3d Camara - Need Advice

[P3D Duane Kimball <dkimball@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have for quite some time sat back and watched the bickering over what is
the best 3-D camera format.  Quite frankly, I agree with whoever said to
quit arguing about the format and go out and take 3-D pictures.  

I shoot in four different formats and each is best for a particular purpose.
For those newcomers looking to get into a great hobby, here are my general
observations:

Single Camera

If you shoot stationary objects (like my wife's ceramics), nothing can beat
it.  The available optics, camera control, and control of stereo base cannot
be equaled in any stereo camera of which I am aware.  My personal choice is
an Olympus OM2S (it is 100% of the image thru the viewfinder).  I cut them
down to European format and put them in RBT mounts for use in viewers.

Nimslo (Teco Modified)

If you are a newcomer, this is the best bet as far as I'm concerned.  I have
all three macro lenses.  It is point and shoot, has good optics, and is
extremely light.  Most of my "Wow" pictures (birds in flight, macros of
flowers, etc.) are done with my trusty Nimslo.  And, 95% of the time, you
won't be able to see any difference in picture quality between it and the
great 50's cameras.  The difference between half frame and Realist format is
nothing to most to most of the people with whom you will share you pictures.
(Note to Grant:  You made absolutely the right choice for a first camera.
Get the macro lenses and the modification - you'll be even happier. If you
are a casual 3-D'er, you may never need or want a Realist.)

FED Boy

For those who wrote about modern audiences wanting more width, I have to
agree. The European format is much more pleasing (being roughly the ratio of
most TV sets) than the Realist format. After some initial problems (I can't
say enough good words about Joel Alpers), I finally got this gem to be a
good, reliable part of my 3-D entourage.    The 2.8 lenses allow me to focus
in to 1 meter (39 inches), the automatic settings are great for spontaneous
shots, and you at least get aperature control for flash.  (The depth of
field gauge on the BOY is wonderful.)  Best things about the FED are the
"feel" of the camera and 7 perf format.  Worst thing is lack of control over
shutter speed.  Beware the problem cameras and go only to a reputable
American "re-worker" like Joel.  When you get one that works right, you'll
love it.

Realist

I have only used a borrowed Realist.  (If George keeps his prices down, I
may sport for one of my own in Rochester.)  However, if you have the time to
set it up, can handle its awkward feel and don't mind the weight, it does
produce consistently above-average shots.  We should bear in mind, though,
that we are coming up on the half century anniversary of these guys.  And,
you would never consider a 1950 Hudson as state-of-the-art.

It is a big mistake for a newcomer to start with a Realist UNLESS THEY ARE
ALREADY FAMILIAR WITH MANUAL CAMERAS.  Most are used to modern day,
ergonomic cameras with automatic settings.  The manual features of the
camera are a BIG turn-off.

I have often thought it would be fun to get together a competition between
those of us who use and enjoy many formats and the the Realist
affectionatos.  It would be called "Try That with Your Rickety Ol' Realist".
But, then, I have thought better of it.  It would be unfair to put such a
noble steed in such light.  It is not all that George claims, but it is the
greatest of a wonderful era for 3-D.

Duane Kimball


------------------------------