|
Martytoof posted:Yeah, I sort of figured what sort of people frequent that forum when they got mad at someone for asking a question about scanning a negative on a ~~~COMPUTER~~~~ instead of printing it in a darkroom or something. "Sent from my Zorki(R)"
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:03 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:I'm still lusting after a Contax G1, but in all honesty I am so incredibly happy with my old $100 Zorki 6 that I bought from fedka.com -- it's really fun to use, looks pretty nice, is relatively quiet. It won't last forever since it has a cloth shutter (and indeed Fedka replaced my first Zorki 6 when the shutter literally tore 5 minutes after it arrived in the mail), but for the time being I'm having a lot of fun with it. I moved up to a Canon IV from a Zorki C and was pretty impressed with the smoothness of operation that everything had in comparison. The combined viewfinder/rangefinder is quite handy, though that camera was hampered by Canon's weird rail based flash rail system which pretty much means that I'd have to use bulbs. Just last year I managed to snag a good condition Canon P, probably one of my favorite cameras to walk around with. Large viewfinder window with built in parallax adjustment, 1/1000 top speed, metal shutters and easy back loading makes this as fancy as I can get with a budget non-metered RF. I'd love to get a Nikon S series someday but they run nearly as expensive as a nice used Leica nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
Sushi in Yiddish posted:Just last year I managed to snag a good condition Canon P, probably one of my favorite cameras to walk around with. Large viewfinder window with built in parallax adjustment, 1/1000 top speed, metal shutters and easy back loading makes this as fancy as I can get with a budget non-metered RF. god drat you i didn't know this thing existed a few minutes ago and now i want one so bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 18:57
|
|
|
 So apparently the last bottle of developer that I have did not have an airtight seal on the cap. It leaked all over my poo poo in the month I had it stored (it ha fallen on its side). I am wondering if I can still use it? The discoloration is from what u assume was air getting in there. I only developed one roll from this bottle so it would suck to lose it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 20:34
|
|
|
rio posted:
My bottle of HC-110 looks the same way and it works fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 20:37
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:I spent a few hours putting my backlog of negatives in printfile sleeves tonight. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 23:25
|
|
|
HPL posted:"Sent from my Zorki(R)" Don't even think about using the word d****l or mention the "online auction website"  Sushi in Yiddish posted:I moved up to a Canon IV from a Zorki C and was pretty impressed with the smoothness of operation that everything had in comparison. The combined viewfinder/rangefinder is quite handy, though that camera was hampered by Canon's weird rail based flash rail system which pretty much means that I'd have to use bulbs. I went from a FED-2 to a Bessa R, and difference in everything is just amazing, viewfinder thats probably better than my Pentax ME super (wash your mouth out), with TTL metering, metal curtain and its black to go with the Jupiter 8-1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 23:32
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:I spent a few hours putting my backlog of negatives in printfile sleeves tonight. This is about 2 years worth of 120 how did you have it before?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 23:38
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Don't even think about using the word d****l or mention the "online auction website" Whoa.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
Yeah I'm pretty sure my next camera will be either a Canon P or a Bessa R. But in all honesty, this Zorki 6 is pretty awesome. I mean for what it is. A super cheap russian Leica-style knockoff. The only reason I want an upgrade is for a better viewfinder. I'd love to get some framelines up in here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:What were your 120 negs doing before? Just sitting in a box? Rolls held together with elastic bands? Genderfluid posted:how did you have it before? About half of them were in print file pages and the rest were in various glassine or plastic sleeves from the lab. I'm not a monster, I just didn't know my lab would print file stuff for cheap. I still don't have any binders, all my negs are in a giant white envelope on a shelf in our home office.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Don't even think about using the word d****l or mention the "online auction website" I really regret selling my Bessa. I've heard the Zeiss Ikon ZM's viewfinder is even better, but haven't looked through one (it's also way more expensive though).
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 02:04
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:I really regret selling my Bessa. I've heard the Zeiss Ikon ZM's viewfinder is even better, but haven't looked through one (it's also way more expensive though). My friend has a Zeiss Ikon ZM so when I looked through the viewfinder, it was literally wow, very bright and very clear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 02:16
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:god drat you i didn't know this thing existed a few minutes ago and now i want one so bad. I briefly had a Canon 7 (came with two lenses I bought). The viewfinder was better than my R3a (brighter, better framelines) but I'm a lazy babby that wants AE, so off it went.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
I went from a Kiev 4 to a Leica M6. It's like night and day, I had a look at a Bessa R4M a couple of weeks ago, I'm pretty sure I would have been just as happy with one of those. To the point that it's probably going to be my next film body.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 10:48
|
|
|
I have a Bessa R, a FED 2 and a 4. The Bessa wins in terms of features because of a) the TTL light meter, b) times (love the ability to shoot with the flash at 1/125), c) bright, selectable frame lines, but the other two aren't sloppy either. The FED 2 is simply a beauty, especially with its collapsible lens. If I have to go shooting at an event of some kind, that is my camera of choice and nothing can touch it.  FED 4 is middle ground between the two; I like it because it's sturdy, compared to the Bessa, but has a couple of features missing from the FED-2 (light meter, self timer).
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 11:08
|
|
|
The Bessas have a wonderful range of features, I'll definitely think about one if I ever get the scratch to get into M-Mount lenses. I just wish used ones came up for auction once in a while. One complaint I've heard is that the bodies feel kind of plasticky, I guess I'm not used to rangefinders not being heavy blocks of solid metal. You could drive nails with my Kiev 4. Martytoof posted:Yeah I'm pretty sure my next camera will be either a Canon P or a Bessa R. Sure you can get framelines, but it's just not as snazzy looking as one of these turret viewfinders:  Zorki 4 rangefinder camera w/ Jupiter 8 & universal turret viewfinder SAM_0315 by THE OLYMPUS CAMERAS COLLECTOR, on Flickr Sushi in Yiddish fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Nov 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
The one thing that drove me mad more than anything was the lack of an film-advance leaver on the FED-2, I thought it wouldn't matter but it just made me not want to use it so much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
Fixed lens RF'es make so much more sense than these.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
I don't disagree, but the lens positioning on my Yashica Electro 35 completely ruined that camera for me. It's so far to the right that it interferes with my right hand and holding it is uncomfortable. Plus the focusing ring on the lens is really awkward to find if you're not looking right at it. I much prefer my awesome little Zorki.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
Interchangeable lens RFs do make sense when it's your only system. edit: I can't spell. vv don't bother adapting FD lenses to EOS, they won't focus to infinity. FasterThanLight fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Nov 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
Anyone know if I should spend €60 on a Sigma Filtermatic 24mm f2.8? It's an FD mount so I'll likely be converting it to EOS for my Canon EOS 500 also my 600D
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2012 23:41
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:Interchangeable lens RFs do make sense when it's your only system. Another use of RF lenses is with mirrorless cameras.. I really like using ltm lenses on my nex.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2012 14:15
|
|
|
maxmars posted:Another use of RF lenses is with mirrorless cameras.. I really like using ltm lenses on my nex. They're pretty cool if you use both, but the lack of close-focusing can be a drag sometimes. There's an adapter with a helicoid that helps address that, although I've never tried it myself. The Olympus Pen (half-frame) lenses are pretty good companions to mirrorless cameras, especially the NEX with the 1.6 crop (which roughly matches half-frame's standard size). I love the 42mm f/1.2 I've got on mine, although it's currently out for repairs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 08:24
|
|
|
Forgive me as I'm sure this has been covered plenty of times in the thread but I'm a complete newbie who knows next to nothing about developing. My local photo guy sold me this developer and fixer.  A few months back, I found this tank in my grandmother's closet (needs a good cleaning):  My bathroom is completely light-free and I have access to two empty two-liter jugs that previously contained orange juice. The film I'm looking to develop is Ilford PAN 400. Am I all set to go? Where do I find instructions how to mix the fluids and how long to keep the film in the tank? Just to see if I've understood the process correctly... I load the film into the tank, screw it shut, pour the mixed developer into it, shake it an unknown number of times for an unknown length of time. Pour it out (can this be re-used or thrown away?), pour tap water (our tap water is super clean if that makes any difference) into the tank (repeat), pour it out, pour the fixer into it (repeat procedure?). Can this be re-used or thrown away?). Pour it out of the tank, hang the negatives to dry on clothespins?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 10:07
|
|
|
nemoulette posted:Forgive me as I'm sure this has been covered plenty of times in the thread but I'm a complete newbie who knows next to nothing about developing. http://www.digitaltruth.com/, for all your dev time needs. The instructions on how to mix the chemicals are on the packaging. Detailed instructions on the actual dev process are in this post:http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2864270&userid=83493#post344262317 . Just substitute D-76 for HC-110. You should pick up some hypo clear as it will shorten your wash times substantially.Yes, you can reuse developer and fix. In fact never pour fix down the drain because it contains silver (after use)and is considered a hazardous material. 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 10:34 on Nov 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 10:32
|
|
|
nemoulette posted:My bathroom is completely light-free and I have access to two empty two-liter jugs that previously contained orange juice. The film I'm looking to develop is Ilford PAN 400. Am I all set to go? Where do I find instructions how to mix the fluids and how long to keep the film in the tank? D-76: Fill about 600 ml of the hottest tap water you can produce into a mixing jug. It should be hot enough that it's uncomfortable to stick your fingers in. Pour the powder into the water and mix until it's as dissolved as you can get it. Fill with cold tap water until you hit 1000 ml (1 L). This is now D-76 stock. Pour your stock developer into a bottle with cap and leave it to cool. (You can put it in the fridge if you want.) Rapid Fixer: 900 ml of cold water, 100 ml of fixer concentrate (i.e. up to 1 L), stir well. Bottle. This is working strength fixer. D-76 developer can be used either as stock or in diluted form. If you use the stock as-is, you can re-use it a couple of times. (I think you can get about 5 films developed in 1 L of it.) If you dilute it, you throw out the used developer after each use. Common dilutions are 1+1 and 1+3, sometimes also 1+2 (parts stock + parts water), thinner dilutions are not really practical. Don't dilute stock you have already used at full strength. If you use the stock as-is, pour the used developer back into the bottle. Your developing tank needs 300 ml of chemistry for one 135 film, so 1 L of stock you get you about 6-7 films developed if you dilute it at 1+1 and sometimes 1+3. You use the fixer as mixed, and just pour the used fix back into the bottle after use. When the fixing time gets too long with that batch, turn it in at a recycling station or something, and mix a new batch. (If you leave well-used fixer in a clear container for maybe a week or several, you will see silver precipitate form.) As a note, Kodak D-76 is chemically identical to Ilford ID-11, so times for one of those are also valid for the other. (Ilford produces ID-11 as two powders which are mixed into the hot water in turn. The end result is the same.) If you see water marks on your film after letting it dry, get yourself some wetting agent. It's cheap and makes drying so much safer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 11:44
|
|
|
Thanks guys! E: I went ahead at bought that Massive Dev Chart iPhone app. Seems handy. Do you guys have preferences on agitations? widunder fucked around with this message at 12:00 on Nov 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 11:45
|
|
|
nemoulette posted:Thanks guys! I still do 30 second of gentle rotary agitation as my initial, then 5 slow inversions evenly spaced out 3 times during the dev cycle. I tend to shoot B&W in higher contrast lighting and this gives me slightly flatter negs. If you shoot in low contrast lighting stick with standard recommendations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 14:16
|
|
|
In the future you might want to try out Kodak HC-110. I used to use XTOL but it was kind of a pain in the rear end to have to mix everything ahead of time. HC-110 is also good because it takes up less space to store since you have a concentrate syrup ready to go as opposed to 3 or 4 litres of mix.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 17:20
|
|
|
nemoulette posted:My bathroom is completely light-free Are you absolutely, positively sure about that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
I use a dark bedroom, at night, and climb under a couple of layers of blankets to put my film on reels and in the tank. It works well enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
Before I had a changing bag I turned the lights off and used a few layers of garbage bags stacked on top of each other since they're somewhat less than opaque. Worked really well. Put a small cardboard box in there and you don't have to worry about the bags collapsing on your hands and you have a nice solid workspace to tool around in. The changing bag I have now is far far far too small for my needs. I'm thinking about going back to the garbage bags to be frank. If you're careful with the edges then it's not all that dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 20:13
|
|
|
I only just go this thread's subtitle after listening to a BBC Essential Mix 
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
I have absolutely no idea what it refers to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 22:45
|
|
|
I really hate film changing bags. I got a Harrison Pup Tent and can't recommend it enough. A bit spendy, but so very worth how much less aggravation is involved. Even the Pup Tent, the smallest size, is plenty big enough for 4x5. http://www.cameraessentials.com/harrison_film_changing_tents.htm
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:I really hate film changing bags. I got a Harrison Pup Tent and can't recommend it enough. A bit spendy, but so very worth how much less aggravation is involved. Even the Pup Tent, the smallest size, is plenty big enough for 4x5. This is awesome, but somehow I could never justify spending two hundred plus dollars on a changing tent  Of course ask me again in a month after the 9th time I pull my sweaty hands out of my cramped mini changing bag after fumbling around almost tearing the fabric.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Are you guys trying to play Moby Dick on the drums in your changing bags or something? I've never had problems with size (lots with sweat), even loading up 4x5, I think mine is only a medium one. On that, does anyone else Hulk Hogan their 35mm canisters open too, or it just me:  
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
Sweaty changing tents are disgusting, and Hoganing your canisters is the only way to go.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:03 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:I have absolutely no idea what it refers to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t2TzJOyops It's a play one on that song.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 23:28
|
|