MrMeowMeow posted:I posted earlier in this thread asking whether the messed up prints I was getting were a result of my camera or the people at London Drugs. I got some more prints at a different place today and it definitely looks to me like I have a light leak: Well it depends on where it is. My old Minolta had a light leak, and I was able to fix it by just gaff taping around the back after it was closed. It's a little annoying to do every time I load new film, but it works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 09:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:The Feds and Zorkis can be really nice if you get a good one. Don't discount the screwmount Leicas though as they can be affordable these days (figure $200 for a pretty decent one) and can be resold for about what you paid if you don't like it or want to get something newer. Which model screwmount Leica are you talking about? Also, do you mean by decent that they had a recent CLA or is at least somewhat likely to keep working for a while? I've heard good things about the Jupiter-8, but also that the big ol' rear element won't play nice with a Bessa  There's also a 50mm f/1.7 for the FED's, right? How is that? killabyte posted:So I recently bought a Bessa R3M kit. I am actually looking to sell it if you are interested. I decided I would rather use a Leica M3. I only put a few rolls through it and it is in great condition. Thanks for the offer, but as I said I'm not really willing to spring for a Bessa quite yet. Thanks for the light meter recommendation though, something like that was just what I had in mind. breathstealer posted:The thing is, that "if" is a pretty big if. Unless you get both the body and lens checked by someone who really knows what they're doing, your chances of getting a dud are very high. Lens misalignment is pretty much an inevitable thing, though it's not impossible to fix on your own. What do you mean by dud? Ebay does suck, but I've noticed a number of sellers from Ukraine who seem to sell nothing but old Russian camera gear and have good feedback. I've seen a few Canon rangefinders for sale, including a few of those ones with that huge 50mm f/.95 lens but never really looked in to them much. They seem a bit pricey... how do they compare to a screw mount Leica?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 11:22
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:I posted earlier in this thread asking whether the messed up prints I was getting were a result of my camera or the people at London Drugs. I got some more prints at a different place today and it definitely looks to me like I have a light leak: Light leaks forming over time are a given with many models of cameras. But they tend to be fixable at home - look up your model of camera and see if others have had any luck. Pompous Rhombus posted:What do you mean by dud? Ebay does suck, but I've noticed a number of sellers from Ukraine who seem to sell nothing but old Russian camera gear and have good feedback. Russian gear (well, any old camera gear) can have a variety of problems. Inaccurate shutter timings, bad frame spacing, lenses that don't focus right, and shutters that just don't feel like going every so often are all relatively common on Russian stuff though. Apparently a lot of the reports of Russian optical quality being worse than the German lenses they copied from stem from the testing of misaligned lenses - a properly adjusted Jupiter-8, for example, should be excellent. Canon rangefinders are definitely worth the price, IMO. Essentially you're getting a screw mount Bessa Rxx without the meter, or an M3 with a couple more features and worse build quality, depending on how you look at it. They completely blow away screw mount Leicas in terms of usability. Even after trying out bottom loading and finding it not as bad as I thought, it still makes reloading in the field really fiddly. Most people probably wouldn't be comfortable with the split RF/VF setup and the squinty 50mm finder either. Add knob wind/rewind and you get a camera which is pretty far removed from the modern conveniences you may be accustomed to. Meanwhile a Canon 7 has a meter (which probably doesn't work unless it's a 7s though), swing back loading, lever wind and crank rewind, and a big bright finder with selectable frames for 35, 50, and 85/100. The P and VI are just as competent, though with less fancy finders. Edit: Oh also as for screw mount Russian lenses, the J-8 works fine on every camera as long as it's adjusted for correct focus. The big rear elemented one is the J-12 35/2.8. Dad Hominem fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Aug 14, 2008 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 12:54
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:I posted earlier in this thread asking whether the messed up prints I was getting were a result of my camera or the people at London Drugs. I got some more prints at a different place today and it definitely looks to me like I have a light leak: Do those streaks coincide with the sprocket holes? Because those look like surge marks from overzealous agitation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 14:24
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Do those streaks coincide with the sprocket holes? Because those look like surge marks from overzealous agitation. Actually, yeah, it does seem like it might be the sprocket holes causing that, 'cause of the regular spacing between each line. Hmm. What would cause the big red lines on this photo though?  edit: this photo with the red lines was the 2nd photo off the roll, and the one with the intense sprocket striping was the 22nd photo. MrMeowMeow fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Aug 14, 2008 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 18:39
|
|
|
killabyte posted:Where in the bay area? Foto Express is pretty good and they have a few locations. They do 120 C-41, E-6 same day. I'm in downtown Oakland near the lake. I ended up going to Looking Glass over in Berkeley and they did a good job, kind of pricey though ($6 a roll, where I was in GA previously it was $2.50). They did a good job though.  I don't guess anyone here has an extra Olympus XA (or XA-2) they want to get rid of? I bought one a while ago on Ebay but the meter was busted, and now it seems they are the new hip camera to have... prices have gone up a little too much for me to waste it on another crap shoot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 19:25
|
|
|
That looks a lot more like a light leak. Could it be a small light leak and a single point, and as the film rachets past it exposes the film, and depending on how smooth/fast you wound on affected the outcome?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2008 19:47
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Which model screwmount Leica are you talking about? Also, do you mean by decent that they had a recent CLA or is at least somewhat likely to keep working for a while? For instance, I got a III with two lenses for $175 and spent $70 on a CLA for it. And by decent, yes, generally something that has been CLA'd at least in the past few years and has a decent rangefinder on it. quote:What do you mean by dud? Ebay does suck, but I've noticed a number of sellers from Ukraine who seem to sell nothing but old Russian camera gear and have good feedback. Somebody like Oleg (I can't recall his ebay seller ID off the top of my head) will generally hook you up with nice quality gear. Here in the US you can always contact Yuri at fedka.com -- he has a good rep and you can rely on getting a decent setup from him. It won't be as cheap as the ebay bargains, but it won't cost a fortune either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2008 00:56
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:Russian gear (well, any old camera gear) can have a variety of problems. Inaccurate shutter timings, bad frame spacing, lenses that don't focus right, and shutters that just don't feel like going every so often are all relatively common on Russian stuff though. Apparently a lot of the reports of Russian optical quality being worse than the German lenses they copied from stem from the testing of misaligned lenses - a properly adjusted Jupiter-8, for example, should be excellent. I'd heard that about the Russian lenses, and also read an article a while ago that they were or might have been built to a slightly different standard than their German counterparts. So you can have a lens that works fine on a Russian camera, but if you put it on a German one it's slightly out of alignment. Is there much truth to that? Thanks for that comparison between the three. I may go with a Canon if I can find one for around $200 or less, otherwise I'd probably go with a FED. Much more than $200 and I feel like I might as well just be saving for a Bessa. Oops, I meant the J-12. I've heard good things about it, will definitely pick one up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2008 04:44
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:CLA I at least had to google that, so for everybody else who doesn't know it's a "Clean, Lube and Adjust" apparently. I ended up ordering a Yashica Mat 124G! Only thing wrong with it is that the meter seems to have become uncoupled from the aperture lever and is stuck at what seems like f/8. I put a roll of expired film through it to test focus and the shutter speeds, and otherwise it works perfectly. I've since done one roll of Ilford Delta 3200 with some incredible results, and currently have some Portra 160 NC in there, with 7 photos of a model. Unfortunately I had to go back to the D300 as the light was failing and the person who had brought the portable strobes didn't have a PC cable with him .Do people tend to develop and print B&W themselves, and get someone else to develop colour and then print it themselves, or am I way off the mark here? I've got access to some pretty good labs, and a fully kitted out darkroom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2008 08:28
|
|
|
TokenBrit posted:Do people tend to develop and print B&W themselves, and get someone else to develop colour and then print it themselves, or am I way off the mark here? I've got access to some pretty good labs, and a fully kitted out darkroom. Pretty much. I know people who farm out their BW development, though I see no reason other than time (Really? Come on, that's a lame excuse) to do that. C-41 processing is very standardized and if there's a half-competent staff member working the machine, your stuff will be fine. With BW on the other hand, there are a huge number of variables which I would not leave up to someone else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2008 09:00
|
|
|
On the subject of Delta 3200, might be interesting to some, http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/2008/07/pushing-envelope.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2008 17:37
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:I posted earlier in this thread asking whether the messed up prints I was getting were a result of my camera or the people at London Drugs. I got some more prints at a different place today and it definitely looks to me like I have a light leak: If it is a light leak, all you need to do is get your camera's light seals replaced. We do it for $30-$40 depending on the camera, and any repair shop should be able to do the same. Or you could buy a light seal kit from eBay and do it yourself (search for the seller name "interslice")
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2008 21:54
|
|
|
Saw this and thought of you peeps. http://blog.epicedits.com/2008/08/11/photo-project-the-50-dollar-film-camera/
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2008 03:55
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I'd heard that about the Russian lenses, and also read an article a while ago that they were or might have been built to a slightly different standard than their German counterparts. So you can have a lens that works fine on a Russian camera, but if you put it on a German one it's slightly out of alignment. Is there much truth to that? Potentially. It's related to how rangefinders work, and I don't completely understand the mechanics of it. The short of it (as far as I can tell, old people argue about this online all the time) is that Leica calibrated their rangefinders to be correct when focusing a 52.5mm lens, which is the length of all "50mm" Leica lenses. Zeiss used a true 50mm standard for their Contaxes, and it was the Contax machinery and experts that got captured by the Soviets. Since Soviet lenses are optically similar between Leica and Contax mounts, they're accurate only on Contaxes and Soviet bodies (expecting the true 50s) without shimming. tl;dr: It's best to get a lens that's known to be accurate or get it adjusted by someone who knows what they're doing after purchase.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2008 12:02
|
|
|
Just a quick question, I want to take my camera with me when I drive across the Canadian/American border tomorrow. I know that at airports, x-rays can mess up film, but do I have to worry about anything being x-rayed tomorrow or should it be smooth sailing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2008 19:27
|
|
|
I've never had to do it, but I've heard under 800 should be fine and that you can ask for it to be hand checked (seems doubtful to me) if you want them to. Edit: I completely misread that, no idea if they do it at borders. blambert fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Aug 29, 2008 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2008 19:34
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:Just a quick question, I want to take my camera with me when I drive across the Canadian/American border tomorrow. I know that at airports, x-rays can mess up film, but do I have to worry about anything being x-rayed tomorrow or should it be smooth sailing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2008 19:48
|
|
|
Borders aside, under 800 is fine. I took ISO 400 film to Europe, and it got scanned twice on each side, came out looking fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2008 22:27
|
|
|
I had some ISO 100 and 200 film get ruined going through an x-ray once at an airport, YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2008 22:44
|
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:Borders aside, under 800 is fine. I took ISO 400 film to Europe, and it got scanned twice on each side, came out looking fine. I'm always scared of that. I always ask for my film to be hand checked at the airport. Usually they complain and ask if I have anything over 800 ISO, so what I usually do is throw a roll of 1600 Fuji in the bag so that I can point to that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2008 22:44
|
|
|
So I got some diafine powder to make one gallon of A and B, but my developing tank (chamber?) only holds 400mL of chemical. Is it alright for me to half or even quarter the recipes on all my chemicals (diafine, fixer and washer) so that I don't need big one gallon bottles when I'm only using 400mL of chemical at a time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2008 03:58
|
|
|
Beasticly posted:So I got some diafine powder to make one gallon of A and B, but my developing tank (chamber?) only holds 400mL of chemical. Is it alright for me to half or even quarter the recipes on all my chemicals (diafine, fixer and washer) so that I don't need big one gallon bottles when I'm only using 400mL of chemical at a time? No, just mix it all up correctly, and pour in the correct amount each time, then pour it back into the gallon container, it's better for the developer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2008 04:07
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:No, just mix it all up correctly, and pour in the correct amount each time, then pour it back into the gallon container, it's better for the developer. Fair enough. What about fixer and hypocleaner though? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2008 04:09
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:Just a quick question, I want to take my camera with me when I drive across the Canadian/American border tomorrow. I know that at airports, x-rays can mess up film, but do I have to worry about anything being x-rayed tomorrow or should it be smooth sailing? I worried about this my entire trip to Madrid, which is rife with scanners since the terrorist attacks a few years back; I counted eight passes on one particular roll. No fogging from what I can see - I presume that all new machines are safe and that what you should be worried about are the old scanners still in service.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2008 07:52
|
|
|
Does anyone have any tips for cleaning up black and white negatives for scanning? Do any of these anti stat cloths or solutions work? Some are quite expensive. I can deal with a little bit of dust in Photoshop pretty well but some of my negs are downright filthy and my attempts with brushes and Eclipse aren't cutting it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2008 04:49
|
|
|
killabyte posted:Does anyone have any tips for cleaning up black and white negatives for scanning? Do any of these anti stat cloths or solutions work? Some are quite expensive. I don't like antistatic cloths because when you wipe down a negative you can drag a piece of dirt across and it scratch it. Just use canned air and/or turn on ICE on your scanner. If they're really dirty you can always re-wash and Photoflo them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2008 06:58
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I don't like antistatic cloths because when you wipe down a negative you can drag a piece of dirt across and it scratch it. I haven't had good luck with canned air. It just seems to blow dust around. Digital ICE doesn't work with B&W negatives unfortuntely...
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2008 16:18
|
|
|
killabyte posted:Does anyone have any tips for cleaning up black and white negatives for scanning? Do any of these anti stat cloths or solutions work? Some are quite expensive. Eclipse isn't really meant for cleaning film, but if that's not getting the dirt off used properly, there's no way in hell an anti-static cloth is going to. Are you sure the dirt didn't fuse to the wet emulsion or something? How exactly are you using the Eclipse?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2008 17:54
|
|
|
I'm thinking about getting into photography -- I was planning on going digital until I looked at this thread. Now I'm in love with the contrasty black and white look that film gives, you bastards. I do have a few questions, though. I have no idea what would be a good camera to start with, but I saw the Nikon FM2 being tossed around earlier in the thread, and it sounded nice. On the other hand, the Mamiya 645E mentioned earlier in the thread sounds pretty neat too. The only thing about a medium format camera that puts me off is that I know even less than about lenses, film, and developing for medium format than I do for 35mm. Would I still be able to develop my own film relatively easily with medium format film? I'm planning on taking pictures (B&W predominantly) of places (buildings rather than nature, if it should make a difference), and maybe people at fixed ranges, so I don't foresee being slowed down by manual focus becoming a problem. However, I also have no serious experience with photography of any type; please let me know if I'm completely off base here. In short, all of the photos in this thread are awesome. Help me be like you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2008 13:30
|
|
|
Bunny Fiesta posted:I'm thinking about getting into photography -- I was planning on going digital until I looked at this thread. Now I'm in love with the contrasty black and white look that film gives, you bastards. I do have a few questions, though. Start with 35mm. Medium format is just as easy to develop but many of the cameras are more expensive and somewhat unwieldy. I think you should spend time with 35mm to see if you truly enjoy it. Buy something cheap like an older Olympus or Pentax to start with. Keep your investment to a minimum. I wouldn't even start developing film right away. If you want to start with B&W, buy some rolls of Ilford XP2 Super. It is B&W film that can be developed at a drug store. The investment in B&W can actually be fairly expensive. The chemicals and the equipment to develop is under $100, but you need to either buy an enlarger and have a darkroom to print or you need to buy a scanner tha works with film, otherwise you are going to get bored real quick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2008 16:26
|
|
|
killabyte posted:Buy something cheap like an older Olympus or Pentax to start with. Keep your investment to a minimum. Thanks for the advice, it all sounds great. I poked around on KEH and found an Olympus OM-1 for $126 and a 50mm f1.8 Zuiko lens for $27, both EX condition. Seems like the makings of an inexpensive (and exciting) introduction to film.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2008 22:39
|
|
|
Bunny Fiesta posted:Thanks for the advice, it all sounds great. I poked around on KEH and found an Olympus OM-1 for $126 and a 50mm f1.8 Zuiko lens for $27, both EX condition. Seems like the makings of an inexpensive (and exciting) introduction to film. The OM1 is great, but be aware that you need to either use zinc-air batteries or an adapter to get the proper voltage for the meter. I would recommend also looking at Pentax Spotmatics. Great cameras and the M42 Super Tak lenses are outstanding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2008 23:06
|
|
|
If you can wait a little, check out craigslist along with garage sales and goodwill. The problem with buying from a place like KEH is that for the most part, the people selling know what they have. People who don't know give their stuff to goodwill or sell it dirt cheep at garage sales on on craigslist. The other half of the people on craigslist want 20 dollars less than what they paid brand new in 1975 adjusted for inflation, but at least they keep you entertained while you browse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2008 04:25
|
|
|
^^ There is a dude on my local craigslist that has been trying to sell old 1960s cameras for $1000s that you can get from ebay for under $25, with tag lines like "Don't lowball me, I am a professional photographer and know the worth of this set up." Even better is when he tries to sell his 256mb SD cards for $50 each. Speaking of ebay, I was cruising for some old 120 film to kick around with for fun. Most auctions seem to end up going for retail or more, even for outdated film out of the foil packs. Is it just the lomo kids not wanting/knowing they could get fresh from the fridge for less? Where is a good place for cheap color print 120 film?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2008 01:43
|
|
|
Jahoodie posted:^^ There is a dude on my local craigslist that has been trying to sell old 1960s cameras for $1000s that you can get from ebay for under $25, with tag lines like "Don't lowball me, I am a professional photographer and know the worth of this set up." Even better is when he tries to sell his 256mb SD cards for $50 each. If you have a local pro store you can possibly find out-of-date 120 for cheap. The place near me puts out most of their 'outdated' film for a buck a roll, even though it's been refrigerated and is just fine. Other than that, try the usual suspects: B&H, Adorama, Freestyle. As for craigslist... we should have a thread where we just post the camera 'deals' that pop up. Some of the stuff is downright hilarious.  There's a guy selling his 'professional' Minolta setup for $399 (probably worth $150 on a good day) and posts it every two weeks like clockwork. For a year. The funny thing is that most of the really good deals I've gotten from craigslist have been from ACTUAL pro photographers who are just looking to sell their stuff to somebody who'll find good use for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2008 02:17
|
|
|
I picked up a Voigtlander Vitomatic Ia recently because it was really cheap and in (seemingly) decent working order and I thought it'd be fun having something other than SLRs to carry around. I loaded some film and it seemed to work fine for a couple shots, but then the shutter started firing when I advanced the film, right at the end of the pull. Something must be out of sync with the film advance tensioning the shutter or something, right? Just wondered if anyone had any insight into this sort of problem before I go digging around in the camera. I've got no experience with this sort of thing but thought I'd open it up and see if could fix it through fiddling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2008 19:39
|
|
|
 I have been shooting b&w on my canon for a little while and just recently wanted to get into medium format. Looked around a little bit and tlrs really interested me, and then this popped up on craigslist. He even threw in the light meter with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2008 23:33
|
|
|
STA posted:
The C330s (the entire C-series for that matter) are AWESOME. Just heavy as gently caress to lug around compared to say a 124G, but you get killer glass and interchangeable lenses. Congrats!
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2008 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
Yeah those cameras are awesome, nice score.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2008 00:24
|
|