Ich muß Foto machen.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000709SU/ref=cm_wl_ovu-pg.1-pos.6/102-1935719-3948907?v=glance&coliid=IVE1K6BO1B4O8&me=A3LJ5WMKNRFKQS

I believed he used it on the current Gucci and Sisley campaigns. Apparently the lens it quite good, but it's certainly not as versatile as a good SLR.

I don't like the way the majority of digital shots look, stevem. The only time I've seen digital shots that look as good as a good 35mm shot is on SLR digitals--which cost $5000!

I think I might buy the camera Spencer recommended, but I'm going to hold off for a day or two for more recs!

I should have said 'in my world' and also included Nick Knight. But yeah, Richardson is pretty big right now...

http://www.lomolca.de/lomo.jpg

(xpost)

If he really did take the Gucci ads with that camera then I'm fucking sold.

btw, I use digital now (Canon S400) since I hate paying for film and processing.

http://www.studio5tv.com/fotografos/fotog4/terryp.jpg

Features:
Originally designed as a pocket-sized Soviet spy camera

!!!!!!!!! Sold!!!! Why wouldn't you want it as your only camera, Spencer? I note the mention on Amazon about "super-saturated creative shots"...re: Digital, I enjoy having the prints. My house is covered in prints and I have a billion of 'em in a drawer waiting for frames and stuff. I have...9 photos on my desk at work right now.

Where did you get yours, Geeta? I don't really have a problem with fully manual but I haven't touched one in so long.

re: Prints, you can have excellent prints made from digital! and you don't have to develop every pic to figure out which one you want a print of...

and Mary, was my comment surprising because Terry's not the biggest at the moment, or because he's been big for a while?? I don' ge'it :|

Also, I know Barrus was talking about an older SLR that he used to great effect - I'm thinking it was the Olympus OM-10, which is all over ebay for cheap.

The thing with the Lomo is I really liked the test shots and the whole concept of it, but you're right, it's a terrible idea for it to be the only camera I have. Though I do like the fact that it excels at nightshots.

re: getting things ebay etc: um, well, the reason why I'm personally using Amazon to do all my researching is cos, haha, I have an Amazon credit account that has nothing outstanding on it. Unlike, haha, all my, haha, credit cards. And my bank account has, oops, like, no money! So I really NEED a new camera but cannot presently AFFORD a new camera just off the bat like that so I'm kind of trying to jimmy the Amazon thing so I can just use my card there--BUT if I get this Lomo which is really appealing to me, then I will still need an additional "regular" camera that I can buy at a later date, ie my next time I get paid soooooo nevermind this whole paragraph! Haha! Again!

OK so I can't decide if the LOMO is just a fashion accessory or a funtional camera. It seems like half and half reviews but I don't TRUST Amazon reviews because I think about 45-65% of the reviews are written by morons.

OK so if the LOMO will NOT be my only camera and I supplement it with the same $20 cheapo Target camera that took all these pics and this pic which I use as my desktop at work, would that be a good choice? I do still like that camera you first referenced though, Spencer.

Hmmm.

http://www.rotovibe.com/files/2003Aug13_LA_Sunset.jpg

There's a new process for digital prints called 'Chromira' which is simply amazing. I use it in my art.

if you're interested in Medium format you might also want to check out either the Holga or the Lubitel. both can be found for very cheap (20-40$), but don't have flash. i bought my Lubitel on ebay for 30$ and it got sent to me from Russia with love. it was so amazing. it was wrapped in brown paper with yarn tied around it and weird spy letters all over it.

and check out how cool it looks
http://static.wired.com/webmonkey/99/23/stuff3a/lubitel.jpg

I didn't think of craigslist! Has anyone used the Olympus Stylus?

xpost: that camera is so awesomely weird looking.

I need a camera too, as my petite Canon died a slow death sometime last January--What kind of camera do you recommend for me? I would like to take pics like a mix between Wolfgang TIllmans, Shoichi Aoki, and Hiromix.

http://www.nyip.com/tips/topic_holga0802.php

Mary, I defer to your fashion wisdom as ever, however I do like Richardson quite a bit.

What kind of camera do you recommend for me? I would like to take pics like a mix between Wolfgang TIllmans, Shoichi Aoki, and Hiromix.
this is going to cost more than $170! Also, does anyone know what Struth/Gursky/Sternfeld are using for their large format shots?

My digital is a bit pricey, but you can get a Canon s230 for under $300 at Amazon. It will allow high quality 8x10 prints.

http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/ts/exchange-glance/Y02X4660607X2237108/qid=1063830875/sr=1-1/102-1935719-3948907#image

Ooer Spencer, I don't like. Difference of opinion then.

I don't even like his Hysteric Glamour shots!

there is also a Twin lens Reflex (i think?). that's like the picture of the lubitel i posted. you look through one of the lenses, and the camera takes a picture with the second.

and also there is the Rangefinder where the lens is off to the side (much like a holga) and the lens takes a picture from the center. you're not taking a picture of exactly what you're seeing so a lot of people that use these "shoot from the hip" (meaning don't look through the eye piece and just sorta wing it.

Rangefinder. notice the eyehole off to the side and the lens in the middle
http://64.95.118.51/images/opti/ee/8d/483165-elec_lg-resized200.jpg

Twin Lens Reflex. two lenses
http://static.wired.com/webmonkey/99/23/stuff3a/lubitel.jpg

I'm debating between the Yashica and the Olympus still. I'm putting the Lomo on my wishlist. In case anyone was, like, interested in that.

Holgas and Lomos (and Terry Richardson) (especially Terry Richardson)(no, really, fuck Terry Richardson) are boring - letting a mechanical gimmick take over for creativity.

Unless you have access to your own darkroom, I don't recommend a medium-format camera (ie TLRs like the Lubitel). More expensive to get processed and printed, and slower.

What's your budget, Ally? You can get a good SLR for sub-$250 if you really want one.

is this camera rockism?

My budget is under $200, preferably more like $150ish. :\

Look at the 400,000 websites out there with Joe Schmoe's 'artsy' Holga photos that trade on the defects as content unto themselves. Which is possible, but only the first few times you see it.

They have the best reputation for used stuff on the net, and everything's in great condition even at their worst ratings (plus there's a 60-day or so guarantee).

For instance, for $155, there's an OM-1N w/ 50mm lens for $155
http://www.keh.com/shop/duplicate.cfm?crid=5829658&skid=OM0199905145506&sid=newused&bid=OM&cid=01

A wee bit more, $220 for a Canon AE-1 w/ 50mm lens in "excellent plus"
http://www.keh.com/shop/duplicate.cfm?crid=5829658&skid=CA0199905131404&sid=newused&bid=CA&cid=01

(I'm a big Olympus fan - they're so much lighter and smaller than other manufacturers. Plus cheaper.)

If you want new w/ bells and whistles (autoexposure, autowinding, autofocus), the Canon Rebel series will run you about $250-260 at B&H Photo in Manhattan for a new body and the Canon 50mm lens. That's at least as 'good' as a T4 or upper-level point-and-shoot, for less money.

Fully-manual is (usually, there are things like Leicas which are a serious exception to the rule) cheaper, lighter, usually quieter (the Canon Elan 7e is an exception here - it's really quiet). Some people think you have more 'control' over the image, some people just feel more comfortable with them. I like fully-manual (esp. with medium format) sometimes because it makes me slow down and burn less film. If you do night photography, these are sometimes easier to use because you can open the shutter, turn the camera off and preserve the battery.

Automatic has the advantages inherent in computers doing the loading and winding (fewer screwups there), most of the choices on exposure (shooting print film, the camera will almost always be close enough for it to not matter unless you're in a really weird situation like shooting directly into the sun) and being faster overall (you can load and shoot an entire 36exp roll in a matter of seconds just clicking the shutter release). They're more expensive, louder, larger, heavier, and usually get packaged with a bad consumer zoom.

Then there's the 'no-control at all' school typified by Lomo and Holgas (and maybe I'm too hard on them), where you don't control focus or exposure, and in the Holga's case, whether or not the camera has a giant gaping hole to ruin the film.

One more question (famous last words...haha): what is a good range of shutter speeds to have? I know this depends upon what you'll be doing with it, but in general?

You'll almost always be using something in the range of 1/30s to the 1/2000 range. Anything longer than 1/30 and you'll get camera shake (and 1/30 is if you're good and use the right technique and so on) handheld, and anything longer than 1/1000 is rare, unless you're shooting fast film in the middle of the day.

anybody have any other suggestions? I need a 3.2-4M cam, willing to blow up to about $400.

http://www.dcresource.com/
http://www.dpreview.com/

I've been extremely happy with my Canon S400 (which received excellent reviews). I used it to take the sunset picture above. Also, see the Spencer Chow FAP thread for more pics.