|
That should be okay. NC or VC?
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2013 12:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
So, I found this last week: DSCF4646 by atmz, on Flickr For £30, untested from an east London street stall - I think it must have just arrived. Long story short, after cleaning out a bit of corrosion from the battery, it's working perfectly apart from the frame counter, and I understand why everyone loves these things:  000023 by atmz, on Flickr  000026 by atmz, on Flickr Bonus feature: 39-40 shots/roll. Changing aperture is a pain in the rear end though. I also have an unrelated 'how screwed am I' question: I accidentally shot half a roll of MF Provia 400 at 100 - any hope of it being salvageable?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 11:37
|
|
|
TMZ posted:I also have an unrelated 'how screwed am I' question: I accidentally shot half a roll of MF Provia 400 at 100 - any hope of it being salvageable? You'll get something off of it but your highlights are basically going to be gone/transparent. You could try to get the roll pull-processed I guess (ka-ching).
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
So I'm gonna dump a couple of recent pictures into this thread, but I also have a question: can anyone recommend a good compact camera with lens-quality equal (or close) to a Ricoh, Contax, or any of the other high-end compact cameras? I was thinking Olympus XA, but it seems really plasticky and fragile. I want to throw it in my bag when I'm out and about. Last Snow in Ystad by Cdammen, on Flickr  Malmö Elverk by Cdammen, on Flickr  Fyren Malmö Inre Hamn by Cdammen, on Flickr Also, my Tetenal C41 kit held for twelve 120 films and 2 rolls of 135 films (36 exposures), but the last ones were not dense at all. They were kept in storage for about five months in black, plastic accordion bottles. TMZ posted:Bonus feature: 39-40 shots/roll.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
Try Olympus Stylus Epic (mju:ii), more modern than the XA and lives in its own tough little shell. And the life of you Tetenal kit sounds about right, how many of the rolls were iso 200+? The higher the iso the fast you exhaust the chems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
The original XA (not the 2 or 3) is a great camera with a lens almost on par with the cameras you listed. It isn't a p+s though, it's a rangefinder. I love my mju-ii and how tough it is, but it simply isn't as good a camera as the contax or any of the other cameras that cost 5-10 times as much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
So two people vouching for the toughness of the Olympus Stylus Epic, might have to take a look at that one. Thanks for the tip! I'll also look into the original XA.Spedman posted:And the life of you Tetenal kit sounds about right, how many of the rolls were iso 200+? The higher the iso the fast you exhaust the chems. Also, I had no idea that higher sensitivities means a more rapid "consumption". Cool, good to know.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
Mega Itch posted:So I'm gonna dump a couple of recent pictures into this thread, but I also have a question: can anyone recommend a good compact camera with lens-quality equal (or close) to a Ricoh, Contax, or any of the other high-end compact cameras? I was thinking Olympus XA, but it seems really plasticky and fragile. I want to throw it in my bag when I'm out and about. I'm not quite sure what you're asking. You want a bargain-grade compact that performs like a high-end compact? Doesn't exist, otherwise it would be a high-end compact. The Stylus Epic is great and also splash/rainproof. The XA is great too and gives you more control. It's nowhere near as fragile as you seem to think it is, although either of them are going to break if you step on them or something. I think the Stylus Epic lens is every bit the equal of the XAs, personally (although I've never done a direct comparison). I'd also take a look at the Rollei 35. The Sonnar models have probably the best lens ever put on a compact camera and the camera is as tiny as it is physically possible to be. It is the same family of lens they put on actual rangefinders. Unfortunately the price you pay for that is godawful ergonomics. The flash shoe is on bottom, there's no rangefinder, and it's so tiny it gets awkward. Finally, also consider medium format folders if you just want something that you can throw in a glovebox/console or something. A little Ikonta is going to give you more image quality than most real 35mm SLR lenses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The XA is great too and gives you more control. It's nowhere near as fragile as you seem to think it is, although either of them are going to break if you step on them or something. I've actually had really bad luck with XA's breaking down. They're great cameras though. I had a tech modify my last one that I was already sending in for servicing to meter a stop fast, giving it an effective ISO range of 50-1600. (I was hoping for 2 stops but he said that exceeded the tolerances of the camera, unfortunately.) Still a pretty nice mod, if you wind up having to send one in, I recommend it. If you want ISO 25 back, you can always use the backlight compensation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
I prefer the XA over mju/epic mostly because the mju seems to always shoot wide open whenever possible and this often results in narrow DOF and then missed focus. I prefer the rangefinder on the XA so I know what will be in focus to a certain extent. I did have to realign the XA range finder once when it was out of alignment vertically. Not terribly difficult but took about 2 hours to look up how to do it then put it all back together. If anything, I'd say the XA feels more robust than the mju. It is definitely heavier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 02:35
|
|
|
I got an XA a week or so ago. When I ordered it, I was worried it would feel cheap and plasticy but it feels tough and nicely weighted. The thing has a hair trigger which could be a good or bad thing depending on your tastes and the lens although sharp does vignette noticeably. Those issues aside, it's really, really fun to use and a a great size if you just want something to throw in your pocket without worrying about packin' yer G.E.A.R. I found a Stylus Epic for $4 at a thrift store a few days ago, put some batteries in it aaaaannnd, I absolutely hate it. I want the roll of HP5 I stuck in it back. edit: http://youtu.be/SzSAQ9jVApw?t=2m burzum karaoke fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Apr 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:I got an XA a week or so ago. When I ordered it, I was worried it would feel cheap and plasticy but it feels tough and nicely weighted. The thing has a hair trigger which could be a good or bad thing depending on your tastes and the lens although sharp does vignette noticeably. Those issues aside, it's really, really fun to use and a a great size if you just want something to throw in your pocket without worrying about packin' yer G.E.A.R. I will pay you your $4 and three rolls of HP5 for the Stylus...
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
found this in the related videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16PjtXZfio0 apparently Canon wants you to use their products to spy weirdly on half-naked women e: holy poo poo the longer i watch this the creepier it gets whereismyshoe fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Apr 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
Scanned some stuff I shot with the  Bessa_4_14006.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  Bessa_4_14004.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  Bessa_4_14005.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  Bessa_4_14007.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr About 5 seconds after I took this one I dropped the camera   Bessa_4_14020.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickrrough
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
The Canon video is amazing. I want a T90 now, but only if it's available in a 6-legged robot body roaming around on some far, far away planet. And a Q-PIC, just because. Here, have some Minolta from the same youtube account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeU3feKhWOk
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
So I did something very stupid with my EOS 5: I attached a K-mount lens with an adapter. I took a shot and the camera shut off. I eventually figured this was because the aperture control of the lens was hitting against the mirror so I switched back to an EF lens. I got a roll back and for the shots after I used the K-mount lens, only the bottom third of the frame was exposed. Basically the mirror isn't coming all the way up anymore when I press the shutter. Anyone have any idea how to fix this? I've been emailing a few local repair places but no luck so far. Am I completely screwed? Gonna cross post this in the Canon thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2013 10:52
|
|
|
 Shadows by atomicthumbs, on Flickr Panatomic-X is a pretty good film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 02:45
|
|
|
started a project photographing along the sides of highways Along the Bronx River Parkway, White Plains NY by JaundiceDave, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
Those background tones are amazing, Portra 400 is king.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
I can see a day where Kodak drop everything bar Portra (and then drop that)
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 08:57
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:I can see a day where Kodak drop everything bar Portra (and then drop that) You shut your filthy whore mouth!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 10:28
|
|
|
Can't stop staring at the sheer beauty of that portrait. Such gorgeous colors!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 10:35
|
|
|
Genderfluid posted:started a project photographing along the sides of highways What speed do you shoot your Portra at?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 12:18
|
|
|
Velvia 50 that 'survived' 2 stops of underexposure. R47 RVP50 01 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
Crossposting from the Buy/Sell thread for relevance, I'm Selling all of my 35mm Nikon film equipment. Great start to finish kit: Shoot, develop and (digitally) print.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
What are you guys using to figure out exposure? I usually have an old light meter handy, but a couple of weeks ago I had to subsist solely on a ratty old Black Cat and an iPhone app and it worked surprisingly well.  Sap bucket by I Like Natty Light, on Flickr Outdoors is pretty easy, but I'm a tad impressed I manage to correctly expose ISO 100 with a 1 second exposure.  Sugaring Season by I Like Natty Light, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:What are you guys using to figure out exposure? I usually have an old light meter handy, but a couple of weeks ago I had to subsist solely on a ratty old Black Cat and an iPhone app and it worked surprisingly well. I've been using a beat up old Weston Master V for the past year, which works fine but it weighs a ton and looks like a steampunk tricorder. Last week my cousin gave me his Gossen Digisix and I'm never looking back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
I have a Digisix too, it owns owns owns. When I'm not using that I'll just use whatever camera I have handy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Velvia 50 that 'survived' 2 stops of underexposure. It handles it a lot better than 2 stops of overexposure for sure. Slide film works the opposite of negative film. Krispy Kareem posted:What are you guys using to figure out exposure? I usually have an old light meter handy, but a couple of weeks ago I had to subsist solely on a ratty old Black Cat and an iPhone app and it worked surprisingly well. If you have a phone app then that works I guess. If I have a camera with a real meter I just use that (it's not hard to get great results even with averaging if you understand what's going on), if I don't have anything real I usually drag along an Olympus XA as a light meter, a phone would work too I guess. A lot of the time I just shoot sunny f/16 though. If you practice for a bit it's not hard to figure out what sunlight/open shadow/closed shadow look like, and negative films have quite a wide latitude. red19fire posted:Crossposting from the Buy/Sell thread for relevance, I'm Selling all of my 35mm Nikon film equipment. Great start to finish kit: Shoot, develop and (digitally) print. Just a heads up but your prices seem pretty high compared to KEH / Epson store. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:What speed do you shoot your Portra at? 400
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:If you have a phone app then that works I guess. It's just an app that let's you select from a list of lighting situations, film speeds, and f-stops. I don't think they've made an actual light meter replacement for the iPhone, although I'm hoping the Luxi incident meter attachment works out when it's released.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:It's just an app that let's you select from a list of lighting situations, film speeds, and f-stops. I don't think they've made an actual light meter replacement for the iPhone, although I'm hoping the Luxi incident meter attachment works out when it's released. In that case you could do worse than the Olympus XA, a reflected light meter with a built-in 35mm f/2.8 lens and rangefinder that usually runs about $75. It's not quite as small and accurate as something like a Digisix but it's still smaller than something like my Luna Pro and probably as accurate. Negative film doesn't need precise exposures anyway. Seriously, go try guessing with the Sunny f/16 rule for a while and check against your meter for an afternoon. Then try going out without a meter for a day. Within a couple outings you will be pretty damned close most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:It handles it a lot better than 2 stops of overexposure for sure. Slide film works the opposite of negative film. While that's true, it sure gets a ton of redshift when it's underexposed by that much. This was the only one to make it through a bunch of color corrections and still look okay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
Ugh kinda pissed. Can anyone tell me what happened in the development that caused the left side of my image to be darker than the right? This is on every frame. I use the massive dev app for times and the app was updated with some agitation guide, which I followed. Here's a lovely example.  The app had me agitating a ton. A solid one minute of agitation followed by agitating for ten seconds every minute. I'm pretty sure that's the reason but wanted a second opinion. Is there anything that can be done to fix this in post or am I basically screwed and just chop this up to lesson learned? Edit: wanted to clarify that the only reason I followed the app was because I was using a developer I never used before (D76) and didn't know if the same agitation rules applied as the one I used for before (HC-110) pootiebigwang fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Apr 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:30
|
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:Ugh kinda pissed. Can anyone tell me what happened in the development that caused the left side of my image to be darker than the right? This is on every frame. I use the massive dev app for times and the app was updated with some agitation guide, which I followed. My guess would be not enough developer or something on the bottom of the tank not allowing the reel to seat all the way. Looks like the left side was only getting developer when slashed on there by agitation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:
Well there is sentimental value to consider  My local shipping place charges per foot of bubble wrap, so I'm trying to figure in a bit extra for shipping. And that 100mm 2.8 E killed me, I bought it brand new at $140 last year, and promptly put it on the shelf and never touched it again. I will entertain reasonable offers though, I'm not a total jerk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:My guess would be not enough developer or something on the bottom of the tank not allowing the reel to seat all the way. Looks like the left side was only getting developer when slashed on there by agitation. I know it had enough developer in there. Did a 1:1 ratio 250ml each. Nothing in the tank either, clean it out after every use 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:41
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:My guess would be not enough developer or something on the bottom of the tank not allowing the reel to seat all the way. Looks like the left side was only getting developer when slashed on there by agitation. Yup, what he said. I had something similar happen to me. What happened is, the reel, which wasn't fastened to the bottom kind of swam up on the developer, leading to very uneven development. Much like you're seeing here. So yes, either not enough developer, or the film swam up in the tank. Another cause that I've seen, is a large temperature differential between top & bottom; say you are bathing the tank in warm water, but it doesn't cover the whole tank -- then you get similar results as well. pootiebigwang posted:I know it had enough developer in there. Did a 1:1 ratio 250ml each. Nothing in the tank either, clean it out after every use Ninja edit: Yeah then it's very likely that your reel moved up and down the spindle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:I know it had enough developer in there. Did a 1:1 ratio 250ml each. Nothing in the tank either, clean it out after every use I'm also in the "not enough developer" camp here. I'm guessing this is 120? Are you sure your tank takes 500ml? I think my tank uses 590ml for a roll of 120, it's usually printed on the bottom. There's no other reason it would follow a horizontal line on the film like that. I guess you could have leaked some light when loading it or something but I'm 99.99% sure you either didn't have enough chemistry in there or it floated up without that little c-clip (really important on 35mm, less important on 120).
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:57
|
|