P3D Re: Realist review...

[Ronald Beck <ronald-beck@xxxxxx>]

I too am commenting on Tom Deering's review of the Realist, as well as
some of the other comments from list members.

My first inclination is to say "quit whining"!  But, I won't do that :-)
:-).  Instead I'll pass along my comments and experiences.

I've used several different types of cameras in my lifetime, from a
brownie 127 roll film, to my dad's german made range-finder camera (all
manual, no light meter), to my Rolleflex 35m (all manual w/ light meter)
to my Konica FT1 (semi-auto load, auto exposure, manual focus) and even
to my wife's Kodak APS camera (auto everything).  And even though every
camera exposed film to create photos, each was different and took some
education to make sure you took the best possible picture with the
equipment you had.

I found the Realist camera awkward to use only for the first couple of
shots.  I learned a "routine" to use for this camera just as I had my
routine for other cameras I've used.  There are specific instructions
for loading a Realist.  Learn them if you want it to work.  There are
specific instructions for exposure settings and existing light.  Use
them if you want an image to come out.  Even an auto-everything camera
is going to give you poor results if the auto setting is for indoor
flash fill when you're outside shooting bright daylight scenes.

And, realize that older cameras, whether 3D or 2D don't have all the
"bells & whistles" today's modern cameras have.  Don't expect a Realist
to operate the same as a Minolta 2000.  The Minolta was built in the
'90s and probably has more computer power built in than the whole world
had back when Realists were made.

What it all boils down to is...

                R T F M !

You'll get much better results that way.  I know I did!

Ron


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