|
I am loving my Canon A2E. It's kind of weird, but it does some things like autofocus better than my 40D despite a 10 year difference in age. It meters quite well too. Underexpose by one stop in daylight and you're practically guaranteed never to have a blown-out highlight beyond recovery. As far as ease of use goes, if you're used to using Canon DSLRs, you'll feel at home in no time flat since the A2E uses practically the same controls including the wheel on the back. The body is a fair size, comparable to a xxD series body but thinner from front to back while retaining the same size right hand grip. Weight is about the same as my 40D. The fact that it uses 2CR5 batteries kind of sucks (expensive) but other than that it is one heck of a camera and I totally recommend checking out one if you're already shooting Canon DSLRs and have EF lenses, especially at the prices its at right now. I paid $80 for mine and it was money well spent. This plus a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 makes for a mighty combo.
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:30 |
|
|
With the latitude of negative film, it's pretty hard to meter too badly anyway. The only other thing I don't like about my A2E is the lack of a dedicated DOF preview button. What were they thinking?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 01:55
|
|
|
I'm thinking the sweet spot for deals on film gear is now or we may be a bit past it. It's amazing how capable these modern SLR's are. My old X-700 metered pretty well but the newer stuff has been really spot on. Now that I'm using the A200 on the DSLR side, I'm concentrating on Minolta film gear. I ebayed a Minolta 7000i with a 35-70 F4 macro zoom for $40-some, the 35-70 is the new carry lens for the A200, it balances perfectly and is much more compact that the kit lens. The 7000i is armed with some Ilford Delta 100 and the sketchy Quantaray zoom. It's still cheaper for me to buy the lens with camera attached but the good deals are getting scarcer. Word must be getting out. I'm a bit annoyed as earlier in the year I was passing on all kinds of good Minolta AF gear as I was looking more for Nikon, the Canon, once I got the A200 a bunch of the cameras that had been sitting around forever disappeared. I'm still doing OK, I'm under $100 for a 50mm f1.7 and the 35-70 f4, and the Q-Ray will work until I find a better long zoom. I did find a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 for my X-700, man what a sweet piece of glass. The point of all this rambling? If you are even thinking of supplementing your digital gear with film gear, it will be hard to do better than right now. The really good stuff, cameras that were $1000 cameras when new, are cheap as chips right now but the tide is turning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 03:47
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:The point of all this rambling? If you are even thinking of supplementing your digital gear with film gear, it will be hard to do better than right now. The really good stuff, cameras that were $1000 cameras when new, are cheap as chips right now but the tide is turning. I agree. Now is the time for late 70's and newer 35mm SLRs. It's starting to get too late for medium format equipment as prices on that are rising. Autofocus film cameras don't have the cachet that manual focus ones do... yet. It's a good time to get one and enjoy cheap full-frame photography with your existing lenses. Think of each roll of film as 24 miniature EOS 1Ds-MkIIIs. Now for a question about film itself: I'm going through the Rockies this summer on a trip. I plan on taking both digital and film cameras. What would be a good, relatively inexpensive color film to use for landscape photography? I've been using some store-brand film which seems to be rebranded Fuji Superia 200 with decent results, but I'm wondering if there's anything better for the price. I'd rather not get $12/roll film as I plan on buying a bunch of it and shooting lots.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 07:24
|
|
|
HPL posted:I agree. Now is the time for late 70's and newer 35mm SLRs. It's starting to get too late for medium format equipment as prices on that are rising. Autofocus film cameras don't have the cachet that manual focus ones do... yet. It's a good time to get one and enjoy cheap full-frame photography with your existing lenses. Think of each roll of film as 24 miniature EOS 1Ds-MkIIIs. I haven't really given much consideration to manual focus and medium format, because oddly the prices for manual focus always seem to be higher than AF cameras, which I didn't really understand. All I know is, I could get an F4 for under $200. As for your question, Nedsmaster's gotten some chrome style for a negative price with Kodak Ultra Color 100. From about 5 pages back: Nedsmaster posted:anyone that is looking for a film that can replicate the vibrance of slide should try kodak's ultra color 100. i'm simply blown away by this stuff, the saturation is incredible. It ain't Velvia but it's next best to me. Haven't used it myself yet, though. I shoot people almost exclusively so I don't bust out the high saturation often. As soon as Spring hits the world I'm firing up my second roll of original Velvia.  Anyway have fun in the mountains!
pwn fucked around with this message at 08:36 on Apr 15, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 08:30
|
|
|
Hmmm. Looks like Ektar has replaced Ultra Color. I'll have to try a roll or two. It's more expensive than the Superia, but I can't find anything but good words about it in reviews.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 15:39
|
|
|
It has eye popping saturation and colours. Just try not to shoot people with it or because it makes them look sunburnt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2009 20:29
|
|
|
So I was thinking about getting back to using my Contax T2 again. The thing is that you can't set the ISO manually, it takes the ISO from the DX code on the film can or else it defaults to 100. What I noticed is that to change the DX code from 400 to 1600 all I have to do is put foil tape over one square in the first row and that's it. I'll try that tonight. If it works, that would be awesome because then I could put my A2E back on auto ISO instead of having to remember to change it every time I use a different kind of film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2009 19:32
|
|
|
http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Hub/PixelGrain/pixelgrain.htm Kinda funny shorts, Mr. Pixel and Mrs. Grain. e: Hahaha, the second one is great. 365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 17, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2009 22:51
|
|
|
The third one is hilarious when they're explaining their origins.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 01:00
|
|
|
I just want to mention that I've fallen truly and deeply in love with portra 160nc and really wish i could afford to shoot it all the time (well, all the day time).
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 01:04
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Hub/PixelGrain/pixelgrain.htm That was awesome. First one was a little slow, but the other two were great
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 01:24
|
|
|
Two rolls have come out of my AE1 completely screwed. The first place I developed one of the rolls suggests light leak, the second place I developed another roll says no light hit the film in the first place. Other than these yokels, what would the best way for me to figure out this problem be?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 03:06
|
|
|
Well, what does the film look like?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 03:07
|
|
|
Like it's been accidentally exposed, except for the random one or two picture in the negative that looks like it just barely caught the light I wanted. But you know just after posting that first message I had a thought and walked over to the camera. After picking it up and shaking it (which was my first idea) I took off the lens, opened the back and fiddled a bit, winding the camera and releasing the shutter on different speeds. On bulb through 1/8 I saw the shutter curtain open, the other speeds I didn't.. I've run plenty of film through this camera before, and despite being somewhat old whoever had it beforehand took fantastic care of it, since it doesn't have any obvious signs of damage. Has something gone wrong internally I wonder?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 03:17
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Hub/PixelGrain/pixelgrain.htm pwn fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Apr 18, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 07:03
|
|
|
HPL posted:So I was thinking about getting back to using my Contax T2 again. The thing is that you can't set the ISO manually, it takes the ISO from the DX code on the film can or else it defaults to 100. What I noticed is that to change the DX code from 400 to 1600 all I have to do is put foil tape over one square in the first row and that's it. I'll try that tonight. If it works, that would be awesome because then I could put my A2E back on auto ISO instead of having to remember to change it every time I use a different kind of film. You can also bulk buy new coding label stickers. Foil and glue is more fun though!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2009 10:03
|
|
|
Ended up scraping the paint off with a knife. Worked fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2009 00:28
|
|
|
Hooray for yard sales. Yashica Electro 35 GSN, bag and 2 flashes, $20. Pictures at 11. Edit-apparently formerly owned by someone who has no clue about film. The DPO had loaded a roll of film in upside down, and the film had kind of wrapped around the cassette and jammed up nicely-if they had loaded the camera like that before, I'm guessing the pictures would have come out rather strangely, having been exposed through the film base. The Electro also requires a 6 volt battery. A single 123 cell won't work. Gnomad fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Apr 19, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2009 01:57
|
|
|
shooting some of the kodak c-41 bw film rontalvos was nice enough to send me. the tones aren't amazing, but i still like it for quick, convenient black and white.  
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2009 05:22
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:Hooray for yard sales. I have one of those and loved it, until it killed the $9 battery in a week  I haven't touched it since.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2009 18:40
|
|
|
The T2 did an okay job at 1600 with Arista Premium: http://www.flickr.com/photos/31391300@N04/sets/72157616968119651/ 
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2009 23:33
|
|
|
I didn't know if this fit in the camera gear thread or the regular thread, but I was kind of curious what kind of scanners you guys use. I've got a digital SLR, but I also have a K1000 and I just bought a Holga (and plan on getting a Yashica because medium format is so awesome) but I want to cut down on my processing costs for now, especially with the medium format, hence scanning it myself. Plus it's wasteful to have to burn a CD or whatever for my film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 04:34
|
|
|
Brucie Banner posted:I didn't know if this fit in the camera gear thread or the regular thread, but I was kind of curious what kind of scanners you guys use. I use an Epson V500. Slow, but the quality is decent. Just be aware that it can only do one or two medium format frames at a time and only goes up to 6x9, so no wacky panorama formats.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 05:16
|
|
|
The choices for medium format seems to be Epson 4490, Epson V500, or Canon Canoscan 8800. I just bought a 8800 and like it quite a bit, having started in the archiving process. Word of warning-once you start scanning your negs at any kind of decent resolution your need for storage increases like you wouldn't believe. A 1200 dpi scan of a 6x4.5 negative works out to something like 26 megs. I have a 750g exteranl drive and will need another one, I kind of expect to actually dedicate one to scanning. Edit-the Canonscan 8800 will do at least 3 120 size negs at a time. I paid $199 for mine from an office supply store. I would have bought the V500 but Office Depot was agonizingly incompetent and didn't actually have one to sell me, despite there being a tag by the demo. Gnomad fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Apr 20, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 05:16
|
|
|
I ordered some of the Chinese film for both 35mm and 120, but I guess it takes a while to get here. Word to the wise, don't be in a hurry for it. Must be coming slow boat from China!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 05:29
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:I ordered some of the Chinese film for both 35mm and 120, but I guess it takes a while to get here. What's up with that? What does it do that the normally available films don't do?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 06:05
|
|
|
HPL posted:What's up with that? What does it do that the normally available films don't do? It costs less than $5 and change per roll, basically. Only one store in my area carries 120 anything and 35mm B/W, and they know they have the market all to themselves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 06:48
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:It costs less than $5 and change per roll, basically. Why not Arista Premium? It's about $2 per roll for 36 exposures and it's basically relabelled Tri-X.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 07:05
|
|
|
Sounds like the Canonscan is more for what I want, since I'll definitely want to experiment with some panoramas on the 120.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 07:17
|
|
|
HPL posted:Why not Arista Premium? It's about $2 per roll for 36 exposures and it's basically relabelled Tri-X. After shipping, it's not such a great deal anymore. I am strongly considering bulk fim, since I do have a loader, but that still doesn't help with the 120.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 08:38
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:I am strongly considering bulk fim, since I do have a loader, but that still doesn't help with the 120. Definitely buy in bulk if just for the convenience alone and not the savings. The only issue is that I have shot more rolls of film than I even have time to develop.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 08:59
|
|
|
I hate this thread because I've been reading through the first ten pages and decided that once I go on to grad school I'm going to put together a mini-lab in my apartment. Time to start making a list of everything I need...
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 09:08
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:It costs less than $5 and change per roll, basically. What brand? I used to shoot Lucky 100 on my TLR when I was in China. It was less than a dollar a roll  They used to make an ASA 400 B&W film, but I think they phased it out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 14:11
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:After shipping, it's not such a great deal anymore. Where are you located? I'm in Canada and even with shipping, duties, taxes etc. etc. it still came out to a little under $4, all in which is still at least a couple of dollars cheaper per roll than in the stores. EDIT: Just noticed that Henry's will be carrying Arista Premium soon. $4.29 for a roll of 36. HPL fucked around with this message at 16:31 on Apr 20, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 15:28
|
|
|
w_hat posted:I have one of those and loved it, until it killed the $9 battery in a week http://www.yashica-guy.com/document/battery.html Pompous Rhombus posted:What brand? I used to shoot Lucky 100 on my TLR when I was in China. It was less than a dollar a roll Lucky actually make surprisingly good film, it did help that Kodak gave them a bunch of money and expertise back in 2003 though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 17:34
|
|
|
Just set up an exchange on KEH on a flash that stopped working for a 28mm for my K1000. Film rules.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 21:36
|
|
|
HPL posted:
I'm bulk loading HP5 at the moment and even purchasing retail in Vancouver it works out to under $3/roll.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 21:43
|
|
|
dunno posted:I'm bulk loading HP5 at the moment and even purchasing retail in Vancouver it works out to under $3/roll. Yes, but Tri-X 36 exposure rolls can go for $5 to $6 per roll plus tax in the stores. Point being that if you're not going to get into bulk loading any time soon, AP400 is a good way to shoot Tri-X at a slightly lower cost. Henry's charges $10 for shipping so can cover PST easily if you order from them. Where are you buying your bulk from? Leo's?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2009 21:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:30 |
|
|
HPL posted:Yes, but Tri-X 36 exposure rolls can go for $5 to $6 per roll plus tax in the stores. Point being that if you're not going to get into bulk loading any time soon, AP400 is a good way to shoot Tri-X at a slightly lower cost. Henry's charges $10 for shipping so can cover PST easily if you order from them. Beau Photo, I haven't checked if Leo's sells bulk rolls yet, but I don't like shopping there much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2009 01:03
|
|