|
friendship waffle posted:People do use medium format lenses on 35mm bodies though. Usually they pair them with a tilt-shift adapter to make use of the wider imaging circle (otherwise it's basically wasted). I'm doing that right now, waiting on a Mamiya 645 lens I bought from KEH (rolled the dice on an UG, worst case scenario I'll just return it and eat the shipping). I had fun this summer messing around with a Olympus 21mm prime to do a tilt/shift effect, so I thought I'd try something more suitable. Basically making a wider-angle one of these. Something cheap like a TLR is probably good for you Mannequin, given your track record with gear  I agree that MF is more fun than 35mm, especially square format. (I had a 645 mask for my TLR but I only used it once or twice, felt like I might as well be shooting 35mm since I don't do any big enlargements). I used a Seagull TLR that I got for $30, a lot of people here knock them but I think it's pretty decent for the money. You can't go wrong with one of those nicer $100 Japanese ones either though. If you want to build an SLR system, Bronica 6x6 is a pretty good value for the money, since it's basically dead. KEH sells SQ-A outfits (lens, body, back, viewfinder, some with a speed grip) for around $300ish. Just don't get a Holga. That's pretty much the worst thing you can do to 120 film. Edit: CVS scanning is terrible. Everything is a grey, contrast-less haze, there's really annoying autorun software on the CD, dust and scratches on my negs. This time they hosed up and cut my frames off all wrong on the scan. I think I'm done with them, I'm tired of paying money to get my film scanned and then having to take time to process the keepers in Photoshop. Now I want a half-frame camera     Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Dec 30, 2008 |
#
?
Dec 29, 2008 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
Mannequin posted:In terms of medium format, would any of my current Nikon F-mount lenses work, or would I have to get something specific to medium format? I basically know nothing about this. You'll need lenses for the format you choose as they're made to project an image circle large enough to cover the entire frame. The F-mount Nikkor lenses would only project to cover 36mm x 24mm, which falls short of 60mm x 60mm of a 6x6 medium format. And as an aside, I can sell you a Mamiya M645 kit if you're interested. I'm in New Orleans for the New Year, but PM me or find me on AIM sometime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2008 00:22
|
|
|
Yeah, buy a TLR (like my 124G, if you're interested) and send it off for a CLA. If you get a Yashica TLR, Mark Hama is your guy. It'll be like new when he's done. Medium format is FUN and you can get an Epson 4490 for cheap and get decent scans too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2008 00:26
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind.
hybr1d fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Dec 30, 2008 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2008 04:53
|
|
|
Alright, here are a few samples from my Ektar 100 shoot. I shot the roll pretty quick so the images aren't anything special. I went back to Costco and made them rescan the pictures because the other ones were awful. Even these scans aren't that great and have some dust spots on them. Mt. Hamilton, San Jose, CA. Nikon F100, 14-24 f2.8 and 50 f1.8, Matrix Meter, Ektar 100. No post processing at all has been done on these images and no filters were used at all.    
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2008 07:33
|
|
|
Anyone have a mail-in type lab that does 120 film to recommend? I'm just looking to develop 2 rolls of E-6 and one B&W I've had laying around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2008 19:06
|
|
|
friendship waffle posted:If you want to go film I'd recommend a TLR. Cheap, you can get excellent quality glass if you buy the right model, simple, and medium format is always nice. Plus, square is a great format. And what would the great kenwaffle recommend? I really have my eyes on some sort of Rolleiflex. Anyone have experience with them? My local used camera store has ~5 for sale but I wouldn't mind picking up one from you guys either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 00:18
|
|
|
The Yashica 124G is a great model, and can be found reasonably many places including https://keh.com.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 03:57
|
|
|
This wonderful thread has gotten me quite wet for film. I was wondering if the Pentax ME Super 35mm would be a good starting camera? My price range is roughly 200$ for a body and lens. I mainly want to take photos of the city and my friends. Keh.com has a me super with a 50 1.4 SMC M lens that falls right in that range. help please.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 05:24
|
|
|
le capitan posted:This wonderful thread has gotten me quite wet for film. I was wondering if the Pentax ME Super 35mm would be a good starting camera? My price range is roughly 200$ for a body and lens. Do you have a DSLR already? Enough of the cheaper 35mm film cameras are similar enough that you may as well make your purchasing decision based on what lenses you have now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 16:03
|
|
|
TokenBrit posted:Do you have a DSLR already? Enough of the cheaper 35mm film cameras are similar enough that you may as well make your purchasing decision based on what lenses you have now. This would be my first camera, I don't have a DSLR or any other camera. Also this would be my first lens. I'm really torn between a 35mm SLR or just picking up a digital point and shoot like the canon powershot 590.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 17:38
|
|
|
le capitan posted:This would be my first camera, I don't have a DSLR or any other camera. Also this would be my first lens. There's nothing wrong with either choice- depending on what you want to get out the purchase. I would generalize it and say that a point-and-shoot will give you mediocre pictures right out of the box, and that you will fight to get creative control over it the whole time you own it. This includes exposure, focus, depth of field, etc etc etc. A film camera of just about any kind will challenge you to learn the process, and will result in many failed photos- but that is part of the learning process for film. You don't see many (or any?) famous photographer's early screw-ups, because they learn from them and throw them away.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 19:27
|
|
|
Stupid question of the day: What is the technical reason I cannot put my negatives on my normal scanner and scan them? Why do I need some crazy adaptor? Can I not just create something myself to hold the negative?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 19:57
|
|
Associate Christ
|
Mostly because regular scanners are designed to scan paper, not transparencies. I've seen okay results with a gehetto rig that tapped the negs to the glass, then made a paper box over it to reflect the scanner light back through the negatives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 20:14
|
|
|
Jahoodie posted:Mostly because regular scanners are designed to scan paper, not transparencies. I've seen okay results with a gehetto rig that tapped the negs to the glass, then made a paper box over it to reflect the scanner light back through the negatives. also there are focus issues depending on the scanner and negative holder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2008 21:05
|
|
|
hybr1d: Yeah that's basically what's been going through my head. My parents have the 590 and i've had a chance to mess around with it. It is nice and exactly as you said. I've been doing some searching on craigslist and found a canon AE-1 with a 50mm f1.4 lens. Best case scenario would be for me to get lenses that i could keep and get a better body after I get some more experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 00:20
|
|
|
What then is the most economical negative scanner I might buy? I got the prints back from my first roll on the TLR. It was quite funny as the developer wrote 'Camera has framing issues' on the packet. I assume he is referring to the fact that it exposed the entire film width, because otherwise it looks ok. They also provided the negative as a single roll, it was not cut every five exposures as they normally do. It seems to me that any negative scanner is going to hold the negatives in such a way as to not allow me to scan to the very edge of the film (sprocket holes and all). Is that correct?  ps. Here is an accidental double exposure that came out quite well. The first roll was mostly a wash though. ISO 200 and almost none of the shots were in daylight. other people fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Jan 1, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 00:28
|
|
|
Epson 4490 if you can find them, mine was $79 refurb'd and does great MF neg scans. Don't worry about sprocket holes if you're scanning medium format, there are none. If you want to scan 35mm as well, maybe a V700 would be ok but you really need a proper film scanner.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 01:22
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:If you want to scan 35mm as well, maybe a V700 would be ok but you really need a proper film scanner. I used to disagree, but ever since I started wetprinting I've come to appreciate just how terrible the 35mm scans from my Canoscan flatbed are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 01:32
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Epson 4490 if you can find them, mine was $79 refurb'd and does great MF neg scans. I will be doing 35mm only. I want their sprockets! What do you mean by "proper"? Something like the Plustek OpticFilm 7200? It looks like that won't get me any sprockets, and $189 is a bit steep.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 01:50
|
|
|
le capitan posted:hybr1d: Yeah that's basically what's been going through my head. My parents have the 590 and i've had a chance to mess around with it. It is nice and exactly as you said. I've been doing some searching on craigslist and found a canon AE-1 with a 50mm f1.4 lens. Best case scenario would be for me to get lenses that i could keep and get a better body after I get some more experience. Lenses pretty much rule the day on film cameras. What is your budget? One thing to consider is going with a manual focus camera- you can sometimes get a 'better' (I know, I know, it's subjective) camera if you go with a slightly older model that doesn't have AF. I'm not sure how much of a return you will see trying to keep lenses across camera types, but hey- whatever works. I would recommend for your first time out getting a single (50mm?) lens and using that to get to know the camera. I've learned more about my DSLR from sticking to a 50mm for a while than the confusion of multiple lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 01:52
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:I will be doing 35mm only. I want their sprockets! Most "proper" (dedicated) film scanners won't. If you want serious scans you probably will want to look at a Coolscan or similar setup, but it won't be all that cheap. There's more to scanners than resolution, there's how well it holds the film, depth of field, dynamic range etc. Unfortunately scanning 35mm well still isn't a cheap thing, and that's why it's so great shooting MF -- even a humble 4490 will get you a decent enough scan to do respectable 8x10 prints from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 01:58
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:Lenses pretty much rule the day on film cameras. What is your budget? One thing to consider is going with a manual focus camera- you can sometimes get a 'better' (I know, I know, it's subjective) camera if you go with a slightly older model that doesn't have AF. I'm not sure how much of a return you will see trying to keep lenses across camera types, but hey- whatever works. I would recommend for your first time out getting a single (50mm?) lens and using that to get to know the camera. I've learned more about my DSLR from sticking to a 50mm for a while than the confusion of multiple lenses. I'm trying to stay around $200 for a body and lens. I was thinking of going with a 50mm f1.8 lens and getting a nikon body such as the FM or the 8008. I'm sure i'll be fine without AF.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 02:48
|
|
|
Well shoot, you can get that for less than $100, probably less than $50. I highly recommend the Nikkor-S 50 1.4 if you can find one, it's fast and has incredible bokeh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 03:01
|
|
|
Maybe I should adopt some of the crazy cheap 35mm equipment I see locally for you guys in tougher markets. Today I found a Nikon N2000 with a 50mm 1.8. $50, I thought about grabbing it for the lens alone for that price. Lots of $60-$75 Olympus gear and Canon too. Not so much Nikon, since I use a D50 I've been searching mostly for Nikon. While digging around in my neglected ham radio gear I found my long-lost Vivitar 283! This news even sweeter as I had already come across the accessories, the VP-1, the slave, the lens kit, bracket, etc-I was fishing in the big bay for another 283 but mine has been delivered once again into my hands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 07:02
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:Maybe I should adopt some of the crazy cheap 35mm equipment I see locally for you guys in tougher markets. Today I found a Nikon N2000 with a 50mm 1.8. $50, I thought about grabbing it for the lens alone for that price. Lots of $60-$75 Olympus gear and Canon too. Not so much Nikon, since I use a D50 I've been searching mostly for Nikon. What kind of Olympus gear? I've been looking for an OM-1 or 4 ever since I handled one... they're so small. le capitan posted:I'm trying to stay around $200 for a body and lens. I was thinking of going with a 50mm f1.8 lens and getting a nikon body such as the FM or the 8008. I'm sure i'll be fine without AF. You should have no problem. I've picked up autofocus Canon bodies for $10-20 locally, just keep an eye on Craigslist or go cruising garage sales on Saturdays. The latter is where you'll find the real bargains, nice deals on CL get swooped up pretty quickly. I missed a 430EX (a Canon flash) for $100 by two hours last weekend
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 16:30
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:You should have no problem. I've picked up autofocus Canon bodies for $10-20 locally, just keep an eye on Craigslist or go cruising garage sales on Saturdays. The latter is where you'll find the real bargains, nice deals on CL get swooped up pretty quickly. I missed a 430EX (a Canon flash) for $100 by two hours last weekend I found a Canon AE-1 SLR camera with an FD 50mm 1:1.4 lens on craigslist for $120, but i'm still hesitant for a better deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2009 17:13
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:What kind of Olympus gear? I've been looking for an OM-1 or 4 ever since I handled one... they're so small. If you're looking for a killer OM body send me a PM, I have an OM-2 that was just serviced by Camtech earlier this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2009 04:55
|
|
|
le capitan posted:I found a Canon AE-1 SLR camera with an FD 50mm 1:1.4 lens on craigslist for $120, but i'm still hesitant for a better deal. That's basically what KEH is asking for the same setup in "bargain" condition, so yeah, I'd hold off unless you just can't wait to start shooting. Could always ask the guy if he'd do a lower price. Doing some searches for other lenses, I came across KEH's FD selection... you can get some nice glass for really cheap, the downside being that you can't use them on a modern SLR without extensive modification or adapter that's basically an extension tube (changes FoV and degrades image quality) Clayton Bigsby posted:If you're looking for a killer OM body send me a PM, I have an OM-2 that was just serviced by Camtech earlier this year. Is it an SP? I want to use it with high speed film, so looking for one that takes ISO 3200 natively (yeah I know I could dial down exposure compensation a stop @ 1600, but I've got that feeling maybe I'll want to push it two stops someday). Not sure why I typed OM-1, really I'm looking for a 4, or I guess a 2 SP. Also an OM-G if it pops up cheap, just for the novelty of the name. Oh, if anyone is interested in that Minolta X-700, my dad wants to sell it now that he knows it works. It's got a 50mm f/1.7, a 2X teleconverter, a 70-210 f/4.5 zoom, as well as some miscellaneous filters and a camera bag. I ran a roll of film through it and it works fine. I'm going to have to ask him what he wants for it, shouldn't be much more than $50-60. Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Jan 2, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2009 17:37
|
|
|
No, just a plain OM2 (not MD but still has the drive connection).
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2009 18:01
|
|
|
Way earlier in the thread I posted a picture of an old TLR Ikon Ikoflex I got. Today I got the first roll of film I put through it back:  (Could kick myself for not noticing the tripod. I was in a hurry with this one.)   It was tricky not having a lightmeter, I used my digital camera for the most part plus some over/under exposure bracketing. The camera's also abit fidgety with some of it's dials, sometimes they don't want to stay put. I am, however, completely hooked on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2009 04:04
|
|
|
I have started recently with film and have really been enjoying it. I am shooting on an AE-1P and a Yashicamat LM. I am looking at getting a medium format with interchangeable lenses. The ability to shoot 6x7 would be a real plus. What I have been looking at are the Mamiya C3 series and the Bronica GS-1. I really like the numbers on some of the C3 series lenses and the ability to do close ups but some of the stuff the GS-1 also seem very attractive. Price is a bit of a factor, I am trying to stay under 500 on keh. Any thing wrong with the two listed camera or are there others I should consider also?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2009 02:00
|
|
|
Sadi posted:I have started recently with film and have really been enjoying it. I am shooting on an AE-1P and a Yashicamat LM. I am looking at getting a medium format with interchangeable lenses. The ability to shoot 6x7 would be a real plus. What I have been looking at are the Mamiya C3 series and the Bronica GS-1. I really like the numbers on some of the C3 series lenses and the ability to do close ups but some of the stuff the GS-1 also seem very attractive. Price is a bit of a factor, I am trying to stay under 500 on keh. Any thing wrong with the two listed camera or are there others I should consider also? Either would be fine. Keep in mind that if you want to do close ups with a C series TLR you really need the Paramender to handle the parallax correction. Let me toss this out: RB67. It has the bellow focusing, great glass, 6x7 with rotating back, and doesn't cost a fortune. The downside? Size and weight. It is a HUGE loving CAMERA but if you are willing to deal with it you can't find anything better for the money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2009 03:26
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Either would be fine. Keep in mind that if you want to do close ups with a C series TLR you really need the Paramender to handle the parallax correction. I have an RZ67 Pro II. It's great. I only got it over the RB67 because I can borrow lenses and digital backs for it easily. Edit: It is big, but you can actually handle it. I shoot it in a studio handheld without a problem, even without a strap attached. TokenBrit fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Jan 6, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2009 12:42
|
|
|
TokenBrit posted:I have an RZ67 Pro II. It's great. I only got it over the RB67 because I can borrow lenses and digital backs for it easily. Yeah, it's actually nice to handhold since it has so much bulk you won't have a lot of shake.  I have the shorty neckstrap for my RB and it's pretty comfortable to shoot.The RZ is nice, but I've seen RB67 outfits go for < $200 lately. Hard to beat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2009 03:23
|
|
|
After spending almost all of winter break not shooting, I'm back at my house and itching to burn some film. I've got my tlr loaded up with some Acros 100, and my Bessa with some Arista-X (shooting at EI 1250). I'm going to soup the TX in diafine as per normal, but what should I use for the Acros? I have access to Diafine, D-76, HC-110, and Rodinal. I'm going to be shooting a little street and maybe some portraits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2009 08:59
|
|
|
Got a Contax T2. Yay!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2009 10:02
|
|
|
Just shot my first roll of T-Max P3200, it seems to have finer grain than Delta 3200, even when developed for EI 12800 like I did here:  But it was nice to be able to shoot outside under streetlights without flash. I'm glad I like it, since I bought 10 rolls of it and T-Max 400.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2009 21:41
|
|
|
I want to start doing some of my own developing and enlarging at home and I came across a local deal. Some one has a Beseler Dichro 67S2 with 3 lenses 3 lenses a 50 a 63 and a 90 and 6 easels. I could not find much info on the S2 but from what I could find it will do every thing from 35mm to 6x7 which fits my needs and being that it has color filters I understand it can do variable contrast prints. There would also be some assorted darkroom odds and ends. Is there any thing I should be on the look out for? Ill be honest I don't know too much about the developing side of things I have just started looking into it in the past few weeks but that struck me as a very good price for an enlarger.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2009 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
Nuts to your Leicas and Bronicas. You're not badass unless you're shooting through a Tibetan skull camera. http://www.boyofblue.com/cameras/yama/yama02.htm
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2009 10:33
|
|
is go