|
Getting in on the first floor of a great thread. I've still to actually develop any of the film I'm shooting, but I adore both my cameras for being amazing mechanical artifacts (neither of these are my pictures): The big one, when I know I'm going to a photogenic place: My father's old Nikon F2 Photomic (info on what is probably the best site for info on old Nikons ever) with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 or a weird Tokina 70-200 zoom. Picture has a different lens.  The tiny one, which I aim to always keep on my person: The diminutive Minox B. It is about 1.5 x 1 x 4 inches, includes light meter and the design dates from the 30's. It is awesome. The film it uses, however, is rather queer (8x11 mm in proprietary canisters). It is still being produced, but in lesser and lesser quantities, and it commands a pretty awful premium.  I'll answer anything I can, and I am right now trying to import Diafine into Sweden thanks to this thread. One can try.
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2008 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 08:09 |
|
|
Cannister posted:I asked this before without an answer, you save a bunch of money & have more control of results with developing negatives yourself, but once you do that what are your options to get those negatives printed? I'd really like to find someone local that prints optically; the usual response is scan and digital print, I think.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2008 11:50
|
|
|
I just bought $100 worth of supplies: Minox Minopan film (100 x 2, 400 x 3), Diafine developer and a changing bag. I better start developing soon. This thread  Diafine doesn't really oxidize, does it?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2008 07:57
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:You can probably keep and use Diafine for years. After a long-ish time it can get sludgy but you can filter the liquid to clean it up. Great. I'll mix that up when it gets here instead of the bag of D76 I had as a first choice, then. What happened to that analog newbie camera guide you were going to put together? 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2008 05:44
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:This thread. It might bring in more clueless newbies I'd like to think of myself as set for the time being (although a wide angle lens for the Nikon would be nice...), but I'd certainly enjoy a list of things on which to look out for great deals.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2008 14:27
|
|
|
I just found someone selling a load of 35mm film of various kinds in SA-mart (no affiliation), and thought it might interest the thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2008 17:42
|
|
|
So my Diafine finally arrived (got stuck in customs,  x 5 lost there). At least it turns out I was sent a gallon while ordering a quart. Also got a hugeass changing bag and some Minox film, so I'm ready to roll. Is it a bad idea to only mix up like a pint of each of the solutions? I don't have any gallon-sized airtight bottles at the moment.Also, I have some Tri-X and a roll of Minopan 400 that were shot at their nominal EI - how would I go about developing them in Diafine without overdeveloping? Edit: Minopan 400 == APX 400 Snaily fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Jul 8, 2008 |
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2008 22:00
|
|
|
Oh crap. I have to mix up my D76 then, and do all that difficult temperature matching for my first rolls.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2008 11:11
|
|
|
Molten Llama posted:Difficulty is overrated. Developer to an ideal temp, use ideal box times, done. The internet likes to bitch and moan about reticulation, but everything from the big names has been reformulated not to reticulate under all but the most ridiculous conditions. (Which the internet also likes to bitch about, because now it's much, much harder to get it on purpose.) Oh, I'm aware it's not a big deal to many people. It is, relatively speaking, a tad more difficult than the Diafine pour-in-pour-out for a newbie. There's also the fact that developing in D76 feels a lot more wasteful, since you can't reuse the developer (or?), and it supposedly goes bad faster as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2008 21:00
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Right. His point is that diafine naturally controls conrast, if fact it sucks at developing negs shot in flat light. If you overexpose and or develop you get high contrast, which through magical diafiney goodness ends up looking good. So what, do anything and it'll look good? Overdeveloped means underexposed (for that development), doesn't it? Why would a developer work in both ends of the scale, but not in between? (Also, I've given up on figuring it out beforehand - I have few test rolls I'll run through the soup once I find two gallons of cheap distilled water)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2008 08:49
|
|
|
So I really had no more excuses not to try this developing thing. I made photos! 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2008 20:51
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:Just a quick question, I want to take my camera with me when I drive across the Canadian/American border tomorrow. I know that at airports, x-rays can mess up film, but do I have to worry about anything being x-rayed tomorrow or should it be smooth sailing? I worried about this my entire trip to Madrid, which is rife with scanners since the terrorist attacks a few years back; I counted eight passes on one particular roll. No fogging from what I can see - I presume that all new machines are safe and that what you should be worried about are the old scanners still in service.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2008 07:52
|
|
|
Luxmore posted:Buy a new lens. Most expensive advice ever.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2008 21:44
|
|
|
 The best film camera dealer in Sweden is holding their seasonal auction soon, and just put up their auction list. It is in Swedish with certain comments in English, but I trust you people are mostly in it for the images. Notable objects: Two golden Nikons (#341 and #344) The Fotosniper FS-2 KMZ (#416) pictured above. A plethora of Leicas and Hasselblads. (The listed sums are in SEK, and starting prices. 10SEK ~ 1.4USD. Not affiliated in any way.) Snaily fucked around with this message at 08:37 on Oct 10, 2008 |
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2008 22:02
|
|
|
Snaily posted:(The listed sums are in SEK, and starting prices. 10SEK ~ 7-8USD. Not affiliated in any way.) So it turns out my conversion sucked. It should be 1.4 USD per 10 SEK. Apologies and free laughs all around. (not Iceland)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2008 08:38
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:For example, if my focus is on infinity and I point towards some trees in the far distance, they are kind of out of focus, but the sky will be in focus. What could be the reason for this? Fun fact: "infinity" focus, that is, as far as the lens will turn, is usually beyond true infinity focus, so that the lens can still focus in extreme environments (say, really really cold, when thermally contracted) and to make assembly somewhat easier.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2008 09:52
|
|
|
Cleaning, lubing and adjusting your own cheap finds: yes or no? More specifically, I'm thinking of getting a cheap Hasselblad with a sticky shutter and lubing it with the help of a service manual. Am I likely to ruin it?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2008 18:25
|
|
|
Snaily posted:Cleaning, lubing and adjusting your own cheap finds: yes or no? I hate to self-quote, but I think I got lost in the deluge of shutter != aperture posts. I'm imagining camera service is basically disassembly in a clean spot, lube wherever service books says and reassembly without getting your private parts caught in the bayonet mount. Am I terribly naive?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2008 09:47
|
|
|
johnasavoia posted:If you want realllly long exposures and REALLLLY cheap film, just cut down photographic printing paper, its roughly ISO 3, can be cut, loaded, and even developed under a safelight(develop like you would a print) and is so ridiculously cheap compared to buying actual 4x5 film you really can't not shoot some, especially if you have some paper already. As far as scanning goes, 4x5 has so much resolution you can practically just use a decent flatbed scanner, unless you absolutely must print billboard sizes. Ilford has some Ilfochrome (formerly Cibachrome) plastic base "paper" that's supposed to be used for outdoor advertisment purposes, and it seems to be easier to develop at home than normal color process. Highly accurate color rendition, azo coloring that never fades... I want to use it for a huge box camera some time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2009 18:39
|
|
|
killabyte posted:Just curious, for what reasons are you going with an F4? Do you need to ask? Actually, I think the endorsement of Kenny means you should think about what you're about to buy one extra time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2009 09:09
|
|
|
The catalogue for another camera action is up. These days, 100SEK(Skr) = 11USD (yay crisis). All defect descriptions are in English, too. I shall see if I can't get my grubby paws on a Hasselblad for cheap. Snaily fucked around with this message at 11:18 on Mar 2, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2009 11:11
|
|
|
Yeah, those are starting prices. They also have some fairly fishy extra fees tacked on: 20% + 40SEK in commission, +2.5% if you pay with a card. I'm not affiliated with them in any way - I've been and looked at the auction objects a few times so I can vouch for the fact that they actually exist and do business. Beyond that, you're on your own. Edit: I just saw that they've started having the ability to have people participating in the live auction online come the 13th. Check it out. Edit 2: I feel kind of bad I got your hopes up. Here are the clubbed prices for the three auctions they had last year, for reference: November 2nd June 15th 16 March 16th Snaily fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Mar 2, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2009 15:45
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:pfft. more like VC. NC's for squares!! Well, he did say he was shooting with a Hasselblad...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2009 21:54
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Aww man, I just scored a Patterson tank with two reels yesterday. At least it only cost me a shitbid of $12. While I haven't tried anything else, Paterson tanks are OK to work with, in my opinion. Load it once or twice in the bag with a dummy film or paper cut to size, then you're good to go. One problem with keeping chemicals in the developing tank is that it is generally filled with the reels. Also, you need somewhere clean to mix the chemicals (that contain enough to fill the tank). Third, you may want to bring readymade solutions that can be sued more than once (like Diafine, or fix). I got it down to tank+bag+four 0.5L plastic bottles (only one reel), which while travellable, isn't really ideal. What'd you give for the R3a and lenses?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2009 07:03
|
|
|
pwn posted:And I'm just finishing my first roll of Kodachrome. I hope I can get some more before it's over. I was just about to post this. Tourist pictures of China, you'll be my only Kodachrome memory.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2009 18:04
|
|
|
have it your weigh posted:Does anyone have experience with the Pentax auto 110 or any 110 camera? I may have just bought one because it was so cheap. The last producer of 110 film just called it quits, but you may still be able to get some. Development is scarce. They are cute, however!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2009 06:23
|
|
|
So I got a Yashica-Mat 124G for ~$100 as a potential gift for my brother. Anything special I should check out? Is the meter worth trying to get running, given that it was made for mercury batteries? (picture from the seller)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2009 06:14
|
|
|
Leyendecker posted:Where did you pick this up? The Swedish equivalent of eBay, Tradera.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2009 06:29
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:I found a MAt 124G at a garage sale for $50, talked them down to $30-TBH I'd have paid the $50 but people always leave some bargaining room on the more expensive items. Yeah, that's what I planned to do. Turns out I'd forgotten to update my address, so the camera is on the other side of the country right now - I'd have compared it to my Nikon F2 by now, otherwise. It'll mostly shoot B&W, so I can deal with the meter being a stop off. In other news, I played with a coworkers Hasselblad 500C/M last week. I am now broken forever.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2009 16:20
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:You have 2 kidneys and really only need 1. Just a thought. I could probably afford one - hell, they're less than $1000. Then I have to choose between redundancy in Hasselblad:s or kidneys.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2009 20:07
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Is there a place to get similarly cheap 120 film? That site doesn't seem to have the relabeled Tri-X in 120. If you don't mind ISO 100 and a no-name brand, I know the frugal photographer has Shanghai GP3, a Plus-X clone under $2 a roll if you buy a brick of 50. I haven't tried it myself, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2009 08:31
|
|
|
On that note, has anyone bought from KEH from abroad? A relative is traveling through Georgia, so I can arrange for local pick-up, but I expect them to treat me like a thief over my Visa card. Are there any extra delays?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2009 19:07
|
|
|
Stregone posted:Has anyone done any autochromes (I think thats what its called)? Where you take 3 black and white shots, each with a red, green, or blue filter, and then combine them into a color picture? I'd like to give it a try. Any info would be appreciated. I imagine it'd be annoying to swap filters without moving the camera. Those old autochromes are pretty badass, though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2009 18:52
|
|
|
HPL posted:I suppose the easiest way to do it would be to get one of those Lomo cameras with multiple lenses and then put colour filters over each lens. Or build a turret for gel filters, perhaps.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2009 19:01
|
|
|
I have to share something slightly... suspicious. A dude here in Sweden is selling a bunch of Nikon MF gear on our local craigslist-knockoff: 20/2.8 28/2.8 50/1.2 105/2.8 Macro 180/2.8 - all of it F/AIs. He wants the equivalent of $1100 (This is actually a better deal than it sounds. The SEK has strengthened recently.) and by his own admission these lenses cost over 6k new. It's a pretty clear-cut scammer, but if I had a car I'd drive down to his hometown and check them just on the off chance that he's for real.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2009 19:17
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Scammer or stolen, most likely. He actually wanted to meet up in person for the transaction. I like to think that someone is getting a great deal, rather than that someone will get held up at knifepoint when they get there. Me, I can't afford to be scammed. I just sent my relative to KEH, and have no money left.  Click here for the full 2048x1536 image. Hasselblad 500C/M, Zeiss 50/4 T*, A12 back, waistlevel finder, light meter knob, rapid winder crank (not pictured) e: Reichstag posted:I'm running real low on on solution A Snaily fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Aug 18, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2009 07:24
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:That makes sense, but in my case I have a single roll of Kodachrome available and I'm not sending it to the other side of the world just to have normal snapshots developed. I haven't figured out what to do with it even though I've held on to it for a year. I used what may very well be my only roll of Kodachrome on a trip to Asia. I just got the slides back, and they have a certain something about them that I find very attractive. I'm not sure I did anything "special" with them in regards to exposure, though, so my suggestion is to just use it (tm).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2009 20:13
|
|
|
TokenBrit posted:I'm not saying waste it, but if you can, just shoot one normally before you shoot anything important. Well, yes, if you expect to produce at a technically highly proficient level, you have to try any new stock out. Within the context of snapshots (and in the light of Kodachrome's imminent demise), I found that, for my slightly lower wants, shooting away as usual (or maybe with a wariness in regards to exposure latitude) worked just fine. There's also the risk that if you compensate for all the quirks of the film, you won't get as much of the Kodachrome character, which may or may not be you desire.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2009 20:39
|
|
|
I got some 'expired' Ilford FP4 from my local photo store. When I got home, it turns out it expired in 1997. What can I expect? Awesome fogging?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2009 22:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 08:09 |
|
|
Reichstag posted:Depends on how it was stored, at the least, probably a little speed loss. Supposedly it's been frozen, but the rolls were out on a shelf. I'll make sure to run it at rated speed in Diafine. I'm happy I didn't buy their expired slide film, though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2009 22:53
|
|