|
Helen Highwater posted:Here. With finger to show white balance is more-or-less ok. Yeah, that's turbofucked. Look how pink the base is - it's supposed to be orange.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:36 |
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Lots of info The minolta srt looks to be a well liked series and they are cheap as hell. Is the 202 good? As far as I can tell, mirror lock up is the only difference I can see that the 101 has. I'm thinking about bidding on this one here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/201597059072 I'm so afraid of buying another cheap film camera that has issues like the fm I have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Choicecut posted:The minolta srt looks to be a well liked series and they are cheap as hell. Is the 202 good? As far as I can tell, mirror lock up is the only difference I can see that the 101 has. I'm thinking about bidding on this one here: Use keh.com. They have a 6 month warranty and great customer service. It might cost a bit more than ebay auctions, but they're more trustworthy. They have a Minolta X700 (which I understand to be a good camera, but I've not used it) for $45. If you want to stay Nikon they have an FE for $79 and an FE2 for $109.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Gobs of minolta chat I got lucky with my XD's - bought a black body with a broken spool that came with an extra chrome parts body and sent them both to a repair guy. Meanwhile found a deal on another untested chrome body and grabbed it to have a spare - of course it runs great and I shoot it more often that the other. But between the 2 bodies for different speeds/monochrome/color and the 24, 35, and 85, it's a really enjoyable setup.  CP - Minolta XD-11 by Bud, on Flickr  CP - Black Minolta XD-11 3 by Bud, on Flickr  CP - Black Minolta XD-11 by Bud, on Flickr Then again a spotmatic with a nice 50 is no slouch.  CP - Pentax Spotmatic by Bud, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yeah, that's turbofucked. Look how pink the base is - it's supposed to be orange. I took it back to the shop, they had no idea what the problem was. They only develop 135 film in house, 120 gets sent off to a lab in Bratislava. I have no idea what they are going to do about it, we had a long discussion but it wasn't very productive because they were speaking Slovakian to me which I don't understand, and I was speaking Russian to them which they only vaguely understand. I'm going back on monday to collect the next batch of 135 negatives, I'd better get at least a replacement roll of 120 out of it. They tried to suggest that my camera might be the problem but I don't see how that's possible without some kind of colour filter or some really weird lens coating.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
^^^^ yeah a replacement roll or two of 120 film seems like the least they could do to make up for... whatever the hell that was. Choicecut posted:The minolta srt looks to be a well liked series and they are cheap as hell. Is the 202 good? As far as I can tell, mirror lock up is the only difference I can see that the 101 has. I'm thinking about bidding on this one here: The mirror lock up on the 101 is IMO a necessary feature if you want to do long exposure / low light / night landscape stuff, the kind you might see posted in the landscape thread. The lack of MLU on the newer Minolta bodies is the biggest oversight of their design in my eyes. XD11s are supposed to be so smooth (ie vibrations from the mirror flipping up are normally dampened) that MLU isn't necessary, but I haven't found that to be the case in practice. Then again, my XD has a pretty worn-out shutter/mirror box. Bud posted:I got lucky with my XD's - bought a black body with a broken spool that came with an extra chrome parts body and sent them both to a repair guy. Meanwhile found a deal on another untested chrome body and grabbed it to have a spare - of course it runs great and I shoot it more often that the other. But between the 2 bodies for different speeds/monochrome/color and the 24, 35, and 85, it's a really enjoyable setup. Those are some nice cameras. Especially the all-black XD. I actually have two XDs- one user with a nice body but a 'quirky' shutter, and a shelf-sitter that's all banged up and corroded but seems to have much smoother mechanics. I really should combine the guts from the one with the body of the other sometime. I did something similar with two Kiev-60s a while back... still need to make my post about that project in the sovcam thread. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Jun 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I took it back to the shop, they had no idea what the problem was. They only develop 135 film in house, 120 gets sent off to a lab in Bratislava. I have no idea what they are going to do about it, we had a long discussion but it wasn't very productive because they were speaking Slovakian to me which I don't understand, and I was speaking Russian to them which they only vaguely understand. I'm going back on monday to collect the next batch of 135 negatives, I'd better get at least a replacement roll of 120 out of it. They tried to suggest that my camera might be the problem but I don't see how that's possible without some kind of colour filter or some really weird lens coating. Yeah, it's not just the exposed parts of the film though. Somebody hosed up with the chemistry big time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yeah, it's not just the exposed parts of the film though. Somebody hosed up with the chemistry big time. Very much so, the negs look like some Aerochrome I processed in C-41 a few years ago 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
Before I go making an account on APUG or photo.net to ask people there about it, let me ask anyone here who owns a nikon FE2, FM2, or FA, does this shutter blade arrangement match yours? (Shutter in unwound position) Specifically, the top blade. Should the end stick out above the rest (on what would be the left side of the shutter, if you were looking at it from normal orientation)? I wonder, because I am getting a little bit of overexposure on the bottom of my negatives and I think that top blade may be the culprit. Dammit, I bought a near-mint FE2 exactly in the hopes that I wouldn't have to worry about stuff like this. Overexposure on the bottom of the frame is the same problem my old Minolta XD has. I guess the Nikon titanium shutter is notorious for its delicacy, but I didn't find that out until I started researching more after this problem appeared. I think maybe the film leader could have grazed it when I was loading/rewinding. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Specifically, the top blade. Should the end stick out above the rest (on what would be the left side of the shutter, if you were looking at it from normal orientation)? I wonder, because I am getting a little bit of overexposure on the bottom of my negatives and I think that top blade may be the culprit. Dammit, I bought a near-mint FE2 exactly in the hopes that I wouldn't have to worry about stuff like this. Overexposure on the bottom of the frame is the same problem my old Minolta XD has. I guess the Nikon titanium shutter is notorious for its delicacy, but I didn't find that out until I started researching more after this problem appeared. I think maybe the film leader could have grazed it when I was loading/rewinding. When Cosina took over production of the FM series for Nikon, back in the early/mid-2000's, they released steel shutter replacements for most Nikon bodies, going back at least as far as the FE2 (as far as I remember). The shutter is the same one in the newer FM and Bessa models, and is loud as gently caress relative to most rangefinder shutters in the case of the Bessa, but is solid as a rock. They do not appear to make these kits anymore, but you might be able to find a kit somewhere, or a junky camera body that had one of the kits installed then relocate it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Yeah, I found a listing for what appears to be a highly rated old camera repair shop not too far from where I live, and it's likely that they'll replace the shutter with one of the newer aluminum models if I take it in, so I'm not too worried about trying to very carefully slide that top blade back into its proper position, because I have an out if I gently caress it up. But I'm not sure if that's even what needs to be done. Maybe the shutter blade is supposed to stick out like that? If there isn't a visible fault with the shutter then maybe I can get away with just a cla to fix the issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
Yeah one nice thing about Japan is that all of the decent used camera shops have repair facilities and do CLAs. Downside: no cheap film cameras. Upside: well maintained film cameras. (My Bessa T is green/black and was probably originally purchased to live on a shelf, just for it's Heliar 3.5/50 which was probably slapped on a Leica and trashed, and it was still de-greased, re-springed, and re-greased from 15 years of living in a box - the repairs are noted on the CLA "report card" that came with the camera.) There are shops that do not do repairs/CLA, e.g. Lemon Camera and all its various branches, but since they are competing with people who do repairs/CLA work they just discount slightly from that price and aren't a great deal unless you are looking for junk to salvage. Also, to be more relevant, I have never seen a titanium shutter in person on a Nikon body as every one I have seen has been in a shop, used, with a replaced shutter. I suspect most of the local shops do pre-emptive replacements if they do encounter one. This is the best picture I can find of a stock shutter: http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfeseries/fe2/fe2g.htm Looks pretty drat flush to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
Can someone comfort me and tell me everything will be alright if I try to use a manual flash with a manual film camera? It's like some incomprehensible dark art that I just don't understand. Do I just set my camera to 125x, and then set my flash to the proper ISO/distance? I guess I should just experiment, but I want to do this with life music photos because I'm a glutton for punishment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Can someone comfort me and tell me everything will be alright if I try to use a manual flash with a manual film camera? Shutter speed is irrelvant to flash, the X is shorthand, just means its the sync speed for focal plane shutters (most), but you can go slower (usually). Leaf shutters have no sync speed issues. I would find a flash that takes guide numbers as input, then: gn = (distance * aperture) / sqrt(isospeed/100) Works for ft or meters so long as the flash is properly configured. I use an Olypus FL-600R. edit: "what happens if you shoot faster than the sync speed" varies by camera, sometimes no flash, sometimes reduced flash you can compensate for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Yeah, I found a listing for what appears to be a highly rated old camera repair shop not too far from where I live, and it's likely that they'll replace the shutter with one of the newer aluminum models if I take it in, so I'm not too worried about trying to very carefully slide that top blade back into its proper position, because I have an out if I gently caress it up. But I'm not sure if that's even what needs to be done. Maybe the shutter blade is supposed to stick out like that? If there isn't a visible fault with the shutter then maybe I can get away with just a cla to fix the issue. Saw your post in the buy sell thread. Here's what mine looks like, sorry I couldn't get a better angle:   I can tell you that yours is definitely hosed =\ It looks like it's come off the track, the blade on mine is definitely below it, and all the blades are flush up against each other at the same amount.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Thanks for taking a look. Now I know what I need to do. Much appreciated!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Can someone comfort me and tell me everything will be alright if I try to use a manual flash with a manual film camera? Yeah you set your shutter speed to 125x or slower (more ambient light will be let in but exposure will not be affected), focus on your subject, then check on the flash which f stop you need to be using based on the distance to subject (since you've already focused, you can just look at the distance scale on the lens), and use that recommended f stop. And yes, make sure the iso is set. I would recommend using an auto thyristor flash if you can get one. It has a sensor on the front that turns the flash off when enough light has hit your subject. The cool thing is that they work with bounce flashes too. They typically have 2 or 3 auto modes and matching f stops for various ranges. It's almost like using a TTL flash except compatible with literally any manual film camera
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
I'm getting resistance going to concerts with the XT1 and am considering a cheap point and shoot film camera. I have a pentax 90wr, but I'm not a huge fan cause its completely auto. Would it be stupid for getting a small compact 35mm with manual controls for concerts? I was looking at a Ricoh 500G (cheap), Rollei 35 and an Olympus 35SP. Would I be better off scrapping the film idea and sticking to a compact mirrorless like a ricoh gr or sony rx100. I even condered getting the 27mm pancake for the XT, but I think it would still be too "professional" to a security person that doesn't know much about cameras. To simplify my question, would I be able to get good photos with a small 35mm at a concert with high speed film?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Choicecut posted:To simplify my question, would I be able to get good photos with a small 35mm at a concert with high speed film? You're barking up the wrong tree. You'll get photos but unless you're interested in high grain high contrast shots only it's not worth it. Digital is far superior for low-light performance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:You're barking up the wrong tree. You'll get photos but unless you're interested in high grain high contrast shots only it's not worth it. Digital is far superior for low-light performance. Out of interest, what would you guys recommend for shooting in low light with a 35mm camera? I'm new to this and so far have only really shot on 200/400 outside, because I'm aware that shooting in poor light is probably going to be poo poo (my ME Super's light meter makes this very obvious, lol). I took a few photos inside a gallery and the shutter speed automatically went so low that I thought it was jammed, though I did actually get a very cool picture out of this by accident. Basically the whole time I've been with my camera I've been wondering what will happen or what to do when it gets a bit dark. I don't mind some grain, and would like to take some pictures in the evening/night outside - should I get 800 film for this? And how much does the 2x or 4x exposure setting on the camera help? How bad are shots on 200/400 film going to look if there's not a lot of light?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:You're barking up the wrong tree. You'll get photos but unless you're interested in high grain high contrast shots only it's not worth it. Digital is far superior for low-light performance. Thanks, that pretty much settles that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Paperhouse posted:Out of interest, what would you guys recommend for shooting in low light with a 35mm camera? I'm new to this and so far have only really shot on 200/400 outside, because I'm aware that shooting in poor light is probably going to be poo poo (my ME Super's light meter makes this very obvious, lol). I took a few photos inside a gallery and the shutter speed automatically went so low that I thought it was jammed, though I did actually get a very cool picture out of this by accident. HP5/Tri-X/Portra 400 all shot at 1600+ are your best bets, with the B/W usable to ~3200 depending on light, developed in high concentrate solution like rodinal stand or diafine. To choicecut, yes a GR/RX is a much, much better idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
365 Nog Hogger posted:
Thanks for the input. There are so many freaking options for cameras that it makes my head spin. All with hefty price tags.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Anyone with Minolta SR-T experience know if the self-timer pre-fires the mirror as an alternative to a proper mirror lock-up, since that feature is missing on later SR-Ts?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
It doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
I have had some success with film at concerts using 800 film and some expired 3200 B&W that I got for cheap. To get even close to a salvageable exposure though, I had to shoot wide open (f/2.8 with my medium format camera) and that very much limits the kind of shot you can get. Also, unless you're right up against the stage, it's hard as gently caress to keep your subject in focus with that kind of DoF. Also, also, your keeper rate is going to suck unless the lighting is extremely consistent or you are incredibly good at anticipating lighting changes. https://flic.kr/p/FJmKUj
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Here's a shot from a gig I took a few years ago with a 50/1.7 ME Super with Neopan 1600 (I wasn't into dusting/cloning back then)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
^^^Nice picture-in-picture shot you've got there. ^^^ What about Natura 1600 and Delta 3200? How does Portra 400 (why 400 instead of 800?) pushed to 1600 and HP5 pushed to 3200 compare to the purpose-made high-speed stocks? Oh, and by the way, here's what happened with the FE2 shutter:  Following a video I found on youtube, I put some heat shrink on a pair of pliers and... twisted the top blade back into the track on the side  Well, poo poo. Too bad. I really liked the way the honeycomb design looked before it got all hosed up. Now it will be a permanent reminder of how I should have done more research and always taken care to completely rewind my film (or been more carful when spooling the film - I'm not sure how the blade got pulled out originally). Did it work? It looks like there's a little spacer in the top of the film gate that the bowed blade was running up against as it reached the end of it's travel. They don't appear to come into contact any more. Hopefully this means the end of my exposure issue. Nevermind! Of course the shutter is no longer light-tight. I don't know if a light-leak through the shutter was causing the original exposure problem, as it could really only be seen on exposures from speeds around 60-125. Going to the repair shop tomorrow. Edit: Found this up next on youtube after the instructional video I watched. 20x24 polaroid camera. Insane. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Jun 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Shoot Delta Pro 3200 pushed to 12800 . On a different note, if I shoot Ektachrome 160T in daylight, how hosed will it be?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
It will be really blue but you can probably correct it for the most part after scanning. I've been shooting portra 100t in daylight with an 85A filter and it's been coming out really nice. https://flic.kr/p/HMVHL3
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Little different question than usual. I am putting together some film cases with a grab bag of films as presents for some friends who shoot a lot of film, and I'm looking for some good ideas on unusual stocks. I'm already planning on Natura and Acros as some more obscure stocks, maybe some Ilford 3200 or 50 ISO, but what do you guys love to shoot that may not be a typically available film? What expired stuff should I look for? (35mm or 120 format). E: want to avoid gimmicky Lomography stuff like redscale. Hokkaido Anxiety fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Jun 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Little different question than usual. I am putting together some film cases with a grab bag of films as presents for some friends who shoot a lot of film, and I'm looking for some good ideas on unusual stocks. SilverMax (rebadged Agfa Scala) is really good. Any of the E6 films will be pretty distinctive. Plus-X is still available if you look hard enough (Photo Warehouse respools it from bulk). I'll miss that when it's gone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:SilverMax (rebadged Agfa Scala) is really good. Any of the E6 films will be pretty distinctive. Plus-X is still available if you look hard enough (Photo Warehouse respools it from bulk). I'll miss that when it's gone. Good looking out! Seeing your name reminds me that I should see if I can find any astia as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Little different question than usual. I am putting together some film cases with a grab bag of films as presents for some friends who shoot a lot of film, and I'm looking for some good ideas on unusual stocks. Pretty sure Oriental New Seagull 400 is Japan only, and to me it's a nice middle ground between the clarity of Neopan 100 and roughness of Tri-X 400 and has been super impressive for flash photography for me. Dev times are on the box, I like it more than the Rollei RPX 400. If you can't find it online and you have a few weeks I can head to Shinjuku and pick some up, but shipping will be a bitch. The street price is 800 yen for a 135-36. edit: Typo + note: Despite speculation online, NSG is not rebranded Kentmere, but it is made by Ilford. The dev times are unique and the film base itself is a lot more rigid than Kentmere 400 (which costs more in Japan). Seems to be a custom formulation. windex fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Jun 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Little different question than usual. I am putting together some film cases with a grab bag of films as presents for some friends who shoot a lot of film, and I'm looking for some good ideas on unusual stocks. Rollei and the Adox range, along with stuff like this: https://www.macodirect.de/en/film/film-bundles/
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
So I got some Tri-X with the idea of pushing it to 1600 - if I do this, am I still going to be able to get decent pictures in daylight at all? Or should I not really try
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Paperhouse posted:So I got some Tri-X with the idea of pushing it to 1600 - if I do this, am I still going to be able to get decent pictures in daylight at all? Or should I not really try Sure, go ahead.Of course make sure your camera has some very fast shutter speeds, at least 1/1000s and ideally you may want up to 1/4000s. I found a camera with a half finished roll of Tri-X a little while ago, which I apparently begun at EI 3200... I ended up shooting most of the remaining frames as 1/2000s f/16.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
It will be fine as long as you step down and use fast shutter speeds. E: fb
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
I think I may have mixed my D-76 developer wrong. I poured the mix into 3 liters of heated water and stirred, and then put those into mason jars. At the time I think I figured you would add the water to get it to 3.8 liters when you do the actual developing. Thinking about it now, that doesn't make sense. Is this batch ruined?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:36 |
|
|
Depends if you got the gallon mix. If so, just dilute it to 3.8, then when you use it you re-dilute to 1:1 or 1:3 or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2016 22:14
|
|
