CANTAX?
I use mostly Pentax equipment. This is soley because when I was a lad I bought a Pentax MX and, by the time you've collected a bit of gear, it's a hassle to change it all. Not that there is anything wrong with Pentax! I also use some old Canon stuff - an EOS 600 and a lovely F1 which first saw the light of day when I was ne'er but a youth and is still going strong today. Being a mechanical engineer by trade and a tinkerer by nature I find old cameras like this satify my need to own something where I can understand how the thing works! BTW I overcame the problem of the lack of suitable 1.3v cells for the meter by putting a 2.5k resistor in series and it now seems spot-on with 1.5v cells.
For in-flight hang gliding photos I use an MZ-M with a 17mm fisheye - or 17mm rectilinear if I get tired of curves. The MZ-M is a great little camera and has the benefits of being lightweight and fairly cheap. My 'serious' camera is a Z1-p. This is a very underated camera but seems to attract a good price second-hand from those who know just how good a camera it is. A to D
I scan all my 35mm slides with an Acer Scanwit 2720. However, I now wish I'd have bought the 2740 or something with Digital Ice hardware for removing dust spots and scratches because no matter how careful I am I end up spotting every scan. As for old slides... grrr! Anyway, I use Polaroid DSR software to clean up images, which can be quicker than cloning with photoshop but has to be used with care. It works better on some shots than others. I have put a link to the free download site on my Links page (look yonder).
NEW DOG OLD TRICKS
I've recently had a go with digital cameras and have bought a Sony DSC-U20. This tiny 2mp camera couldn't be called a serious imaging device and yet takes very good quality photos and is cute enough to always attract attention whenever I use it.
I am a bit paranoid that everyone is going to use digital instead of film and that film supplies/services will become harder and harder to obtain. If this does happen (bound to eventually) it will be a very sad day. Digital is ok but it definitely isn't fantastic. Like most recent technological advancements,it has removed the subtle characteristics and beauty of an analogue world and replaced it with machine code. Film has been just fine for the last 100 years or so but now everyone craves instant gratification and throwaway pictures on the grounds that if you take enough of them you'll get a good shot. And I bet my F1 will still be able to take photos in another 30 years time (providing they still make film!)while the latest DSLRs will probably be unusable. Having said all that I've just bought an EOS 300D DSLR. The relentless tide of change and the prospect of no film/processing costs have convinced me I need one. I shall report on its usefulness in a while.
BLIMEY!
Well, I've had the 300D for a couple of months now and all I can say is, WOW! The image quality is really excellent (better than a 2700 scan from a slide) and, with the addition of the Russian firmware hack (link on Look Yonder page), it is an even more useable camera which in my opinion is only let down by lack of user selectable servo focus (maybe a later version of the hack will sort this out) and a spot metering facility. With a 1 gig CF card, a couple of batteries, car charger and a storage device (I use a 30 Gb X's - Drive Pro. Stupid name but works fine apart from very limited battery life) you can go anywhere... so long as you have electricity!
For supplying shots for publication or a library it is so much more convienient, cheaper and flexible than film. I am hanging on to my film cameras though - peering into an F1 viewfinder is like Cinemascope after the 300D's tiny viewfinder image. I have put some shots from the 300D on the site.
