|
Clayton Bigsby posted:I wish that were the case here, the local pawn shops are ridiculous. Beat up Nikon N80? $300. Beat up Sears brand 70-200 lens? $200. Etc. Yeah, people have some fanciful notions about the value of their old gear.
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2008 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:I was wondering if any of you guys wear headphones/earbuds while wearing a neckstrap. I have yet to find a comfortable way to listen to music while lugging around my camera, I always end up with the headphone cords tugging at my head. I just do away with the neckstrap, personally.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2008 07:45
|
|
|
jollygrinch posted:Would the pressure plate on a Rolleiflex being just slightly out of position cause focus issues? I had a whole roll out of focus, all of them increasingly so toward the bottom of each frame. It wasn't all the way over into the other position, just slightly off which held it back a little. I hope. I don't have any other ideas. It looks like it's been tilt/shifted, the pressure plate might not be holding the film flat all over, which would explain why some areas are oof.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2008 23:47
|
|
|
A silly camera it may be, but a tlr is more than a "funny viewfinder." :P
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2008 05:12
|
|
|
Their chemistry might be out of date, that's a pretty big problem with stores that don't get a lot of film going through their machines.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2008 02:32
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:If you want to scan 35mm as well, maybe a V700 would be ok but you really need a proper film scanner. I used to disagree, but ever since I started wetprinting I've come to appreciate just how terrible the 35mm scans from my Canoscan flatbed are.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2009 01:32
|
|
|
Well shoot, you can get that for less than $100, probably less than $50. I highly recommend the Nikkor-S 50 1.4 if you can find one, it's fast and has incredible bokeh.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2009 03:01
|
|
|
After spending almost all of winter break not shooting, I'm back at my house and itching to burn some film. I've got my tlr loaded up with some Acros 100, and my Bessa with some Arista-X (shooting at EI 1250). I'm going to soup the TX in diafine as per normal, but what should I use for the Acros? I have access to Diafine, D-76, HC-110, and Rodinal. I'm going to be shooting a little street and maybe some portraits.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2009 08:59
|
|
|
HPL posted:The Lomographic Society store seems to have Yashica Electro 35 GSNs available for $250. Not cheap, but they've been inspected and all that so it wouldn't be a big crapshoot like eBay. Thoughts? That is such a terrible deal. Do not ever buy anything from the lomo people.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2009 09:24
|
|
|
porcellus posted:Why are these medium format rangefinders thousands of dollars? Rarity/craft. I really prefer other systems for MF; Personally, RFs are ideal for their small size, not because it's a superior focusing system.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2009 05:38
|
|
|
how can i shoot lf really cheaply? what is the cheapest 8x10 i can possibly get?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2009 04:09
|
|
|
brohammed ali posted:stuff Thanks for that, I think I'll stick to 35/120 until I have a real need for lf.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2009 07:47
|
|
|
Arista Premium 400 is Tri-X for less than $3 a roll. Unfortunately you'll only find it at Freestyle, not on Amazon. HP5 will not look like TX at all, but it is a really nice film by it's own merits.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2009 20:57
|
|
|
Chiming in to agree, cameras with angles, hard edges, and black metal are just so much sexier than modern cameras. The antithesis of classic camera design, the ugliest camera ever, the Leica R8: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 02:36
|
|
|
Unfortunately the closest we'll ever get is the Epson RD-1.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 02:49
|
|
|
johnasavoia posted:35mm Efke 25 wanted to try this for so long, but i just hate shooting low iso film 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 06:03
|
|
|
Lowest I normally shoot is 100, and that's only in MF. With 35mm, I almost never go below 400, and usually end up pushing my TX to 800-1250. Maybe I should try shooting a slower film.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 06:16
|
|
|
johnasavoia posted:If anyone wants cheap b&w film, this is repackaged tri-x, and this is plus-x, I just bought 30 rolls of the 400 btw this is repackaged fuji neopan 400, and the 100 is supposedly acros! (Also available in bulk rolls, which is cool since Neopan is no longer available that way) Also, gnomad, that very idea was bandied about in the early 2000's, and was mere months from market when its investors pulled out. I'll see if I can remember more info on it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2009 21:50
|
|
|
If you can find one in working condition, a 120 folder will definitely fit the bill in terms of portability.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2009 23:33
|
|
|
Tri-X is a great, versatile film, buy it cheaply as Arita Premium 400 at freestyle photo. Digital trip report: Been shooting with my d100 all weekend, pisses me off, want to go right back to film. Planning on using it for whenever I need immediate results, but I doubt I'll end up using it for a whole lot other than sports and maybe for some portraiture.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2009 05:26
|
|
|
Nothing wrong with the camera itself, they're problems common to pretty much all dSLR's up until very recently. I'm sure I'll adjust to it. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2009 00:59
|
|
|
Congrats! It's always exciting when you take the film off the reel, peeking at it, wondering if there are images, or if your dreams have been crushed. Um, what I mean to say is film developing is pretty fun and I'm glad you like it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2009 01:51
|
|
|
Anyone own a Leica M and need an ltm adapter? I've got a voigtlander 50/75 one I don't need I could let go pretty cheap... Adapter, Jupiter 8, and 52mm Heliopan UV/IR filter for sale 365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Feb 26, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2009 04:57
|
|
|
Yeah, Dwayne's is the last remaining place to process it. I actually have a roll of exposed k64 (and 4 unexposed) I want to get developed, but goddamn it's expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2009 04:19
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:To be honest $40 is a price I'm willing to pay for a J-8 on a forum, but I have a feeling neither of us would want to go to the trouble or the cost of shipping it to Hong Kong. Depends, what sort of trouble is involved?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2009 16:43
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:Me paying another $20 in shipping, if I'm not calculating wrong. How much would it cost to ship, actually? I can see not wanting to pay that kind of s+h just for a soviet lens.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2009 04:26
|
|
|
mine stays in my closet, which is about 45-50* farenheit. otherwise it would be in the fridge.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2009 23:09
|
|
|
Nedsmaster posted:anyone that is looking for a film that can replicate the vibrance of slide should try kodak's ultra color 100. i'm simply blown away by this stuff, the saturation is incredible. um, the UC line is being discontinued in favor of the new Ektar line, iirc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2009 11:49
|
|
|
All depends on what you're loading. For example, if you were to load 400tx, that's not terribly efficient since buying arista premium per roll is about the same price.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2009 02:38
|
|
|
a Wizards dick posted:I spent 2 days lovingly printing my photographs for a portfolio using split filters and tons of dodging and burning to learn that they want a CD. gently caress my life what the hell is wrong with them? on the upside you gots some nice prints now! (what's that? film thread print exchange?)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2009 02:58
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:dust and scratches? you lose some finer detail though. and it only works on c-41 negs
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2009 03:19
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:Reading some stuff online, it appears that the Arista.EDU Ultra is Fomapan for the ISO 200 versions. I need to restock on 120 ISO 400, and would be interested to know if you're developing it as Tri-X or what. Those are different films, I didn't say the edu was tri-x. Arista Premium 400 = Tri-x Arista Premium 100 = Plus-X Arista.Edu Ultra = Fomapan Arista.Edu = Fortepan Arista II = Agfa APX
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2009 00:55
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:oh, the women in our lives want us to throw the stuff out but we know we'll need it some day, won't we? Well, if women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2009 07:14
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Are used models still that expensive? (I truly have no idea, I find the whole rangefinder concept retarded in this day and age). Yes they are, and it's actually you who is retarded. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2009 02:25
|
|
|
That varies completely with every developer/film/development combination. Your particular combo may look better that way, to you.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2009 09:39
|
|
|
Further explanation here (given in the context of depth of field). http://silverbased.org/shallowest-dof/ Also just plain good reading all over that site.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2009 01:18
|
|
|
That's within the range of reasonable dynamic range with CN film. Even without push processing, you should get usable images. Though if you really want to you could try finding a pro-lab.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2009 03:56
|
|
|
http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Hub/PixelGrain/pixelgrain.htm Kinda funny shorts, Mr. Pixel and Mrs. Grain. e: Hahaha, the second one is great. 365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 17, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2009 22:51
|
|
|
Well, what does the film look like?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2009 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
It'll certainly get the job done. Gotta love the prices on all those reliable old cameras, eh?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2009 11:10
|
|