Well he did have a masochistic streak...

K.

Essentially spam.

Their estimates seem to be a bit on the high side to me.

K.

Personally I'd stick a film in it and use it! If you don't have a film scanner you can get companies like Peak Imaging to dev, print and scan and thus have the best of both worlds. Not cheap, however. Developing your own is probably the way to go if you have some means to scan them.

Best wishes, Kris.

Sadly I have never been. There are lots of places I want to visit in the eastern Med but have never had the chance (Palmyra, Krak de Chevalier etc.)

Lawrence of Arabia did his undergraduate dissertation on Crusader Castles and visited many of them, on foot, carrying a half plate camera and a tripod. His photographs were so good that Oxford gave him his dissertation back (not usual) and it was published in the mid 80s.

Best wishes, Kris.

I was actually rather disappointed in these shots generally.

The first would have been better to have been at a smaller aperture and get both the people and the painting in focus. I was, however, already at 1600 ISO and the reason it is in BW is because the noise is dire.

The second, I did deliberately focus on the statue's face, it seemed the important thing to be in focus. On this occasion I could have upped the ISO and had a slightly smaller aperture. I could have also taken a few more but as always, it looked OK on LCD and less good on the PC.

The third is heavily cropped as I was all the way across a large hall. In this case I think the softness is camera shake combined with the crop.

Compositionally, I like the first one best but it is ruined by the softness of the people. The young son and father seemingly oggling the lady in the painting was what I was after. And it is a grabbed shot in the sense that people rarely stay more than, what, 15 seconds? in front of an exhibit. At least no one was shooting at me!

I get very self conscious photographing strangers in a museum, and the K20D with the DA* 50-135mm is hardly inconspicuous, perhaps I should have used the 43mm Ltd. I think next time I'll load up the MX with Tri-x, fit the 40mm pancake and put it in it's muffler case.

By the way, I don't mind criticism. I knew, really, that these weren't good enough but I was hoping I'd get away with it. I think we have all done that now and again!

K.

I'm pretty sure the K20D would win these days although the DR of BW film still beats a sensor unless you start using HDR-type techniques. A more interesting comparison would be a high-quality scan of a 5x4 neg v. the K20D... Sadly my finances don't run to a drum scanner!

I don't shoot film because of any belief it is better, it is just different and fun. There was something inherently nice in using the LX with its FB-1/FC-1 action finder and the manual glass.

Having said that, I may have some digital images from that day, I'll have a look!

K.

Pick up a reversing ring for your 28mm and you'll have a fine macro lens for not very much.

If you have a 28 and a 50 I'd look for a 135mm next. The M series 135mm f/3.5 is a lovely little lens, the K series f/2.5 bigger but rather nice IQ. The A series version is a bit pricey as it wasn't as common as the M series one, probably because 80-200mm zooms had become good enough for most people at the time.

Cheers, K.

Thanks Dan

Personally, I'd say not. I know the bug isn't so large, but the riot of colour is lovely.

K.