|
Cheers. I am in Australia. Well your advice sounds pretty solid, and everything I'm reading seems to be steering away from the 2000FC. Thanks heaps for the link to KEH, that looks great and to save me a lot of money  Definitely digging the square format at the moment and want something I can make a long term investment in, plus I've wanted to get back into film for a while now (havent done it since high school :P) it'll only be a 'special occasion' camera and will only come out on intentional outings and trips down south, and I have a tendency to be clumsy so perhaps the 500CM will do, found some good cond. cheap ones on KEH. Thanks again for the advice
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
Mega Itch posted:Hey I'm thinking about testing out macro/close-ups on my SQ-A. Are those bellows a cheap Chinese knock-off or are they original, if it's the former, where can I find 'em? Also, could extension rings get me closer? I've seen them on eBay going for acceptable prices. No, they're the Bronica made bellows. Extension rings will definitely work, as far as I know the only ones made for the SQ came in 18mm and 36mm. One 36mm ring with the 80mm lens gets to about .5 magnification. Here is a handy chart for the extension tubes that has exposure factor and everything. I never did find out if you could stack multiple extension tubes on the SQ, but I would imagine that you can.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:It will happen to these too, eventually. Sorry to rain on your parade. Pentax already discontinued the 67ii in 2009, sorry to parade on your rain.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Another q: apparently the 50mm f/4 distagon for the 500c/m has a 63mm filter thread (some varying between like 62.65mm etc), but I'm having trouble finding out if I can get an adapter ring to put my cokin p-series bracket onto the end of it for ND/GND filter use... or how I could go about this?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:Another q: apparently the 50mm f/4 distagon for the 500c/m has a 63mm filter thread (some varying between like 62.65mm etc), but I'm having trouble finding out if I can get an adapter ring to put my cokin p-series bracket onto the end of it for ND/GND filter use... or how I could go about this? I suspect you might need this retaining ring, which turns your 63 into a 67. I guess you're using the older 50/4 C lens?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:Another q: apparently the 50mm f/4 distagon for the 500c/m has a 63mm filter thread (some varying between like 62.65mm etc), but I'm having trouble finding out if I can get an adapter ring to put my cokin p-series bracket onto the end of it for ND/GND filter use... or how I could go about this? It's not actually a threaded 63mm filter ring it's Bay 60 you can find adapters cheap on ebay.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:It's not actually a threaded 63mm filter ring it's Bay 60 you can find adapters cheap on ebay. The older 50/4 use threaded bayonets, they only switched to B60 for CF and B70 for Cfi I believe.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:The older 50/4 use threaded bayonets, they only switched to B60 for CF and B70 for Cfi I believe. Yeah, the older ones are Series 8 but a 67mm filter should screw right into that. EDIT: Oops, wrong about the bay 60 thing. For some reason i was thinking the 50m didn't get the T* coating until the CF model. The retaining ring listed earlier should work but I think most 67mm filters will screw into it fine as long as you are careful. 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 07:06 on May 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
Sorry yeah it's a 50mm f/4 C T (black), that's all the info I can get on it as far as I can tell, KEH doesn't have serial numbers or anything I can pull a date from..
Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 06:40 on May 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:Sorry yeah it's a 50mm f/4 C T (black), that's all the info I can get on it as far as I can tell, KEH doesn't have serial numbers or anything I can pull a date from.. Usually the model of the lens will give us the clue. I'd recommend getting the CF version at least if you can afford it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 09:13
|
|
|
If you're going to shoot color/slide film (and you should, because medium format slides are amazing) I'd recommend the better coatings, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 09:42
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:If you're going to shoot color/slide film (and you should, because medium format slides are amazing) I'd recommend the better coatings, yes. I don't think they changed the coatings much over the years. Anything with the T* is multicoated.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 10:26
|
|
|
Went for the 50mm f/4 CFI T*FLE instead. edit: I understand this might be a really subjective question but is there any recommendation towards film I should use for landscaping (b&w or colour). I prefer to have darker/moodier landscapes than bright or happy too if that helps. Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 13:47 on May 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
You can never go wrong with Portra 400 or Acros.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
I'd try TMAX 400 or Acros for b&w, and Portra 400 or Provia 100F for colour.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
Did my first c41 processing today. It was dead easy. $15/roll -> $1.90/roll.  queensland 6.jpg by alexbeare, on Flickr  queensland 8.jpg by alexbeare, on Flickr  Queensland19-Edit.jpg by alexbeare, on Flickr Sludge Tank posted:edit: I understand this might be a really subjective question but is there any recommendation towards film I should use for landscaping (b&w or colour). I prefer to have darker/moodier landscapes than bright or happy too if that helps. For darker/moodier, Ektar or Reala. Maybe 100VS, if you wanna go positive. Do a search on Flickr for a feel of what different films look like under different light. BrosephofArimathea fucked around with this message at 14:57 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 13:42
|
|
|
edit: NEVER MIND
Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 07:09 on May 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
joelcamefalling posted:Did my first c41 processing today. It was dead easy. Me too! They're drying now, not sure when I'll get a chance to scan them. Going to try and run through the rest of my backlog (~11 rolls) this week before the chems get too stale.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:34
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Me too! They're drying now, not sure when I'll get a chance to scan them. Going to try and run through the rest of my backlog (~11 rolls) this week before the chems get too stale. I only had 5 rolls waiting, and that was about the right amount before I got sick of it and stopped. I need a bigger tank. Either way, 5 rolls means the kit already paid for itself twice over, thanks to Australia being a scam. The Tetenal kit I was using said the mixed chems have a shelf life of 4 weeks, but according to a couple of threads on Flickr, they will easily last a couple of months - and some guy on APUG was still using the same soup after a year and a half. Most people seem to get ~20 rolls out of it before it starts going downhill, which would be pretty awesome. Only real problem was that I got some pretty hardcore watermarks down two rolls; can't see it in the scans, though. BrosephofArimathea fucked around with this message at 15:01 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:57
|
|
|
joelcamefalling posted:I only had 5 rolls waiting, and that was about the right amount before I got sick of it and stopped. I need a bigger tank. joelcamefalling posted:
When I used my (not Tetenal) C-41 kit, none of the rolls showed any signs of used-up chemicals, so I guess I could have squeezed out a few more - I did 12 rolls (mix of 135 and 120) for a kit that said 8, or +50% if you use the chemicals quickly after opening. I did all 12 rolls over one weekend, which was really enough work for a weekend - probably around 8 or 10 hours total spread over two days. I guess all this means it's time to buy some 120 slide film! EDIT: eBay makes spending money way too easy. Velvia 50 on its way. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 20:55 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
I just ordered a c-41 kit, now I need to shoot more c-41 before it shows up.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I just ordered a c-41 kit, now I need to shoot more c-41 before it shows up. Shoot more C-41 than the kit can handle, so you have an excuse to buy another kit...
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
Put the dev in the fridge in a bottle with the air squeezed out if you're not going to use it in the next week or so, it'll greatly extend its lifetime. Otherwise it'll slowly degrade/oxidise into a black sludge.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
I really need to get better organized with my Crown Graphic. I must have forgotten to mark a film holder and turn the slide the proper way after taking a shot because I ruined what should have been my first really nice nature shot with some crazy double exposure non-sense. Have a look, its like the ghosts of Steampunk Pass invaded my perfectly good pond picture. 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:I really need to get better organized with my Crown Graphic. I must have forgotten to mark a film holder and turn the slide the proper way after taking a shot because I ruined what should have been my first really nice nature shot with some crazy double exposure non-sense. That nature shot looks fairly boring so it's probably an improvement
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
I was getting tons of highlight clipping and shadow noise, and turns out Silverfast is the problem, since it's a peice of junk unless you pay them an extra $140 to get 'advanced' things like 16 bit color, the ability to rotate crops, an actual histogram to make sure you are scanning the whole range, etc. Started using EpsonScan. It's basic, but solved those problems. Manually dragging level endpoints twice for every frame is annoying and means color consistency is... not - but its better than giving Silverfast $140. Ektaring.  20130514-img014.jpg by alexbeare, on Flickr  20130514-img015.jpg by alexbeare, on Flickr  20130513-img005.jpg by alexbeare, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
joelcamefalling posted:Started using EpsonScan. It's basic, but solved those problems. Manually dragging level endpoints twice for every frame is annoying and means color consistency is... not - but its better than giving Silverfast $140. I'm a weirdo that likes EpsonScan, it gets the color great most of the time and when it doesn't it's usually because the sky is blown out and EpsonScan tries to make it not blown out so I just drag the whites thingy over and it looks good again (good enough for me anyway). I'm beginning to shoot more color film so maybe I'll end up using something more advanced, but EpsonScan is great for me. I already have Vuescan because EpsonScan didn't work on whatever version of OSX I had when I bought my scanner and it's ok. I downloaded a demo for Silverfast and I didn't like it either though.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
My best tip for Epson Scan: scan your negatives as 48 bit positives and do all of the inversion work yourself in Photoshop.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
dukeku posted:My best tip for Epson Scan: scan your negatives as 48 bit positives and do all of the inversion work yourself in Photoshop. This is what I do. I also mash the auto exposure button in Epson Scan instead of doing any real work. Fuji reala:  c41003.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  c41002.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr Portra:  c41014.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  c41018.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr Dr. Despair fucked around with this message at 18:00 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 09:37
|
|
|
Pal, that poo poo owns.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 13:30
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:
This photograph has balls.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
And a slight magenta cast
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:And a slight magenta cast Yeah, I like it. Makes for an otherworldly thing.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Now I know what you mean by "Reala has a magenta cast". I don't think your inversion approach works as well as you think, as I've never seen that in any of my Reala scans despite sometimes being way off on the exposure.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Now I know what you mean by "Reala has a magenta cast". I don't think your inversion approach works as well as you think, as I've never seen that in any of my Reala scans despite sometimes being way off on the exposure. No I have had that same problem with expired Reala and I use Silverfast's negafix for inversion.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Now I know what you mean by "Reala has a magenta cast". I don't think your inversion approach works as well as you think, as I've never seen that in any of my Reala scans despite sometimes being way off on the exposure. There's 2 ways of explaining this. 1: I'm still terrible with adjusting curves and levels to get color right, especially I'm too lazy to calibrate my monitor 2: The reala I was shooting expired in 2007 and I was shooting at it's rated speed still. Also I looked back at the tif in lightroom and the tint is actually set to +21 magenta. So I'm not sure if the magenta tint is necessarily from it being expired as poo poo, or just because of me trying to get the picture to look ok with the shadows look like complete rear end. So try not to blame the technique, blame the user. I do think I need to shoot the rest of this reala at 50 iso or something though. e. Also this is probably the same batch of reala that 8th-samurai used, so I'm glad it's not just me.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
It wouldn't surprise me to learn that old batch is shifting as it expires or something. I haven't really seen it with my fresh film though, nor the pile of questionably-dated but cold-stored film I took canoeing a couple summers ago. You can adjust color balance in the highlights/shadows directly in scanner without affecting the overall balance by using the white/black points for each channel. I try to scan the whole histogram and that usually results in yellow skies (on any film) so I'm used to tweaking it by hand.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Having finally got my hands on a decently accurate light meter I finally had the confidence to shoot some Velvia: Purple Lines by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Wet Tracks by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Maze by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Ferns by Tim Breeze, on Flickr 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
Dat Velvia. unghghh I'm thinking about picking up a small MF folder for hiking/backpacking. Has anyone used a Voigtlander Perkeo II?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
Saint Fu posted:Dat Velvia. unghghh I haven't used that specific folder but I have used lots of other folders. (Super Ikonta III, Mamiya 6, Olympus Six, Isolette) Basically they all have their quirks, also you need to absolutely make sure that the bellows is fine. Looking into it isn't enough - a strong directional light and darkness are the best ways to find out if it's okay. Or a sacrificial B&W roll, I guess. That said folders are nice, but you sacrifice features as well as image quality for the portability. How much? Well, my triplet TLR beats my coated Tessar Super Ikonta in terms of sharpness and evenness of the sharpness over the frame. That said, it usually still outdoes 35mm and you get that nice medium format look. It also gives images a bit of an retro look as the image frame isn't usually sharply defined. One last tip - advance the film *after* you open the folder - otherwise it creates a vacuum sucking the film towards the lens and your sharpness goes right out of the window; unless you shoot at f/11 or smaller, which isn't always an option.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 06:21
|
|
