Setting up a repro stand

[TechTalk]

I think everyone agrees. I believe there is value in trying out the different compromises. I'm glad I used Contax 645 lenses on the S while gathering Leica lenses. Pentax ED-IF telephotos are good, but try the Zeiss Superachromats and you viscerally understand the price difference. As you say, the *complete* absence of CA has its own special look.

I like the quote from Robert OToole in the link above...

"I create content for this site for fun in my free time. Instead of making a few dollars from this site, I'm more concerned about teaching people to learn to use what they already have, rather than waste time and money buying more equipment. Most of us, myself included, would make far better pictures if we'd stop buying the wrong equipment and spend more time learning how to use what we already have instead."

 

[MGrayson]

I like the quote from Robert OToole in the link above...

"I create content for this site for fun in my free time. Instead of making a few dollars from this site, I'm more concerned about teaching people to learn to use what they already have, rather than waste time and money buying more equipment. Most of us, myself included, would make far better pictures if we'd stop buying the wrong equipment and spend more time learning how to use what we already have instead."

But how do you know in advance that it's the wrong equipment? That is precisely the paradox. The saying is "You can spend a $1000 on a tripod now, or spend $1000 on a series of bad tripods and then another $1000 on the tripod you should have bought in the first place." But that doesn't work with all gear. How much do you want to spend? What does paying a little more get you? How much less money gets you something just as good? How *do* you learn to use what you have? You can't answer these questions without hands-on experience. It's funny. To me, a Leica S system is reasonable (and a joy to use) - an Alpa/Roadie/IQ4150 system is an extravagance. We are all different in that regard.

Oh, and if I had to make a living off of my photography, I'd starve.

 

[TechTalk]

All that really matters is finding the right equipment for yourself. How one arrives there is an individual journey. There will likely be stops along the way as well as forks in the road.

One of the few things about which I have no doubt, the right equipment for me will never be the right choice for everyone else.

 

[rdeloe]

But how do you know in advance that it's the wrong equipment? That is precisely the paradox. The saying is "You can spend a $1000 on a tripod now, or spend $1000 on a series of bad tripods and then another $1000 on the tripod you should have bought in the first place." But that doesn't work with all gear. How much do you want to spend? What does paying a little more get you? How much less money gets you something just as good? How *do* you learn to use what you have? You can't answer these questions without hands-on experience. It's funny. To me, a Leica S system is reasonable (and a joy to use) - an Alpa/Roadie/IQ4150 system is an extravagance. We are all different in that regard.

Oh, and if I had to make a living off of my photography, I'd starve.

I use a lot of adapted lenses on my setup, in ways that were never intended by the manufacturer. It took me a lot of time -- and wasted money -- to get to the point where I now have a pretty good idea about what's going to work.

But more important than that is knowing what is enough. I'm a big believer in "sufficient to the task".

Given what I do, how I do it, and what my skill level is, I'm confident that spending more money on equipment will not lead to an improvement in my photography. My current setup is sufficient to the task.

I think that's where Robert O'Toole is heading with that statement. Far too many people think that their equipment is the primary limiting factor that determines the quality of their work, and thus if they only spent more money on the equipment their photography would improve. I'm sure there are people whose photography is held back by the equipment, but I don't think they're common.

Personally, I don't need sharper lenses. I need sharper ideas.

... Also, more energy, better focus, a stronger back, and hands that weren't wrecked by computer work would be great!

 

[rdeloe]

If you haven't put your money down yet, you may want to consider a Componon-S 100/5.6 instead of the Fujinon. I've never compared them side-by-side, but I have a hunch the Componon-S 100/5.6 might be a better choice if you need around 100mm. I could be wrong. If you buy both you can find out and let us know! If you do go the Componon-S route, they come in all kinds of mounts, some with illuminated windows and some note. There's also a Makro-Iris version that is used in line scanning applications. As you probably know by now I'm a big fan of the Makro-Iris mount system. The lenses are all the same though.

I'm taking this back.

Out of curiosity, I just put my Fujinon EX 105/5.6 up against my Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Componon 90/4.5. I'm very impressed by that little Fuji. It's just about as good wide open at f/5.6 as the APO-Componon is at f/5.6, which is closed down a bit for that lens. The EX improves a bit at f/8, but not a lot. Fuji always claimed their EX line was one of the few, if not the only, multi-coated enlarger lenses. That helps when we use them as taking lenses.

The Fujinon doesn't get much use because the Schneider is excellent and I don't need 90mm and 105mm. But if my Schneider fell off a cliff, I could do what I need to do with the Fujinon EX 105/4.5 and its little sibling the EX 75/4.5 (also excellent).

I've not owned the 90mm version of the Fujinon EX but I've read more than once that it's better than the 105mm. If that's the case, it must be a very nice lens.

And finally, I reviewed my notes on the Componon-S 100/5.6 and was reminded that Robert O'Toole was not impressed. Apparently I did have a copy briefly and it was very bad at f/5.6, but it was not in great condition so I'm not putting much weight on its performance. At the same time though, there are users on this site who are super keen about the Componon-S 100/5.6. So as usual, there's only one way to find out...

 

[Godfrey]

But how do you know in advance that it's the wrong equipment? That is precisely the paradox. The saying is "You can spend a $1000 on a tripod now, or spend $1000 on a series of bad tripods and then another $1000 on the tripod you should have bought in the first place." But that doesn't work with all gear. How much do you want to spend? What does paying a little more get you? How much less money gets you something just as good? How *do* you learn to use what you have? You can't answer these questions without hands-on experience. It's funny. To me, a Leica S system is reasonable (and a joy to use) - an Alpa/Roadie/IQ4150 system is an extravagance. We are all different in that regard.

Oh, and if I had to make a living off of my photography, I'd starve.

Well, if I'm buying new gear and it's "niche use" kinda stuff that is costly and I'm not going to be using it too frequently, I buy from people whom I've worked with and who have a return/exchange policy for a week or three. As soon as it arrives, I test it, and if it doesn't work as I'd expected, back it goes, and I picked the next one to try, etc.

Beyond that, well, much can be done with even the most rudimentary equipment. I first try using every lens and camera combination I already have at hand and see what I get out of them. Most of the time, I already have stuff that is more than satisfactory once I know what it doesn't do well and avoid that.

G

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Well, if I'm buying new gear and it's "niche use" kinda stuff that is costly and I'm not going to be using it too frequently, I buy from people whom I've worked with and who have a return/exchange policy for a week or three. As soon as it arrives, I test it, and if it doesn't work as I'd expected, back it goes, and I picked the next one to try, etc.

Beyond that, well, much can be done with even the most rudimentary equipment. I first try using every lens and camera combination I already have at hand and see what I get out of them. Most of the time, I already have stuff that is more than satisfactory once I know what it doesn't do well and avoid that.

G

Everyone, please take note of what Godfrey said (that I highlighted). Please always test what you purchase right away. Do not wait weeks, or months, or years (as I had someone last week do) to start using it or at least test. Your optimal resolution options from most manufacturers dwindle the longer you wait. Try it out right away.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[MGrayson]

Everyone, please take note of what Godfrey said (that I highlighted). Please always test what you purchase right away. Do not wait weeks, or months, or years (as I had someone last week do) to start using it or at least test. Your optimal resolution options from most manufacturers dwindle the longer you wait. Try it out right away.

Steve Hendrix/CI

Steve, I see what you did there!

Matt