I'm baaaaa aaaack!

[Greebe]

You're worried about jpg artifacts and you're using Advantix?! hehe

[High_Jumbllama]

Is regular 35mm film better? Or what would you recommend? I really have no clue hence half the pictures being next to useless.

[High_Jumbllama]

Originally posted by ZokesPro
Yeah, like hold you down and beat you to a bloody pupl while the other hands cop a feel.

It would almost be worth it.

[Greebe]

35mm has much larger negatives and cheaper to develope

[High_Jumbllama]

I borrowed the camera anyway. Any recommended brands or models?

[Greebe]

Grain is the biggest issue. 35mm is better, especially so if you use good film (I like Fuji Provia) but even if you did the Digital camera thang you would still require a good flash... and those cost regardless of what type camera used

[ZokesPro]

Originally posted by High_Jumbllama
It would almost be worth it.

Oh yeah, besides, six hands.... are WAY better than two.

[Greebe]

Well if you stay with film the larger the negative the better... I know Doc has a sweet medium format camera but can't think what off hand. I've used a few medium format's in my day and the difference in resolution puts any 35mm to shame. If 35mm Nikon of Minolta makes some very nice models.

Digital wise I like Minolta first (A1/A2), then Canon, but my preferences cost a fair amount of cash out of pocket wether it's film or digital.

If you shop around for a 35mm look to see what used can be had. About 4 years ago I picked up a decient Nikon complete setup for $200. Included a tripod, camera body, high speed drive, nice flash, two decient lenses (28-80 and a 100-300mm), mess of filters, two camera bags to carry it all and a few other accessories. All were in mint condition.

[High_Jumbllama]

Originally posted by ZokesPro
Oh yeah, besides, six hands.... are WAY better than two.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .