SA9

Hi!

It's been quite a while since i have posted anything on this forum. I am the proud owner of a SD10 and i will never part from it. However after having picked up a digital SLR i have gotten into photography more and more. This leads me to perhaps a weird choice... I want to try out the SA9. I saw a SA9 om BHPHOTO with a 28-80 and a 70-300 lens kit for about 370 US$. Since i came from P&S cameras i really have have no previous experience with SLR's so i thought i should ask you guys if this was a good deal for a film camera. From what i have read on this forum those two lenses aren't the best lenses around however i would like to have a film camera in my house for those special occations. I have borrowed some old SLR's from a buddy of mine years ago and i have to admit that i really liked the B&W pictures produced from that camera. Though that was a old Nikon of some sort.. hehe.. i guess you can tell that i am a novice.

So would the SA9 be a good choice for a film SLR?

Regards
Jørn Tore Giskemo
Stavanger, Rogaland, Norway

IMO thats a bit high for what you will get in return.

You should be able to get a used SA300 for cheap.

For $370 you could also get a kowa Super 66 MF camera or a Mamiya rb67 medium format camera that with Efke 25 will bury most digital cameras.

I consider 35mm film largely a waste except as you say for B+W film, but a 6x7 negative has over 5x the surface area of 35mm film so its even better.

The one area i like 35mm and 645 B+W film is where you want to shoot very grainy film and emphasize the grain.

On the flip side a Leica M rangefinder 35mm camera with the latest lenses will probably out resolve most everything on the planet, but I have always resisted getting into a Leica M system just due to the expense. Very nice though as I have used one a couple of times, but the lenses are astronomical.

Personally now I even find 6x7 a little small and prefer 4x5 and 8x10 film. Matter of fact you can get a 4x5 crown graphic press camera with a lens for less than $370 too.

best to do some research first, as there are a lot of models out there.

If you want to skip all the BS and go strait to the roots of photography go for a 4x5 camera.

That will keep you busy for quite a while.

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

Thank you for your answer i appreciate it.

I did a check on ebay and found that the Mamiya rb67 is really affordable. I think i might have a closer look at that one. Seems like that is going to take some exellent pictures as well.

But when it comes to pictues quality of film cameras, are there anyone that has a preference to anything particular? I mean the Leica is just WAY to much for me... hehe.. paying thousands of dollars for each lens will make me bankrupt quicker than i can say DANG.

So for instance the Mamiya.. are there any particular lenses that any of you could recommend?

Im sorry to bring this up in a Sigma forum but i think i will end this thread just to see what can be the perfect match for my SD10.

Jørn Tore Giskemo

You can get an SA-9 from http://www.cameta.com

Quite a few members here have bought lenses from them and they have a good reputation for service.

Do a search on their site for "Sigma SA" and you will see the current Sigma listings.....

The cheapest option is $249.00 for the SA-9 body and the el cheapo 28-80 zoom.

Presumably you have better lenses already for your SD-10, so you could use the 28-80 for occasional use....

I think owning a matching SA-9 for film use is a good idea if you want to experiment with film. It's certainly the best cheapest solution for you as an SD-10 owner.

Giskemo said:

I did a check on ebay and found that the Mamiya rb67 is really
affordable. I think i might have a closer look at that one. Seems
like that is going to take some excellent pictures as well.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is nice. Not as nice as a hassy Rollei or a Mamiya 7 (rangefinder) but its a lot more affordable.

Giskemo said:

But when it comes to pictures quality of film cameras, are there
anyone that has a preference to anything particular?

Click to expand...

Just for pure image quality 8x10, then 4x5, then 6x7 or 6x9, then Digital, in that order.

Giskemo said:

I mean the
Leica is just WAY to much for me... hehe.. paying thousands of
dollars for each lens will make me bankrupt quicker than i can say
DANG.

Click to expand...

Leica is more of a passion, than actually being that much better. A pocketable 645 fuji will beat it for rez IMO. The limiting factor for something like a leica ends up being technique, film and the scanning method.

I did a test run a while back comparing film to this and that, and just so you will know what to expect, in the end I figured an E100G drumscan is worth a solid 6-7 bayer mp per square inch on a Leica and about 5-6 on a Medium format camera depending. An epson scan will be a lot less.

A mamiya 7 might hit 6mp per sq inch, but a RB67 would be more like 5mp per sq inch so 6x7 would equal 25-30mp.

With something like Efke 25 that number might go up to 7 depending on the lenses and film flatness.

One thing for sure you want to consider is how will you scan them and the expense. 120 slide film is expensive. If you stick to B+W its not too bad, and its very easy to develop yourself. Also the RB67 is a real brick.

Giskemo said:

So for instance the Mamiya.. are there any particular lenses that
any of you could recommend?

Click to expand...

I would stick to C lenses (multi coated) to start and just buy one slightly wide normal lens like a 90mm.

KEH is a good place to start. Actually the have a RB67 PRO-S with a 90mm lens for $323 bargain grade. Their bargain grade is about like Ebays slightly used but nice. Plus they have a 14 day return policy.

Giskemo said:

Im sorry to bring this up in a Sigma forum but i think i will end
this thread just to see what can be the perfect match for my SD10.

Jørn Tore Giskemo

Click to expand...

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

I have the SD10 and one of the reasons that I bought it was I also had an SA9. It is a very good 35m and after using the 10 using the 9 will be a snap. There are 2 currently for sale on E-Bay.

Well I did that too few months ago…

I decided to experiment with B&W printing and I wanted a film SLR with SA mount for my EX lenses…

I can tell you that 12-24 at 12mm was beyond my imagination … All my EX lenses perform excellent with film. My only complain about the camera is AF in low light.

SD 10 is a lot better in that area. But SA9 is a small with everything I could ask from a film camera … I like it … Now I take SA9 all the time with me together with my SD10 … ;-)

Kostas Sarris
http://www.pbase.com/armaco

Giskemo said:

Thank you for your answer i appreciate it.

I did a check on ebay and found that the Mamiya rb67 is really
affordable. I think i might have a closer look at that one. Seems
like that is going to take some exellent pictures as well.

But when it comes to pictues quality of film cameras, are there
anyone that has a preference to anything particular? I mean the
Leica is just WAY to much for me... hehe.. paying thousands of
dollars for each lens will make me bankrupt quicker than i can say
DANG.

Click to expand...

Remember this : there is one hughe difference between film-cameras and digital- cameras... the images quality of a digital cameras is a composite of the quality of the camera/sensor and the quality of the lens... while the images quality of a film-cameras depends on the film and the lens.... so in reality you can take the same pictures with a cheap Sigma SA9 as you can with an expensive camera... just change the film for another type ...and you have a very different image-quality.

Another thing is that a lens that is mediocre on a SD10 might be just fine on a SA9...

Giskemo said:

So for instance the Mamiya.. are there any particular lenses that
any of you could recommend?

Click to expand...

Hmmm... you should be aware that eventhough a medium or large format camera might be cheap to buy .... it will be very, very expensive in the long run... these film do not come cheap .... and as filmusers becomes fewer and

fewer , you can be certain that development of negatives and slides will be more and more expensive.

Even the cost of using 35mm film might be a nasty surprise as you are used to digital....

Giskemo said:

Im sorry to bring this up in a Sigma forum but i think i will end
this thread just to see what can be the perfect match for my SD10.

Jørn Tore Giskemo

Click to expand...

--
Frits Thomsen
See my pictures at
http://www.pbase.com/yoicz

Good evening,

I have the smaller SA7 rather than the SA9 and really like it as a film SLR. My kit 28-80 which came with it though was NOT sharp, I've totally retired that lens. Also 70-300 (non APO) isn't great compared with EX lenses. But it's marvelous having another camera film or digital on which I can interchange Sigma SA-mount lenses! I keep one camera with wide angle, other with tele- usually.
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman

I was thinking about the SA9 in the beginning at it still sounds like the most likely option, however i will still look at the other options though.

Hopefully they will keep making the SA mount lenses for a long time making me able to take pictures with good lenses for a long time with my SD10 and a possible SA9.

Anyone have experience with a great lens for landscape on the SA9?

Jørn Tore Giskemo

Frits Thomsen said:

Another thing is that a lens that is mediocre on a SD10 might be
just fine on a SA9...

Click to expand...

I would tend to disagree. It depends on the film, but with something like E100G and a sharp scan you could posibly see edge and corner problems.

Frits Thomsen said:

Frits Thomsen said:

So for instance the Mamiya.. are there any particular lenses that
any of you could recommend?

Click to expand...

Hmmm... you should be aware that eventhough a medium or large
format camera might be cheap to buy .... it will be very, very
expensive in the long run... these film do not come cheap .... and
as filmusers becomes fewer and
fewer , you can be certain that development of negatives and slides
will be more and more expensive.

Click to expand...

Very true. 8x10 color film, if you buy it new and pay to process it is $16 a shot, so its not something you use lightly. Even though it is $16 a shot you have to see one on a light table, because they are incredible.

The potential is there to enlarge to 80x100 inches plus and still have almost as much detail in print as a 8x10 print from 35mm film camera.

MF film is not cheap either and for 6x7 can run $1 per shot.

4x5 depending can be expensive if you shoot readyloads. I buy a lot of B+W film off Ebay and my deveolper is almost free, so that works out to be really cheap. Even with efke 25 from J+C new it works out to .66 a shot.

All that said if you never enlarge over 8x10 and digital print there is not much use in going to a larger format.

Frits Thomsen said:

Even the cost of using 35mm film might be a nasty surprise as you
are used to digital....

Frits Thomsen said:

Im sorry to bring this up in a Sigma forum but i think i will end
this thread just to see what can be the perfect match for my SD10.

Jørn Tore Giskemo

Click to expand...

--
Frits Thomsen
See my pictures at
http://www.pbase.com/yoicz

Click to expand...

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

The 15-30 EX.

I used it on my SA7.

This photo is from the SA7 and 15-30EX.

This is Tmax 3200 film scanned on a polaroid sprint scan at 2000 dpi. Not exactly the best scanner.

I also have a color photo from that trip too from gold 100, but I cant find it right now.

If you want will dig around for it.

http://upload.pbase.com/image/27421840

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

All the primes 20mm, 28mm, and 24mm( I dont have 24mm).
20-40 f2,8 EX DG is a killer lens ... very fast AF and SHARP...
24-70 f2,8 EX DG MACRO is nice also...
Macros are great too.
I'm crazy about 12-24 ...
In general all EX glass that I have is very nice...



Kostas Sarris
http://www.pbase.com/armaco

That picture brings out some of the things i would like to do with a film camera. Instead of people complaining about noise (or whatever you call it) i find it to set a good mood to the picture. It seems like it gives the pictures life... many of the digital pictures i see today lack that life.. to clean somehow..

If you would look for those pics i would appreciate it a lot.

Jørn Tore Giskemo

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

The SA7 was my first Sigma- It's a great little SLR, I liked it a lot. As mentioned the only weakness I found was slow autofocus.

The kit lenses are both pretty soft. Cameta might make you a deal to swap for better glass, they carry a lot of SA mount lenses and are good to deal with.
--
Barry Byrd
http://www.pbase.com/barryb

This is the SA7 and 15-30 at 15 and I think it was at F5.6. This is kodak 100 gold negative film drum scanned at 4000 dpi so its not as smooth as E100G. You might want to look around my pbase site, as I have a lot of scans with different cameras. The photo just before this one is about 25 years back of a capital building. It was shot with ektachrome and a Pentax and a 24mm lens if i remember correctly.

http://www.pbase.com/tammons/image/56138217

Just to give you an idea of a sharp 400 film. This is kodak ultracolor 400. It is grainy though. This was taken with a Contax tvs. this is a 4000 dpi drum scan too.

http://www.pbase.com/tammons/image/56138214

The last one is a Mamiya RZ pro (same as a RB but electronic) drumscanned at 2000 dpi and this is E100G film.

Its a lot smoother. Excuse the scan lines. I had problems with my scanner that day.

http://www.pbase.com/tammons/image/56138222

Feel free to download these and play around with them

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

You stated you were a novice so my (absolutely subjective) advice would be invest some money in good glass rather than getting another camera. The SD10 is a great cam; I got it half a year ago (so I am also a novice) but I am learning something every day I use it. It has already been said in this thread that scanning is more or less the "bottleneck" of analog photography. Do you really want to have every single photo scanned professionally before you work on it on your computer? For me as somebody who believes that postproduction is as important as the actual photography itself it would not make sense to do that. I always crop, sharpen, desaturate, mask etc and would find it inacceptabkle (also with respect to my money purse) to have everything scanned. Do not be afraid of digital artifacts and visible pixels as they are integral part of digital photography. If you really want to buy another cam, get a small point and shoot with good ISO capability and pre-focus function (and NO analog ZOOM). This is the perfect 2nd cam I think.
Just my ten cents of course..
Cheers

Tif

armaco said:

I can tell you that 12-24 at 12mm was beyond my imagination … All
my EX lenses perform excellent with film.

Click to expand...

I've also been thinking of getting an SA mount film body for the wide angle. I have the 20 mm EX lens and I think it would be great with film and/or full frame sensor.

My film gear is Leica and their wide angle lenses are a bit on the expensive side, I could probably get an SA9 body and a new 12-24 EX for the price of a used 19 mm Elmarit...

Cheers,

-Topi Kuusinen, Finland

I don't think this is a good price. If you want a SA9 for a good price, try to find one second hand. "Bruktmarkedet" on foto.no and eBay are good places to look.

Presumably you already own some lenses that you use on the SD10. However, note that any DC Sigma lenses will give you severe vignetting on a SA9 body. If all you own is DC lenses - you'll have to build a lens system from scratch anyway.

Btw. I used to shoot film for more than 30 years, but "went digital" three years ago. I'll never go back. Film is so much of a hassle, and Photoshop lets me do everything I did in a wet darkroom much faster and without the stains and fumes. The SD10 is an excellent B&W camera, with much more "bite" in its B&W mode than Bayer cameras. I won't steer you away from film, but I think you should know that film is much less fun and a lot more work, than digital.
--

• gisle