[PRCo] Re: Camera Perspective

[Fred W. Schneider III]

Off topic, I know.  But almost everyone out there walks around with a
35mm camera.  I am not a salesman for Nikon.  I simply use them because
their lenses are interchangeable to some degree on every Nikon from my
two old Nikkormats through the FE2 to the N90.  Once you have four
bodies that work and an armament of a dozen lenses, you don't suddenly
rush out on a whim and convert to Canon or some other mark.  

The solution to John's problem of leaning and keystoning buildings is a
perspective control lens.  I don't know if they are available from
Canon.  Nikon has them ... the 28mm PC is over a grand ... I think about
$1200 (mine came with an instruction sheet showing cameras they haven't
produced in many years). I think the 35mm PC is about $700-800; I found
mine used for $350.  [As my daughter states, "The difference between men
and boys is the price of their toys."  The front elements of a PC lens
can be screwed up above the normal position; and because the entire
barrel can rotate 360 degrees in the mount, the front element can
actually be made to move left, right, up, down ... whatever you need to
keep the camera level and still bring the entire subject into the view
finder (ground glass).  

And if someone wants to know, why the hell does this man have four 35mm
cameras ... I don't find it practical to trade in one camera on
another.  Once it has depreciated down to next to nothing, it has more
value for what I can do with it with film later than what it will take
off the new camera.  This is similar to how much value does a 1995
computer have ... a lot if you can use it, otherwise nothing. The N90 is
regularly filled with Kodachrome 64.  The FE2 usually has Kodachrome 200
in it (good for inside cathedrals and at night ... at night particularly
because K64 has horrible reciprocity characteristics and should not be
used below about 1/2 second).  One of the old Nikkormatt's is
quasi-permanently attached to a copy stand ... hasn't left the darkroom
in years ... good for making slides from postcards and pictures.  The
fourth body is simply a spare -- you don't throw out a body worth $25
when it works.  You deep six it when it needs repairs.

PC lenses are not a poor-man's view camera.  You can actually buy a 4x5
view for less.  But they weigh a lot less and allow you to do reasonable
architectural photography in 35mm format.  And they require cameras than
can be used in a fully manual (non-automatic) mode because the exposure
metering has to be done before the lens is adjusted.  But they are
great.  My view camera hasn't been out of its crate in years because it
is too damn heavy; the PC lenses are on a Nikon almost every day I go
out taking pictures.  

They are really what you hint that your wife should buy you for
Christmas when you have bought her a mink coat.  Most of us don't just
rush out and buy them.  You need to live on beer and Hundai automobiles
instead of Manhattans and Cadillacs for a while if you want to build up
the camera bag.  

John F Bromley wrote:
> 
> Not to mention, when I'm scanning a negative over it's full width, often
> necessary, buildings in the background tend to "lean in" a bit on either
> edge.  When you're printing a view that is also tilted in the negative (Bill
> often did it and so do I, even tho' I make a conscious effort not to - I
> think my left leg must be a bit shorter!), trying to get the building lines
> parallel to the edges of the photo can often be very difficult.  Get one
> edge right and it looks good, then you look at the other side and you think
> you're seeing the Leaning Tower of Pisa!
> 
-- Trailing quotes stripped by Listar --