A New Classic

[mnunes810]

Every day I see countless things that catch my eye. I have always wanted to freeze frame these moments so I have finally scraped up to by my first 35mm slr. My budget is small and I have virtually no photography experience so finding anything reputable has been challenging. I ultimately settled on a mint cond. minolta srt-101. A dinosaur, I know- but I admire its simplicity (and I could afford it). I read a few reviews quickly and decided off gut feeling it would work for me. Most of my photo-ops are outdoor, and the only lens I have is the one coming on the camera, which is a minolta 50mm. So the question is did I make a remotely good call?

 

[marcpro]

Start taking pictures and you'll be able to answer your own question.

50mm is "what the eye can see". No magnification, no wide angle, just the facts. If you want close-ups, you get to move closer (sneaker zoom). If you want to catch more of a scene, you need to back up or change your viewpoint.

If you find this is limiting your creativity, then save up for a zoom lens. Otherwise, go at it! If you love taking pictures with this camera, and you love the pictures, then it's a great choice!

 

[mnunes810]

I see. That was my next question, the lens world is still Greek to me. I would like to be able to do wide angle, for one, which I know there are many lens available. Whether I can afford any one of them or not is another question. I also have a great deal of interest in sky photos. Is a wide angle lens ideal for that as well?

 

[marcpro]

I was going to suggest software for your wide angle creativity, but I see you're shooting film, so yeah, wide angle lenses would be ideal for sky and wide landscapes.

Relatively speaking, lenses for your camera shouldn't cost that much, compared with the auto-everything / Image stabilized wizard lenses available today.

Marc.

 

[gsgary]

Every day I see countless things that catch my eye. I have always wanted to freeze frame these moments so I have finally scraped up to by my first 35mm slr. My budget is small and I have virtually no photography experience so finding anything reputable has been challenging. I ultimately settled on a mint cond. minolta srt-101. A dinosaur, I know- but I admire its simplicity (and I could afford it). I read a few reviews quickly and decided off gut feeling it would work for me. Most of my photo-ops are outdoor, and the only lens I have is the one coming on the camera, which is a minolta 50mm. So the question is did I make a remotely good call?

That's what Annie Leibovitz started with and look at her now

 

[Steph]

If you find this is limiting your creativity, then save up for a zoom lens.

Be aware that zooms from that era were not that great in terms of image quality. You'd be better off with a couple of prime lenses such as a 28mm and 135mm (or maybe 200mm) to complement the 50mm lens.

 

[marcpro]

Good point Steph about the quality of "vintage" zoom lenses. Hadn't thought of that.

Bonus, prime lenses are probably cheaper anyways in this case. Unless you're getting a f0.95 Leica or something exotic like that.

 

[Pband]

I was going to suggest software for your wide angle creativity

Please suggest one such software stating what it actually does.

 

[marcpro]

PBand, look at software like PTGui and PTAssembler. Photoshop CS3 has a stitching feature as well. There are many others, some are free, some are rather expensive. The idea is to take many pics and stitch them into a wide angle final pic.

It's definitely not the same as having an actual wide angle lens, there are many drawbacks, but it's just good to know that it's a possibility.

Here's a "crude" example, with stitching errors and all...

 

[Pband]

It's definitely not the same as having an actual wide angle lens, there are many drawbacks, but it's just good to know that it's a possibility.

Oh, so you taking about Stitching? I knew it. Besides photoshop, my camera also provides a software to do this. But kindly tell me about the drawbacks in detail.

 

[marcpro]

Drawbacks of stitching:

- If scene contains moving objects, you'll get "twins" and shadows or ghosts in the final scene. Can be edited out, but means more time in the darkroom.
- Loss of details as a result of the blending process. Not necessarily noticeable unless you're a purist.
- Parallax errors when stitching scenes where there were objects nearby. Can be avoided with a proper pano head on a tripod, and good stitching software, but it means more time and equipment!

All and all, stitching is an alternative to a wide angle lens, but definitely not a substitute for one.

Hope this helps,
Marc.

 

[Pband]

Thank you very much. Can you please explain where there are black curved borders in your photo?

 

[marcpro]

The curved borders are the result of the type of "projection" I used when stitching the image. Here's another example, except here the canvas was white:

I usually crop the image to a conventional rectangle after the stitching, but not always, sometimes I don't bother if the image will only be on the web.
Cheers