antarctica. But the boat would be first on my list-:)

Hmm. I already have the boat, just need a motor. I see them for sale locally at about $100-200. That would leave me with about $2800 to spend. But what to spend it on?.......:rolleyes:

Oh wait. My son's college tuition is due. Never mind :(

pixelvandal
02-22-2018, 13:36
I'd take that $3000 and i'd go and buy a used triumph bonneville.... at least, that's what i'm doing this weekend. :)

ptpdprinter
02-22-2018, 14:45
Workshops, travel, and printing supplies.

Dogman
02-22-2018, 14:57
I'd take that $3000 and i'd go and buy a used triumph bonneville.... at least, that's what i'm doing this weekend. :)

I had one of those in the 70's. Lots of fun, lots of speed, lots of oil leaks. That's the way they made them back then.

CMur12
02-22-2018, 17:08
I would like to get all of my old mechanical cameras CLA'd, then take a couple of them on a trip.

At some point, I might want to spend that money to add digital equipment to my existing analog, but I'm not there yet.

- Murray

GulfCoastPhotog
02-23-2018, 10:25
Buy a black Canon 7s and lots of film. Go on a month travel and takes lots of photos.

David

Chuffed Cheese
02-23-2018, 10:45
Probably a quality scanner.

edodo
04-20-2018, 08:18
3000 bux goes to dream lenses, that's the best you can invest into!
Hologon? Summilux? Rolleiflexes!?

Chuffed Cheese
04-20-2018, 08:37
A lens.......

Stefan Wood
04-20-2018, 12:08
A large format canon printer.

RichC
04-20-2018, 12:18
Definitely not a Leica! Used Sony A7R III.

lxmike
04-20-2018, 12:44
an m2 and film plus a trip abroad

Mlehrman
04-20-2018, 12:55
World peace.

raid
04-20-2018, 12:58
$3000 worth of world peace? :)

ptpdprinter
04-20-2018, 13:11
$3000 worth of world peace? https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif
Give Raid the tiara.

raid
04-20-2018, 13:42
Am I "Queen"? :)

Roger Hicks
04-20-2018, 14:20
Nothing photographic. I already have more than I use/ can use.

Cheers,

R.

jsrockit
04-20-2018, 15:03
Ok, different month, different answer... ;)

New Fujifilm X-E3

Used:

Fujifilm X-E1
Fujifilm 35mm 1.4
Fujifilm 56mm 1.2
Fujifilm 18mm 2