The included 50mm lens is fast and seems to be sharp, but I only took a half a dozen or so test shots. Snapping a photo can be quite jarring the first time with the VN. The mirror snaps quite hard and probably added unwanted motion blur to a few of my shots. With that being said here are a couple test shots that came out ok. Vivitar Camera Accessories Owner's manual 26 pages. Vivitar Camera Flash Owner's manual 7 pages.
Vivitar Camera Flash Owner's manual 29 pages. Vivitar Camera Flash Owner's manual 28 pages. Vivitar Camera Flash Owner's manual 15 pages, 2. Vivitar Camera Flash Instructions manual 10 pages. Vivitar Camera Flash Owner's manual 18 pages. Vivitar FD N Manuals. Vivitar AF Ni Manuals. Vivitar Digital Camera 10x25 Operation manual 16 pages.
Vivitar Digital Camera Instruction manual 55 pages, 2. Vivitar Digital Camera Manuals. It seemed that the first few frames of the first couple rolls were kind of hard to roll onto the take-up spindle inside the camera, but that apparently was my fault in having forgotten that one needs to make sure the sprocket holes on the edge of the film mate up with the sprocket wheels inside the camera before advancing the film.
Once that was done the take-up smoothed right out. The test drive of the Vivitar came during a beautiful Fall day just before the winter weather started in the Ohio Valley in the middle of November. The photos of the dam were all shot at varying telephoto settings, which necessitated changes in focus to a small extent due to lens focal length, and the shots all came out fine, crisp and clear.
A couple shots of the car also came out fine despite a brightly sunlit day, with the car shots being taken at a 28mm wide angle lens setting just off the car's nose. I was satisfied with the photographic results that the Vivitar produced.
There were a couple drawbacks. First, the first couple of rolls of film being cranked onto the take-up spool have been a bit rough for the first few cranks of the take-up handle, but that was my fault.
Also, the little rubber eyepiece that fits onto the aft part of the viewfinder was on the loose side. In fact, it actually dropped right off the camera when I turned the camera upside down. I decided I didn't really need that loose of a fitting on the aft end of the viewfinder and tossed it into the camera bag, where it will probably stay indefinitely. I can certainly see through the viewfinder fine without it attached, and no doubt will be able to get photos without it. Thirdly, a K-type bayonet lens that works perfectly and fits tightly on the ZX-M feels a bit loose in the Vivitar's mount.
The reason for that could be one of a number of things, like differing manufacturing tolerances from one lens maker to another. The Vivitar, incidentally, came with a Vivitar lens while you normally have to buy the lens extra when you get only the camera body.
That Vivitar lens fit that new Vivitar camera perfectly, nice and tight. Apparently, Vivitar takes manufacturing tolerances between their cameras and lenses into account, since the Vivitar lens fit the new Viv camera very well. Some swear by them while others swear at them. However, it seemed from a quick perusal of a limited amount of reports available that most persons were happy with the results they got for the money they put out. In short, they generally felt they got good pictures from a very reasonably priced camera.
Moreover, I was satisfied with the way the Vivitar handles, operates and takes photographs. Some gripes in that one magazine article had to do with the lack of what one would call optional features and amenities in the photographic world, such as autofocus, auto wind and the like.
Other persons, a very small minority, had bad things to say about something going wrong with the Vivitar they bought and customer service from the manufacturer not being up to what they considered a decent standard. I never have had any gripe with the lack of those optional features on a straight mechanical film camera, since they are things that tend to go wrong at the worst time. The Vivitar also feels sturdy enough to last forever, or at least still be going strong after I give out.
Most of the persons reviewing the camera said they had bought it for a basic photography instruction course, and that it filled that role very well. Others said that they were satisfied with the camera and its performance well enough that they were considering it as first-line photography equipment.
What do I think? It seems sturdier, it feels better in the hand and it takes equally good photos. The mm lens seems a bit "slower'' than what I've been used to for some reason, to the point where you really need more light than other makes of zooms to get the thing to work in low light conditions. However, when you are working with ASA film in broad daylight when the sun is out, all the way from 28 to 70mm settings on the lens, you get good pictures out of the camera.
When you boil it all down, the old mechanical 35mm film cameras filled the photographic niche that cried out for a relatively fast-operating camera that you could take literally anywhere and not have it fail you.
I never used any of the older Speed Graphic cameras, but since the manual 35mm cameras had superseded the Speed Graphics by the time I started being a news reporter in , chances are the 35mm cameras did the job faster and in other ways better than the old Speed Graphics did.
The pocket Fujifilm digital camera I began using just last summer and the Pentax ZX-M 35mm film camera I still use have certain advantages over the old manuals. The Pentax, for instance, is just short of being completely automated with its built- in film advance and rewind motor, and its ability to operate in any of three different operating modes.
All you have to do when it is set to Program mode is set the appropriate zoom setting on the lens and make sure it is focused okay. The digital is even more advanced, since it also features autofocus and has a handy little gadget surrounding the firing button that zooms the lens and you don't have the initial cost of film purchase or the cost of developing and printing film.
All you have to do with the digital is upload the images onto your computer and email them off to whoever wants to use them. In short, cameras have become a lot easier for the average person to operate since when I first became exposed to photography.
As noted, the old mechanical 35mm cameras had their niche and they still do. We have to remember that all it takes to bring a largely battery-run camera to the point of being dead in its tracks is a completely discharged set of batteries, or to be operating in a place where the temperatures are so low that the batteries simply don't put out enough current to make all the different gewgaws on the camera work.
Picture this, if you will excuse the choice of words, you are out on a shooting expedition with a digital camera some fifty miles from nowhere and have just started firing away when your camera flashes the warning signal at you that indicates you have just a couple more images to go before the batteries are completely dead.
You check in the camera bag or your pocket and discover that the spare batteries at back at the house approximately 75 miles away. In the meantime, you know in your heart that the award-winning shot you have been shooting at is fading fast with the available light as sunset is coming on rapidly. Surely, that shot is not going to be there in the morning when you come back with a set of new batteries in the digital camera.
Now, if you had a mechanical 35mm film camera in a situation like that, you wouldn't have to sweat the situation. When the batteries on the old mechanicals go dead, all that stops working is the light meter. Anybody with any experience at all with a straight mechanical camera can use that experience to tell them what settings will put the camera into the ball park of getting a decent shot out of the available light even with a dead light meter.
0コメント