P3D Re: info needed for new 3D camera

["Dr. George A. Themelis" <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am replying to a posting by Joseph Covington who says that:

- all the Realists he has seen are $300-$700 and in terrible condition
- is nervous about "unmodernized" qualitites like lack of light meter
  or hot shoe
- does not like to be stuck with the original lenses
- wonders about shooting prints and not slides
- asks why we love shooting with the Realist

OK, let me put a few things straight:  You can find very good Realists
for $100 to $150.  I sell Realists in this price range that are clean,
work well (all have been checked/lubricated/adjusted by me) and come
with a warranty.  If you don't like it, I'll get you another one or
your money back.  It pays to buy from someone you know or someone
who knows what stereo is all about and will stand behind the sale.

"Realists" (like all stereo cameras from the 50s) do not 
have built-in light meteters.  You might go with a few empirical rules
or buy a hand-held light meter.  Good exposure is less of a problem
if you use prints.  But, from my experience, you can do very well once
you understand a few things about light and how it changes.  Using a
manual camera is a good way to understand photography and appreciate
the control you can have over the results.

Realists do have a hot shoe.  There is a bump (easily filed off) that 
prevents the physical connection of the flash with the shoe contact.  
I have filed that bump off and use flash without adapters.  

The "Realist" (and most stereo cameras from the 50s) will yield negatives 
(or slides) that are of a non-standard (today) size.  Making prints from 
this non-standard size can be a problem but there are places that will do 
it.  For slides it is not a problem because there is a large variety of 
mounts you can use.  Also, there are a few places that can mount them for 
you.

The Realist lenses are very good lenses.  Still, they are fixed.

Why do we like the "Realists"?  Because we are getting great results
from a modest investment.  Also, because there are no other choices
in terms of price, conveniece and quality of results.  Sure, an RBT
S1 might be nice if you have the money to buy one.

The twin camera route is valid (and some people are going that way), but
you have to worry about two things:  1.  How to make a system not designed
for stereo, give you good stereo pictures (matching FL, maching exposures, 
synchronization of shutters, etc.)  2.  Interocular distance (distance 
between the lenses).  The problem with many side-by-side camera systems is 
that you cannot get the lenses close enough (about 2.5" or 65 mm) for 
"normal stereo".

To compensate for 1 and 2, you have the option of interchangeable lenses,
faster shutter speeds and variable/adjustable stereo base.  Many people 
use both:  "Realist" type cameras and twin cameras.  For me, twin (or 
single) SLRs supplement my Realist very well.

-- George Themelis

PS.  Note, most comments about the "Realist" apply for many stereo cameras
hence the use of parenthesis.


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