Jack Baty, Director of Unspecified Services

A Photograph of a Shoe

Spending time with a copy of Edward Weston: Life Work has been inspiring. I'm normally not interested in still life photography, but Weston's photos are so good and the book's reproductions are so well-done that I'm thinking still life is worth considering. 

Phat Farm. Hasselblad 500C/M | Delta 100 | Zeiss 150 Sonnar | Rodinal 1:50

Phat Farm. Hasselblad 500C/M | Delta 100 | Zeiss 150 Sonnar | Rodinal 1:50

Above is the result of deliberately setting up a "scene," fixing the Hasselblad atop a tripod,  and carefully metering before each exposure. I normally do none of those, so this is new to me.

It's no Pepper No. 30 but it does nicely document a pair of shoes I wore for years, and which I bought under duress from my daughter, who at the time was still thinking she could make me cooler. 

 

Edward Weston: Life Work

Edward Weston: Life Work is a beautiful book filled with wonderful photographs. I'm beginning to appreciate the beauty of a well-seen and beautifully executed still life. 

I have never owned  a photography book as nicely made as this one. Lodima Press really put some effort into the production. For example the book is printed using two types of paper, each appropriate to  Weston's style and printing preferences at the time the original photo was made. The photos are represented beautifully. Perhaps not the same as a true print, but still very nice. I could sit here for hours and just explore it. 

I didn't know that Weston printed his own work, and was apparently very good at it. This resonates with me since I'm struggling to print well in the darkroom myself. It's easy to make a mediocre print, but another thing altogether to create a "fine" print. I'm not talking about the subject matter, but of the print itself. When done well, there is nothing like it. The following paragraph in the book describes what looking at a fine print feels like.

How great it would be to create something that could be described like that!

Shit Photojournalists Like | In Your Bag →

Because I am a tortured artist, I have several 35mm film cameras that I like to swap in and out of my bag. One of them looks like a box of apple juice

Seriously, if I see one more Moleskine in a "photographers" bag along with his Leica I may have to admit I'm not quite as deep and original as I thought.

Replacing my Olympus Stylus Epic

You will almost always find an Olympus Stylus Epic on or near my person. The unassuming little Stylus Epic is in my opinion the best compact film camera for carrying everywhere. It easily fits in my pocket, is weather resistant, has a very nice f/2.8 lens, a spot meter, and goes from pocket to photo about 25 times faster than my iPhone.

I've been carrying an Epic for about 10 years now, and the second one I've owned finally stopped working consistently. Occasionally it just doesn't fire, and there's a hairline crack somewhere which affects the top center of every frame. Not ideal, so I began looking to replace it.

Today on Craigslist, this showed up...

Olympus Stylus Epic Deluxe

Olympus Stylus Epic Deluxe

A nifty, like-new condition Stylus Epic Deluxe. In the box with all original paperwork, case, strap, etc. It's not black, but the champagne color is pretty nice.

I paid $10. How great is that! This is undoubtedly the best ten dollars I've ever spent on photography gear.

The Online Photographer: I Had Better 'Fess Up →

It seems fair to conclude from the evidence that I'm the victim of some persistent delusions when it comes to my own photography. For instance, every time I buy a new camera, I truly believe that I'm going to use it for the rest of my life and will never have to re-sell it. This flies in the face of all of a huge body of evidence to the contrary

That's Mike over at The Online Photographer admitting the same problem I suffer from. I too buy each new camera with the intention of it being my one-and-only for the rest of my life. That almost never happens. I'm glad it's not just me.

Leica IIIf

I've always wanted a "Barnack" Leica, if for no reason other than the nostalgia of using a piece of photographic history dating back to the mid-1930s. I'm not a (deliberate) collector, so condition and rarity weren't important to me. I ended up with a "user" IIIf.

1946 Leica IIIc (converted to IIIf) with Voigtlander 28mm Color Skopar

1946 Leica IIIc (converted to IIIf) with Voigtlander 28mm Color Skopar

The camera is not really a IIIf but rather a IIIc built in 1946 then later converted by Leica into a IIIf. It came with a lovely chrome Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM lens, which was a nice bonus, since prices on the Canon LTM lenses keep going up. When this photo was taken, I was trying the 28mm Voigtlander Color-Skopar and 28mm accessory viewfinder. The Leica IIIs were made with a 50mm lens in mind, so I'll probably keep the Canon on it most of the time. I'm also looking for a nice post-war 50mm collapsible Summicron, since that would be a great fit.

After two or three rolls of film I can say that it's a delight to use. By "delight" I don't mean that it's easy or convenient. It's neither of those.

To visualize the photo, you look through the left viewfinder for focusing, then you need to switch to the right window for framing. Both are quite tiny and not nearly as bright as the later M cameras that I'm used to. The film is advanced by turning a knob and it is rewound using another knob. No sir,  none of those newfangled levers on this camera. None of this can be done quickly.

Loading the film is even more awkward. The leader must first be trimmed manually with scissors so that it doesn't get jammed between the shutter curtain and plate. The trimmed leader is then connected to a separate take-up spool. The final assembly is then carefully pushed up into the bottom of the camera, making sure the sprockets on the take-up spool are engaged with the film leader. (I missed that last part with the first roll and ended up shooting the entire roll without the film advancing. Not good.)

There's of course no meter, so exposure must be set manually. I don't mind that, since I shoot other meterless cameras.

All of this sounds rather cumbersome, and it is - a little. But the camera feels wonderful in my hand. It's a precision-engineered mechanical marvel capable of making fantastic images. It just won't do it quickly. I read somewhere that each camera took 40 man hours to build. A little patience is a good thing. 

Below are a few images from the first practice roll.

Mamiya 6

I love medium format film. The big negatives are so much nicer to work with than 35mm. I've been shooting with a Hasselblad 500C/M for a couple of years and the images thrill me. I also love rangefinders. Using a Leica M camera is wonderful and focusing with the rangefinder is fast, easy, and accurate.

How to combine the look and handling of square 6x6 medium format film with the ease and speed of shooting with a rangefinder? I've decided that the answer is a Mamiya 6.

Mamiya 6 medium format rangefinder (photo by Yaron Levy)

Mamiya 6 medium format rangefinder (photo by Yaron Levy)

I chose the 6 over the 7 because I prefer the 6x6 format. Also, it was less expensive. I'm starting off with only the "standard" 75mm f/3.5 lens. I'm told the 50mm is outstanding, and if I like the camera well enough I'll probably end up with that also. Wider lenses have been growing on me, so having the 50mm would be nice.

I'm not sure what to expect, really. I bought a Leica M7 recently so I could have a meter and aperture-priority auto exposure when I'm feeling lazy. The Mamiya also provides those conveniences, so I suppose it's possible this new camera could supersede the Leica. Time will tell. I'm excited to find out.

The camera is on its way from a gentleman in Denmark and I can't wait to run a few rolls through it.

Manual Exposure with the Hasselblad

The Hasselblad 500C/M is a favorite camera of mine. I love the images I get from those gigantic square negatives. It's great on a tripod with motionless subjects when I can carefully meter at my leisure and don't mind that it takes 10 seconds to move the focus ring from one extreme to the other.

Wandering around using the Hasselblad handheld is another thing entirely. I don't like using it "in the field" nearly as much. Moving subjects are difficult with any system, but the Hasselblad lenses have a very long "throw" which makes it almost impossible to keep up.

Even when I'm lucky enough to get the focus right, rapidly-changing lighting conditions mean also dealing with exposure. The 500C/M uses no batteries, thus has no meter at all. I'm pretty good at using the Sunny 16 rule with my manual 35mm cameras, but for some reason always seem to get things wrong with the Hasselblad. I can't explain it. Yesterday I wanted to burn up a roll so went in the back yard, as I do, and photographed the dogs. It was cloudy and late in the day and I simply underestimated the light. While I did get a couple of decent, focused images, the exposure was off by so much that they're unusable.

Zim. Hasselblad 500C/M

Zim. Hasselblad 500C/M

Zim. Hasselblad 500C/M

Zim. Hasselblad 500C/M

As much as I love the Hasselblad system, recent failures on my part have me thinking of going with something a little more automated. Anyone have a Contax 645 system for sale?

Maine with the M7 and X100

I struggled with the decision of which camera(s) to bring on my recent trip to Maine. The purist in me wanted to bring the M3, 50mm Summicron, and a bag of Tri-X. That would have been easy, and likely a disaster. This trip called for color photography and some wide angle lenses.

Having just bought a Canon 1D MarkIII, I really wanted to take that camera. That would also have been a mistake. It's way too big and heavy for hiking and biking.

I could just bring a selection of cameras and film and decide while there which to use. I tried that on my last trip and it was a mistake. I'd have either the wrong camera (too heavy) or the wrong film (too fast or slow) and spent too much time deciding which to use anyway.

I knew I wanted to shoot some film and some digital, mostly wide angle, and all color. Not too heavy. I finally decided on bringing both the Leica M7 and the Fuji X100. They are both very small, and even carried together aren't too much trouble. I had the M7 loaded with Kodak Portra 400 and the X100 on auto ISO. With good light the Leica is perfect and when the light goes away the Fuji is great.

Leica M7 and Fuji X100

Leica M7 and Fuji X100

This turned out to be a terrific combination. Most of the time I carried both around my neck. No problems. On longer or more strenuous hikes I took just the X100. It's very light and doesn't require that I also carry film. Everywhere else I took both and alternated, depending on mood or subject.

Here are a few images from the trip.

Missing Digital

I kind of miss digital. I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "Oh no, here we go again." and you're right. This has happened before. So?

Currently, I own 2 digital cameras; the Fuji X100 and a 10-year-old Canon 1Ds. The X100 is great for having with me and grabbing snaps. The out-of-camera JPEGs are terrific. I love it. The 1Ds was at one time an $8000 monster full-frame brick. I've been borrowing it for 6 years or so. Technically, it's not mine, but realistically it might as well be. Anyway, the 1Ds is getting a bit long in the tooth. The files can look great, and the camera feels good, but it's a bit slow, sensor is full of dust, the screen is tiny, and it starts to get noisy at ISO 400.

So, what am I missing? Speed and convenience, mostly. Sometimes shooting with meterless, manual focus film cameras is not what I feel like doing. Sometimes. Today, for example. I wanted to go out and take some photos of my dogs. Most days I'm fine grabbing a roll or two and hoping for the best with the rangefinders. Other days, that's not good enough and I want to just aim and rattle off a dozen frames without thinking too much. The X100 doesn't do that. The rangefinders don't do that. The Nikon F6 would be fine, but I'm not fond of burning through film that quickly. And sometimes I simply want to play with the photos now.

Canon ID Mark III

Canon ID Mark III

Well, what then? Honestly, I'd like a newer 1Ds, but those are still quite expensive. The big upgrade in the 1D series was the Mark III, back in 2007. I've been watching prices on the 1D Mark III drop for the past couple of years, and they've finally gotten to the sub $1000 area. Found one on Craigslist today and will pick it up on Tuesday. 10 frames per second, 30 frame raw buffer, solid and weatherproof build, crazy-fast autofocus, and a zillion available lenses. Can't wait.