|
Are any of you guys looking to upgrade to a beefier tripod? I'm getting out of the LF game and have a carbon fiber Giottos MT-8163 (w/ Manfrotto 486RC2 ballhead, but I think I may keep that) that is way overkill for my future needs. Ideally, be happy to trade it for another set of more compact CF legs, that could support a Hassie when needed. (I'll make a post in the buy/sell thread if there's interest). The Giottos are tanks, I've put an 8x10 monorail on them with no issues, and regularly shot with a 4x5 Speed Graphic + Aero Ektar. Catch is I'm in Japan, although the shipping will hurt more for me than for you 
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
Spedman posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Spedman posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
Spedman posted:I snagged a $5k ticket to a corporate suite to the Melbourne F1 on Sunday. In between sipping champagne and eating caviar (seriously), I took some shots with the trusty GW690ii: Killer.  Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr  Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Is there some stack of magical adapters that will let me attach some flavor of mirrorless digital to a Fuji GX680?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Medium format macro! Prickly Pear Cactus by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
 Midlands, Tasmania by Alex Gard, on Flickr e: how fun is 8x10 (or larger) in comparison to 4x5? What are the advantages/appeals of using ultra large formats over 4x5? Was just curious about the whole ULF thing. Also someone pls buy my Sinar in the gear for sale thread :/ Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
How about this question: what is lacking about 4x5 for you?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:How about this question: what is lacking about 4x5 for you? You can fit more dust on an 8x10 neg than a 4x5. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:What are the advantages/appeals of using ultra large formats over 4x5? Contact printing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Contact printing. Yup. Particularly if you're into alt processes, some of which don't work with the wavelengths of light from an enlarger, or take forever. There are a few alternatives. You can make an internegative by enlarging a smaller format, or by scanning it and then printing the internegative as a laser transparency or whatnot. Other than that, the thrill of doing something weird and off the beaten path. There's some interesting stuff like the life-size Polaroids and that camera-obscura trailer, but it gets very expensive very quick both in terms of materials and equipment. 8x10 is relatively practical but beyond that, hold onto your wallets. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:How about this question: what is lacking about 4x5 for you? Nothing is lacking at all, i just saw a guy on facebook with an enormous camera and i just got curious. I asked the same question and they took it like i was bashing it. I just genuinely wanted to know what the appeal was because im newish to it and i dont know.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
I'm putting together another 8x10, (one with gears/bellows and an actual working back) for contact printing wet plate negs with alt-processes. There are a bunch of Chinese photographers really getting into ULF and alt-processes, this guys work is phenomenal just for the shear size and quality of the prints (I do like the subjects as well): http://meartgallery.com/artist.php?id=29 He shoots 8x20 negs, makes a massive digital copy and then does the palladium printing process with half of the earths supply of the metal.  Thats artist Liu Dadi on the left, and everyones favourite guy, the owner of the Chamonix factory on the right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Got tired of being unable to make rectangles, so I bought this:  KEH BGN condition in this case means that the waistlevel and camera body are a little beat up and that there are some deep scratches on the lens barrel, but all of the glass is fine. Coming from an RB67, the RZ just adds an electronic shutter and some warning lights and moves the shutter speed control to the body, as well as a single lever for the shutter cocking and film advance. The finder is somehow even better than the RB67—it's huge, bright, and very clear. It's a pleasure just to open it up and look at stuff. The lens is a 65mm M L-A, which in Mamiya jargon means that there's a floating element system that's manually controlled by the blue ring on the lens. You adjust it according to your subject distance for the best possible corner performance. As I understand it, this is the best 65mm for the RZ system, but it's huge and very heavy. Going to run some test rolls through it tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
Nice
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:Got tired of being unable to make rectangles, so I bought this: A mate of mine just got the rb67 and same lens. Was really surprised how big it is compared to a blad. Cool camera though!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
Picked up a super beat-up Yashica Mat-124G and got it CLA'd, but the lens coating turned out to be really scratched. I put a few rolls through it, and I'm not sure if the bad coating could cause all this hazy flaring, or if it's something else. Anybody have any idea? It was Ektar 100 at box speed with a lens hood, and then I set the white and black points to the visible edges of the histogram when scanning. http://imgur.com/a/JWX3v    
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
404notfound posted:Picked up a super beat-up Yashica Mat-124G and got it CLA'd, but the lens coating turned out to be really scratched. I put a few rolls through it, and I'm not sure if the bad coating could cause all this hazy flaring, or if it's something else. Anybody have any idea? It was Ektar 100 at box speed with a lens hood, and then I set the white and black points to the visible edges of the histogram when scanning. Scratched or bad coating in strong side light could certainly cause veiling flare. Were you using a lenshood? You can get Bay 1 hoods on ebay pretty cheap. 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Mar 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
It looks like what my uncoated lenses produce when shot in bright light outside.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 10:06
|
|
|
Still taking pictures of the people who hang around Times Square in costumes for money.    
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Spedman posted:It looks like what my uncoated lenses produce when shot in bright light outside. Cant't say my Yashica is quite as bad, but yeah, pretty much this. Putting a hood on might help.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
I did use a hood for all of those shots. Argh, sounds like the coating really is at fault here. Do I have to pick up a for-parts unit to swap the lenses with? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 10:00
|
|
|
404notfound posted:I did use a hood for all of those shots. Argh, sounds like the coating really is at fault here. Do I have to pick up a for-parts unit to swap the lenses with? Could also be internal reflections in the light box. I think a lot of old TLRs have issues with that. I've heard flocking recommended for that, but I haven't tried it myself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
404notfound posted:Picked up a super beat-up Yashica Mat-124G and got it CLA'd, but the lens coating turned out to be really scratched. I put a few rolls through it, and I'm not sure if the bad coating could cause all this hazy flaring, or if it's something else. Anybody have any idea? It was Ektar 100 at box speed with a lens hood, and then I set the white and black points to the visible edges of the histogram when scanning. Just want to chime in and say that hood or not there's definitely something wrong with that Yashica Mat. And no, I use a lot of old TLRs and I have to say, that a well kept old TLR doesn't produce images like that. Something is seriously wrong IMO. This looks worse than what I get from both my triplet lenses partially-coated Ricohflex TLR and yet worse than my 1950ies Mamiya Six folder. I've added some shots in hazy, and/or bright conditions shot with these cameras for you to compare and contrast. What I'm saying is not that your Yashica Mat is poo poo, but there must be some other problem that is not just the coating alone. Coatings are important, but still get overrated a lot as to what they do. Does, or did your Mat have fungus? Is the lens etched on the inside? How does the rear element (Way, way more important than the front element!) look? How's the baffling on the inside of the camera? Did some 'smart' person possibly paint the inside with glossy black paint instead of the usual coarse matte finish?   
VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Still taking pictures of the people who hang around Times Square in costumes for money. I'd like to see the subjects somewhat more isolated from their backgrounds. There's a lot of distracting stuff going on in some of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:37
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:I'd like to see the subjects somewhat more isolated from their backgrounds. There's a lot of distracting stuff going on in some of them. Hmm you mean a shallower depth of field, or trying to shoot them with less stuff behind them?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Just want to chime in and say that hood or not there's definitely something wrong with that Yashica Mat. And no, I use a lot of old TLRs and I have to say, that a well kept old TLR doesn't produce images like that. Something is seriously wrong IMO. Aw gently caress, guess I need to do something about this. There was indeed fungus on the lenses, among a host of other problems, but I took it to a pretty reputable guy for a complete overhaul (this guy in Mountain View, if you're in the bay area), so I would expect that it's as good as it's going to get. I'll bring it in tomorrow and show him some of the pictures and see what he has to say; he's got a six-month warranty on any work he does, and hopefully that'll cover "this poo poo gets some mad hazing."Edit: I suppose it's still usable even if it can't be fixed... after taking the scanned photos into Lightroom and cranking up contrast/clarity while turning highlights way down, I get something resembling a normal exposure. Still, it'd be nice to have a camera working the way it's supposed to. Assuming I don't want to carry a light meter with me, what are some other cheap (or photography-cheap, at any rate) options for TLRs with built-in meters? 404notfound fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
404notfound posted:
Photography cheap obviously still means that the Rolleiflexes are out, ones with a confirmed working & accurate meter do to fetch exorbitant prices. There is however the 'Minolta Autocord CDS', which uses a relatively reliable CDS cell and battery for metering. It is a rare model though, but it is also a way way better camera than your Yashica. (I may be biased, I have two Autocords alongside my Flexes.) Expect to pay $200-350-ish for a CDS model, based on condition and revision number. The very latest models that take 220 film are even rarer and highly coveted, they'll probably set you back $450 or more. Another idea would be just to use your phone, or a Gossen DigiSix. Or go pro and buy a (used) Sekonic L-558. Boom. All the light-meter you'll ever need. If you're committed to film, I don't see carrying a good light-meter breaking either your back or bank. Buy a good one from a reputable brand that covers all the functions you need; it will last forever and do everything. Just like a tripod. Same rule. (Buy a good one from the get-go!) VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
 Tokyo International Forum, Marunouchi, Tokyo, 2013 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 09:40
|
|
|
I took my Yashica to the guy who serviced it, and right away he noticed that there was something hazy in the taking lens, which either was missed the first time I took it in (unlikely since it was pretty obvious when he showed me, and he had to have seen it when calibrating the two lenses) or got in there between when I first got it back and when I took some pictures (also unlikely since the camera has spent the whole time in dry, temperate California weather). I asked him about the scratched coating and he confirmed that it wouldn't make that kind of a difference in the image quality. In any case, he popped out the back of the lens and cleaned off the surface, and also lined the raw edge of it with some black paint, right there in the back of the shop as I watched. Gonna run a roll or two through it and hopefully my flare woes are over. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Hmm you mean a shallower depth of field, or trying to shoot them with less stuff behind them? Both, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
So I had to shoot 4X5 for school. A LF camera is really intimidating the first time you use it. junk by Jordan_t_Brown, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Both, honestly. Cool, next time I'm there I'll keep that in mind. Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:You can fit more dust on an 8x10 neg than a 4x5. snype pls  In all seriousness, I was wondering of the longevity of 8x10 film, and was thinking in the future would really love getting into some ambro/ferrotypes. Looks like such a good time. Was just wondering if that was the case, would it be worth converting my Sinar to an 8x10 for this... or is 4x5 enough...
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
Some Portra 400.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:37
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:snype pls B&W 8x10 will be around for a fairly long time to come. I don't think the same can be said for color. How much that matters is up to you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 10:00
|
|
|
How much interest do you guys think there would be for a portable battery powered scanner that can scan 135 and 120 to DNG onto a memory card. I say portable so that it does not require a host computer/desktop-software and is reasonably sized. Of course it would have to have a LCD screen for preview and settings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:How much interest do you guys think there would be for a portable battery powered scanner that can scan 135 and 120 to DNG onto a memory card. I say portable so that it does not require a host computer/desktop-software and is reasonably sized. Of course it would have to have a LCD screen for preview and settings. Probably not much unless it was super cheap. I can't imagine just like being in a bar and whipping out my negs to scan or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Probably not much unless it was super cheap. I can't imagine just like being in a bar and whipping out my negs to scan or something. I'm thinking something like a box thats maybe 2x as wide as 120 and maybe just enough to scan 3x(6x6) at a time. Film goes into the box and not just left hanging. Less than $1000 with super slick software thats totally not like the current crop of 90s clunky desktop software. Auto density analysis + exposure per frame. Automatic frame border detection for auto cropping. User film+camera presets for meta data tagging in the DNG. Film profiling(?). Data stored as linear light(not sure if this helps for scans). Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:I'm thinking something like a box thats maybe 2x as wide as 120 and maybe just enough to scan 3x(6x6) at a time. Film goes into the box and not just left hanging. Less than $1000 with super slick software thats totally not like the current crop of 90s clunky desktop software. Auto density analysis + exposure per frame. Automatic frame border detection for auto cropping. User film+camera presets for meta data tagging in the DNG. Film profiling(?). Data stored as linear light(not sure if this helps for scans). I'll start the wiki.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:47
|
|
