|
GWBBQ posted:Size 675 zinc-air batteries are the same voltage as the old mercury cells and the same form factor. You'll still have to wedge the foil in but the voltage will be spot on. I will try to find that, but I live in Taiwan, so I can't exactly order off of Amazon. Thanks for the replies. The other thing I have been having trouble with is finding a tank for developing the film. Every shop I have went to tells me film is outdated and I shouldn't bother with it 
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
Sevn posted:I will try to find that, but I live in Taiwan, so I can't exactly order off of Amazon. Thanks for the replies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
I posted this in the Buy/Sell thread but I thought you guys would be interested as well: spotted this on the local Craig's List Yard Sale ads: Vintage antique cameras and accessories, box cameras, old 35mm, Kodak, old Polaroid with bellows, pocket vest, Olympus xa, old flash bulb flash sets, old travel tripods 2 waterproof (10 foot) working canon 35 mm film cameras Minolta maxxum Sony alpha lenses 35-80 zoom, 135 2.8 tele, 500 reflex (mirror) Maxxum 9xi camera Minolta ringflash, & more lenses. Bag of olympus om lens and body caps, other photography gear Gitzo ball head (new) Old school portable flash with power pack, 3 heads, stands bought at Peace camera years ago. good intro level way to practice studio photography for cheap Nikon 72mm CPL filter, new in box Yes, I'm going to actually get my rear end up and be a freaking hour away from my house for this yard sale. I'm looking at the Olympus xa and the old school flashes/stands. Anyone else want me to check into anything? Not sure I really need that XA and I know there are a bunch of people that do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 18:55
|
|
|
Sent you a PM 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Sent you a PM same
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 21:54
|
|
|
The owner of that photo store has given me permission to share the spreadsheet I've been making. This is what I've tagged and tested so far. Keep in mind that these were all from the "display only" shelves, so they're not the regular stock. https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArsyVuWUgxpRdGlQTWVHRjNWQXR5b1JXVjQxTDBYSFE&hl=en&authkey=CJra96YF Probably about halfway through the display stuff by now, so the list will continue to grow quite a bit. If you see anything in there that interests you, let me know and I'll try to get you in touch with the owner. Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Feb 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 02:04
|
|
is go
|
Posting to revel in my self-organization:  Not storing it in a freezer, just room temp. Most of the unboxed 35mm is expired already. Just something to have fun with!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 04:14
|
|
|
Nannypea posted:I posted this in the Buy/Sell thread but I thought you guys would be interested as well: !!! Would love to get the Olympus XA, how much is it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 04:22
|
|
|
Sirkus posted:!!! Would love to get the Olympus XA, how much is it? No ideas on any prices until I get there and AIIAZNSK8ER already has dibs on the XA
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 04:25
|
|
|
pseudonordic posted:Posting to revel in my self-organization: Put those in the fridge heathen! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 04:43
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:The owner of that photo store has given me permission to share the spreadsheet I've been making. This is what I've tagged and tested so far. Keep in mind that these were all from the "display only" shelves, so they're not the regular stock. You got the PMs? I'm interested in one. edit: Replied to your buy/sell thread. You can also email me at mystikal99 at hotmail ASSTASTIC fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Feb 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 05:31
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Put those in the fridge heathen! I thought the same thing. Velvia, room temp? As to add content to the post anyone use either Rollei's, or efke's infrared offerings? Specifically how much of a pain were they to deal with pre processing, and processing? If I do get some I will be buying a few IR filters. Ferris Bueller fucked around with this message at 13:41 on Feb 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 13:38
|
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:I thought the same thing. Velvia, room temp? The Velvia 35mm was expired and room temp when I bought it for $1. The 120 just recently expired. I'll talk to the wife about how much space she'll let me have for film in the fridge. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 16:01
|
|
|
pseudonordic posted:The Velvia 35mm was expired and room temp when I bought it for $1. The 120 just recently expired. I'll talk to the wife about how much space she'll let me have for film in the fridge. Ah I understand. Often I get the "what's this doing in here," when something from my hobbies needs to be in an electrically cooled device that often is the territory of a member of the female persuasion. Jealously guarded territory at that*. *I think I'm slowly breaking down mine into my thought of his and hers fridges. Brewing beer just takes up too much fridge space, and really, everyone needs a tap house in their house.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
This is total White People Problems, but after having taken it on a few shoots, I'm 100% convinced that my Contax rangefinder makes sharper pictures than my Leica SLR with Summicron glass. I've always heard that rangefinders (with good glass) are sharper than an SLR with similar quality, but I expected that to be more of a theoretical thing for nerds who shoot targets. It's pretty obvious to see in the negatives and prints, however. It's pretty annoying because as much as I love my G1, I prefer to shoot with an SLR, and the R8 is pure utilitarian sex. It's going to make me sperg out when I use it, knowing I could be getting sharper negs with the rangefinder. tl;dr- Oh bother, my Ferrari is faster, but the Bentley is oh-so-comfortable! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
The only reason a rangefinder could theoretically give you sharper images would be that you are, in fact, focusing more accurately.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 22:31
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:The only reason a rangefinder could theoretically give you sharper images would be that you are, in fact, focusing more accurately. A rangefinder is sharper because the lens is positioned closer to the film plane.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 23:25
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:A rangefinder is sharper because the lens is positioned closer to the film plane. * From Wikipedia Canon FD mount 42mm Nikon F mount 46.5mm
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 00:23
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Really? If that's true, then different manufacturer camera mounts should have different sharpness with the same (3rd-party) lens. One of the reasons you can't just stick an adaptor on a Minolta lens and focus at infinity on a Pentax body is the Minolta lens' plane of focus at infinity is closer to the back of the lens (i.e. the flange focal distance is different). Or is the difference in distance between a typical 35mm SLR (about 40 to 46mm) and a typical rangefinder (about 28-29mm) so much greater than the difference between SLR FFDs* that nobody would notice a sharpness effect there? Well like I said, I didn't think the difference would be something you could see without pixel peeping a target. I've noticed a small difference in sharpness between my Nikon and Leica SLRs, but just attributed that to the quality of the lenses. Going up to the rangefinder so far has been almost as dramatic as the difference between 35mm and medium format. Or at least the increase in detail from Tri-X to Pan-F. So yeah, I don't think the differences between the different 35mm systems amount to all that much when a rangefinder sits so much closer. I'm not sure about other lenses, but the rear element of the widest Contax G lens sits 6mm off the shutter. There's no way to get even nearly that close on an SLR.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
The difference between top of the line lenses on any 35mm system is so small as to be absolutely meaningless in real use.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 00:54
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:The difference between top of the line lenses on any 35mm system is so small as to be absolutely meaningless in real use. I would have agreed with you until I saw it for myself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 01:03
|
|
|
bokeh
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 01:57
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:bokeh Game, set, match.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 02:18
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:If there isn't a local lab that does it, mail it out to somewhere reputable. Someone here did a comparison of getting film developed in NYC, NJ, and mailing it to them, and mailing it to Dwayne's in Kansas ended up being the cheapest if you can wait. Ha, well I'm in Jersey and everything is close by in this state. Now, I just gotta figure out WHO does it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 17:33
|
|
|
Arrrgh. Loading 120 film into a Paterson plastic reel is officially the Worst Thing. Took like half an hour to finally get the damned film to stay on there, and by that point, I was so frustrated that I forgot to put the black core back into the thing and fogged the first third of the roll before I realized my mistake. Despite that, my first roll through my newly acquired $20 Ansco Titan looks pretty dope. 6x6 folder from the 1950's, sunny 16'd it with Plus-X down by a beach amusement park that's closed for the season. e: huh, it looks like there are tiny spots all over everything... Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Feb 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 01:23
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:Arrrgh. I don't know if that risks damaging the pictures, but it works. Dr. Cogwerks posted:e: huh, it looks like there are tiny spots all over everything... Like "holes" in the pictures? Seems that happens if you don't properly wipe the water off during drying. Or is it just the grain?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 02:50
|
|
|
Tempest815 posted:Ha, well I'm in Jersey and everything is close by in this state. Now, I just gotta figure out WHO does it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 04:05
|
|
|
I recently found a bunch of Kodax MAX 400 and Agfa Vista 200 at my parents house. They're at least 10 years past expiration and were stored at room temp. Is it even worth shooting them?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 04:16
|
|
|
What else are you gonna do with film? Just don't shoot anything super important, I bet you'll find some interesting colour or grain effects on film like that. Browse the flickr groups to get some ideas: http://www.flickr.com/groups/expired/
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
I got what seems to be some decent photos on a 10 year expired Ektachrome 160. I just need a way to scan it  Edit: Here's one. I processed the camera raw to get the colours reasonably close to the actual slide. 
nielsm fucked around with this message at 08:01 on Feb 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 05:48
|
|
|
spf3million posted:I recently found a bunch of Kodax MAX 400 and Agfa Vista 200 at my parents house. They're at least 10 years past expiration and were stored at room temp. Is it even worth shooting them? I had a roll of Agfa Vista 200 that was likely about the same age when I shot it and was stored in the same conditions. This was how it came out in terms of colors: http://i.imgur.com/TNoGE.jpg It wasn't horrible, everything just looked less vibrant and more pale.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 13:01
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:What else are you gonna do with film? Just don't shoot anything super important, I bet you'll find some interesting colour or grain effects on film like that. beeker posted:I had a roll of Agfa Vista 200 that was likely about the same age when I shot it and was stored in the same conditions. This was how it came out in terms of colors: http://i.imgur.com/TNoGE.jpg Now I just need to find a place to develop and scan photos in Bangkok.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 13:10
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:Arrrgh. I've found that you have to work that film lip(especially if it has a hard curl like all the tri x I've had,) one at a time trough the bearings then pull the film trough a complete rotation, on the reel. Then I start walking it onto the reel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 14:33
|
|
|
nielsm posted:I got what seems to be some decent photos on a 10 year expired Ektachrome 160. I just need a way to scan it Some of my favorite colored shots have come from very expired Ektachrome, the ended up being quite unsaturated and warm at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 22:32
|
|
|
Not color film, but I shot some HP5+ that had been sitting in a box in my friend's closet for ten years, and been in the box who knows how long before that. Shot one at 800 and one at 1600, and most of the pictures came out great (though the 1600 one was too foggy to see the picture through in bits).
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 23:03
|
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:I've found that you have to work that film lip(especially if it has a hard curl like all the tri x I've had,) one at a time trough the bearings then pull the film trough a complete rotation, on the reel. Then I start walking it onto the reel. The problem was that it kept falling out of the bearings after I had half of the roll onto the reel, and once that happened, the walking motion would just reverse it. Got it to eventually work by just holding my thumbs right on the bearings the whole time. I think it was just a particularly curly roll, it's been awhile since I've used black and white in 120. nielsm posted:Like "holes" in the pictures? Seems that happens if you don't properly wipe the water off during drying. There are these little tiny specks all over the skies, surrounded by oblong washed-out rings that join together if the specks are close enough. The pattern is pretty random and different in each one. I'm wondering if all my manhandling got dust all over the film before the chemicals hit it, or if water specks dried strangely around dust? I did use photoflow and a drying cabinet. Laptop charger broke so now my laptop and scanner are both unusable, damned thing is a hundred bucks and it's out of stock too... once a new one arrives, I'll scan and post one of those weird frames. spf3million posted:I recently found a bunch of Kodax MAX 400 and Agfa Vista 200 at my parents house. They're at least 10 years past expiration and were stored at room temp. Is it even worth shooting them? Yes. Go shoot it. If you're worried about wasting money, just ask for "Develop Only." Most of the color film I've been using lately is at least that old.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
I bought an Oly OM-2 Program from a friend and if things work out, I'm going to get a 50mm to put on it and take it on a family trip to Paris this summer. Is the general rule of thumb on film still to take it in a baggie and have it hand-inspected?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 04:22
|
|
|
Yeah, in a bag, and out of their boxes and plastic containers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 04:26
|
|
|
Pushed my first roll of film today. I was pretty convinced that I was going to blow it somehow, but the photos came out great. This was a test roll of HP5 through my silly new OM77AF - seen here through an old vivitar 28mm f/2.5 that is somehow super foggy: Here are some shots through the kit 50 1.8:   
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 04:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
Reichstag posted:Yeah, in a bag, and out of their boxes and plastic containers. Awesome, thanks 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 05:45
|
|