First Roll w/Mz-5n and FA 28-70mm f/4

ajuett · 05-08-2009, 11:51 PM

I finally finished my first roll with the Mz-5n and FA 28-70mm f/4. I'd say 30% were good. The Kodak UMax 400 colors were looking different compared to my Super Program(?). I may try Fuji 400 again. I posted some below, I pped color as the greens were way too rich.

Tomorrow I load a roll of Fuji Reala 100 (weather pending)

k100d · 05-09-2009, 01:04 PM

what was wrong w/ the super program?

cousinsane · 05-09-2009, 01:57 PM

Scanning color negative is a pain.
It's almost impossible to get the color right

woof · 05-09-2009, 02:31 PM

Nice photos.

I use that combination of camera and lens. What a nice combination. I hardly ever swap the lens out. It is my kind of go-to film body and lens for 28-70mm. When I do swap out it is to go to my F 50mm f/1.7. That's an outstanding duo too.

You'll like the Reala I think.

Seaain

ajuett · 05-09-2009, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by k100d

what was wrong w/ the super program?

Nothing wrong with it. I've just bought the MZ-5n and this was it's trial run.

ajuett · 05-09-2009, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by cousinsane

Scanning color negative is a pain.
It's almost impossible to get the color right

I'm finding that out. However, not only do different films give different results, bodies could do the same.

ajuett · 05-09-2009, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by woof

Nice photos.

I use that combination of camera and lens. What a nice combination. I hardly ever swap the lens out. It is my kind of go-to film body and lens for 28-70mm. When I do swap out it is to go to my F 50mm f/1.7. That's an outstanding duo too.

You'll like the Reala I think.

Seaain

Thanks Seaain, 19 shots into the Reala 100 today with the kids/scenery in a park. I'll finish it off tomorrow at a different location. 100 ISO sure brings the shutter speed down

AndrewG NY · 05-13-2009, 08:04 AM

Originally posted by ajuett

I'm finding that out. However, not only do different films give different results, bodies could do the same.

How would you explain different colors with same film + lens but different body?

AndrewG NY · 05-13-2009, 08:07 AM

Originally posted by woof

I use that combination of camera and lens. What a nice combination. I hardly ever swap the lens out. It is my kind of go-to film body and lens for 28-70mm.

I've been a little disappointed with the 28-70/4 on digital but it just feels & looks right on the little MZ/ZX film bodies. Especially with the Fg AA grip.

AndrewG NY · 05-13-2009, 08:09 AM

Originally posted by ajuett

I finally finished my first roll with the Mz-5n and FA 28-70mm f/4. I'd say 30% were good. The Kodak UMax 400 colors were looking different compared to my Super Program(?). I may try Fuji 400 again. I posted some below, I pped color as the greens were way too rich.

Tomorrow I load a roll of Fuji Reala 100 (weather pending)

I think these scans look pretty good from a detail/contrast point of view though the colors look a little brown to me.

Gooshin · 05-13-2009, 08:09 AM

holy lens flare batman

ajuett · 05-13-2009, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by AndrewG NY

How would you explain different colors with same film + lens but different body?

I wasn't making a statement, it was more of a question. Would the same lens and film on different bodies yield different colors? Doesn't really matter, I was just thinking out loud.

CSoars · 05-13-2009, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by ajuett

I wasn't making a statement, it was more of a question. Would the same lens and film on different bodies yield different colors? Doesn't really matter, I was just thinking out loud.

If the film came from a different batch, maybe (or the lens was being affected by ghosting/flare).

But objectively, the body is a light-tight box that barring different exposure, shouldn't affect the outcome of the colour at all. That's up to the characteristics of the lens and the emulsion itself.

jgredline · 05-13-2009, 03:20 PM

Great images ..Love the third and the 4th is simply precious!...

I would have to agree that the body does not dictate what the images look like. It is all lens and film...The only folks who seen to insist that the bodies make a ''huge'' difference are the leica people..:ugh:

ajuett · 05-13-2009, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by CSoars

If the film came from a different batch, maybe (or the lens was being affected by ghosting/flare).

But objectively, the body is a light-tight box that barring different exposure, shouldn't affect the outcome of the colour at all. That's up to the characteristics of the lens and the emulsion itself.

Originally posted by jgredline

Great images ..Love the third and the 4th is simply precious!...

I would have to agree that the body does not dictate what the images look like. It is all lens and film...The only folks who seen to insist that the bodies make a ''huge'' difference are the leica people..:ugh:

Thanks for the info and the reasoning behind it Javier and CSoars, makes sense

05-08-2009, 11:51 PM	#1
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100	First Roll w/Mz-5n and FA 28-70mm f/4 I finally finished my first roll with the Mz-5n and FA 28-70mm f/4. I'd say 30% were good. The Kodak UMax 400 colors were looking different compared to my Super Program(?). I may try Fuji 400 again. I posted some below, I pped color as the greens were way too rich. Tomorrow I load a roll of Fuji Reala 100 (weather pending)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Black & White First Roll from my new to me MZ-50	dermc	Post Your Photos!	8	04-21-2010 12:18 AM
Some from the first roll....	Rense	Pentax Medium Format	1	03-25-2010 03:41 AM
Roll	manumon77	Monthly Photo Contests	0	09-01-2009 06:59 AM
MZ-7 one roll	redpigeons	Post Your Photos!	4	01-27-2009 01:01 PM
First roll...	Sasquatch	Post Your Photos!	2	08-19-2008 05:42 AM

05-09-2009, 01:04 PM	#2
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	what was wrong w/ the super program?

05-09-2009, 01:57 PM	#3
cousinsane Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: madison Posts: 239	Scanning color negative is a pain. It's almost impossible to get the color right

05-09-2009, 02:31 PM	#4
woof Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: In the present Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,870	Nice photos. I use that combination of camera and lens. What a nice combination. I hardly ever swap the lens out. It is my kind of go-to film body and lens for 28-70mm. When I do swap out it is to go to my F 50mm f/1.7. That's an outstanding duo too. You'll like the Reala I think. Seaain

05-09-2009, 04:41 PM	#5
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100 Original Poster	Originally posted by k100d what was wrong w/ the super program? Nothing wrong with it. I've just bought the MZ-5n and this was it's trial run.

05-09-2009, 04:43 PM	#6
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100 Original Poster	Originally posted by cousinsane Scanning color negative is a pain. It's almost impossible to get the color right I'm finding that out. However, not only do different films give different results, bodies could do the same.

05-09-2009, 04:46 PM	#7
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100 Original Poster	Originally posted by woof Nice photos. I use that combination of camera and lens. What a nice combination. I hardly ever swap the lens out. It is my kind of go-to film body and lens for 28-70mm. When I do swap out it is to go to my F 50mm f/1.7. That's an outstanding duo too. You'll like the Reala I think. Seaain Thanks Seaain, 19 shots into the Reala 100 today with the kids/scenery in a park. I'll finish it off tomorrow at a different location. 100 ISO sure brings the shutter speed down

05-13-2009, 08:04 AM	#8
AndrewG NY Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chappaqua, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 688	Originally posted by ajuett I'm finding that out. However, not only do different films give different results, bodies could do the same. How would you explain different colors with same film + lens but different body?

05-13-2009, 08:07 AM	#9
AndrewG NY Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chappaqua, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 688	Originally posted by woof I use that combination of camera and lens. What a nice combination. I hardly ever swap the lens out. It is my kind of go-to film body and lens for 28-70mm. I've been a little disappointed with the 28-70/4 on digital but it just feels & looks right on the little MZ/ZX film bodies. Especially with the Fg AA grip.

05-13-2009, 08:09 AM	#10
AndrewG NY Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chappaqua, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 688	Originally posted by ajuett I finally finished my first roll with the Mz-5n and FA 28-70mm f/4. I'd say 30% were good. The Kodak UMax 400 colors were looking different compared to my Super Program(?). I may try Fuji 400 again. I posted some below, I pped color as the greens were way too rich. Tomorrow I load a roll of Fuji Reala 100 (weather pending) I think these scans look pretty good from a detail/contrast point of view though the colors look a little brown to me.

05-13-2009, 08:09 AM	#11
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	holy lens flare batman

05-13-2009, 09:03 AM	#12
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100 Original Poster	Originally posted by AndrewG NY How would you explain different colors with same film + lens but different body? I wasn't making a statement, it was more of a question. Would the same lens and film on different bodies yield different colors? Doesn't really matter, I was just thinking out loud.

05-13-2009, 12:13 PM	#13
CSoars Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 322	Originally posted by ajuett I wasn't making a statement, it was more of a question. Would the same lens and film on different bodies yield different colors? Doesn't really matter, I was just thinking out loud. If the film came from a different batch, maybe (or the lens was being affected by ghosting/flare). But objectively, the body is a light-tight box that barring different exposure, shouldn't affect the outcome of the colour at all. That's up to the characteristics of the lens and the emulsion itself.

05-13-2009, 03:20 PM	#14
jgredline Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: LosAngeles, Ca. Photos: Albums Posts: 10,628	Great images ..Love the third and the 4th is simply precious!... I would have to agree that the body does not dictate what the images look like. It is all lens and film...The only folks who seen to insist that the bodies make a ''huge'' difference are the leica people..:ugh:

05-13-2009, 05:01 PM	#15
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100 Original Poster	Originally posted by CSoars If the film came from a different batch, maybe (or the lens was being affected by ghosting/flare). But objectively, the body is a light-tight box that barring different exposure, shouldn't affect the outcome of the colour at all. That's up to the characteristics of the lens and the emulsion itself. Originally posted by jgredline Great images ..Love the third and the 4th is simply precious!... I would have to agree that the body does not dictate what the images look like. It is all lens and film...The only folks who seen to insist that the bodies make a ''huge'' difference are the leica people..:ugh: Thanks for the info and the reasoning behind it Javier and CSoars, makes sense