I am looking to restart my B & W hobby that I had for years. I have always used a Minolta X700 but my pictures don't seem to be as sharp as they used to. Probably due to getting older but I thought I might look at getting a different camera. Any suggestions as to what will take the sharpest and best B&W's. Any advice will be appreciated. Thanks Kim

-- Kim Vrtiska (vrtiska@alltel.net), April 09, 2000

Answers

Nothing wrong with your camera. It's a nice user model and should give you good results. Your eyes are not as sharp as they used to be so get some good glasses. Did you use that c-41 color black and white film? If you did then you have found the problem. And do you use a tripod or hand hold your shots? Your hands aren't as steady as they used to be so get used to it. It is never the camera's fault. It is ours. Get used to it. James

-- james (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), April 09, 2000.

The camery may have an optical problem (such as lens surfaces damaged by aggressive gases, if the storage was bad), but you could have that checked. Even if there is nothing wrong with your camera, it might be that your sight has changed. I remember that my wife had serious problems focusing our old x-300, although I thought nothing could go wrong with the focusing aid (don't know the English term; is it split-screen?). I would think there are two options:

1) Get a correction lens for the viewfinder. 2) Get a new camera, either one with a focusing aid that suits you, or an autofocus model.

As to the model: There are many fine cameras around. Your choice will entirely depend on your favourite field of photography. SLRs are not usually silent cameras, so maybe they are not the best choice when you wish to take candid portraits. For the same reason (noise), an AF may not be appropriate. For more static work, such as landscape or architecture, SLRs are just fine, with the range of lenses offered for SLRs an argument in their favour. I know there is a wide range of lenses (even a PC lens) for Leicas, but I would expect it to be a bit more difficult to use as a viewfinder is not really wysiwyg. To keep this short, I suggest you get a bit more specific. Then I'll be glad to give you more suggestions.

-- Thomas Wollstein (thomas_wollstein@web.de), April 10, 2000.

Go Autofocus, Auto-Program, and Digital.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), April 10, 2000.

Interesting. My wife had a x700 which she hadn't used for several years. I took it out of storage, and gave it a couple of rolls of film to eat. It didn't give sharp focus. Exposure was good (given the tolerance of color negative film), but it just wasn't sharp. I took my Nikon FM2 along for parallel shots for comparison. There wasn't any. The Nikon was distinctly sharper.Since my ancient eyes aren't that great, and I don't think Nikon built in some superrefractive capability, I have to say it was the Minolta. I can only assume that there is a problem in the mirror alignment, since the lens doesn't look to have any separation or other problem, and most lens problems would be visible in the viewfinder. And James M.... I have used lots of chromogenic black and white. XP2, XP2 super, T400CN and Kodak B&W. Whatever else you may say about the film, lack of sharpness has never been a problem, using exposure indices of 100 to 800. My bet is on the Minolta. A newer camera is probably the best solution.

-- Richard Newman (rnewman@snip.net), April 10, 2000.

I suggest that you get a medium format (6x4.5, 6x6, or 6x7 cm) camera. If you are going to the trouble of doing your own printing, you might as well go for the extra quality that you will get with medium format over 35mm.

Chris

-- Chris Ellinger (ellinger@umich.edu), April 11, 2000.

I don't know the design of Minolta, but sometimes old springs of the pressure plate don't keep the film straight, it is a little curved. And out of focus, naturally. The negative is sharper near the edges, if so.

Sakari

-- Sakari Makela (sakari.makela@koulut.vantaa.fi), April 14, 2000.

I could be the camera along with changed eyesight. I was away from photography for about 15 years and my cameras were not stored in ideal conditions. I have a Nikon F2 and a Koni Omega M.The Nikon worked first time I tried it...sent it out for a clean and adjust and it only need cleaning. The Koni Omega is now a bookend,for some reason the mechanical shutter release dosent work any longer and the repair shop couldn't fix for an economical price.The Minolta could be the same, however, I have a friend who is using an SRT 101 for 20 years with no problems.

I know that when I turned 40.. boy.. did my eyes change!! It's Bifocals and split image focusing screens for me now.

-- Robert Orofino (rorofino@iopener.net), April 14, 2000.

If you're really interested in getting a new one there are plenty of fantastic buys out there in 35 mm. I bought a Canon Rebel years ago as my first camera. It has auto exposure and focus, and is still my favorite camera for 35 mm. I bought an EOS 5 (same as the AE2) and it seems like I spend more time trying to figure how to get it to do what I want than I do with the old Rebel. Supposedly the 5 has better autofocus and has been programmed for more exposure combinations, but I have yet to find a picture that I've wanted that the Rebel couldnt handle. My advice is to try out a few and see if you really want all the gagdets and stuff on the higher end models.

Other than that you'll probably want to go to medium format especially if you want to make your own enlargements that are bigger than about 11x14. I have several medium format models and the best by far is my RB67. Its heavy and it was a bit more expensive than the others but it is so incredibly reliable. I have tried a Kiev 88 (major junk, optics are good but the finder meter broke the first time I used it, and the lenses in my telephoto literally fell apart right in my hands!), a Mamiya C33, a Yashicatmat-G, and an old Agfa. I still have the Yashicamat-G and the Agfa. Both take excellent pictures, but don't get alot of use since I have the RB.

Best of luck! Its always fun to get a new toy!

-- Rob (robmoll860@cs.com), May 23, 2000.