Concert tonight, Tri-X... what EI?

leekil · 09-13-2018, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by bobbotron

I believe this to be a straw man argument, at least here in Canada. Concert venue == private property. Public place, I'd tell authority XYZ I'm in the right, and what was your badge number?

The public place thing is the same in the US as Canada... in theory.

It may be too late to get some, but I like the appearance of the grain of Tmax 3200 (at 3200).

**bobbotron** · 09-13-2018, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by tuco

Sure, private property is different. But in your case I suspect no matter how belligerent people with phone cameras could be they still would not ban them like presumably they did with the larger gear. So I'm still standing by my camera discrimination thing.

FYI, that scenario I described happen to me. Guilty until proven innocent is the mindset around here.

Fair enough!

I guess for me, I'm not going to fight it for a concert, but in day to day life I feel photographers rights are pretty well entrenched in public places.

---------- Post added 09-13-18 at 03:47 PM ----------

Originally posted by dsmithhfx

Yes and I wish I had one (or any film RF with a fast lens) -- unfortunately they all seem to be pricey now. Dunno if I'd bother with concert shooting though.

I can remember when they'd all be waving bic lighters, well before smartphones came along.

I lucked out with the Petri, bought it for $30 Canadian. It's a nice camera, only gripe is that I find the film reel to be almost impossible to load, massively frustrating each time I need to change film.

dsmithhfx · 09-13-2018, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by bobbotron

the film reel to be almost impossible to load

Is that by design or is something a bit broken?

**bobbotron** · 09-13-2018, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by dsmithhfx

Is that by design or is something a bit broken?

The way you slip it in, it's such a pain to get it to start taking up the film. It just seems like a really fidgety design.

**UncleVanya** · 09-13-2018, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by bobbotron

The way you slip it in, it's such a pain to get it to start taking up the film. It just seems like a really fidgety design.

Some cameras were really bad at that. Some were so easy it was funny. I never could get a bead on why some were so badly designed.

**TomB_tx** · 09-13-2018, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Some cameras were really bad at that. Some were so easy it was funny. I never could get a bead on why some were so badly designed.

The famous Leica M3, M2 (and earlier) required you to remove the camera bottom plate, pull out the film take-up spool. Insert the film leader (aligned carefully) under a spring clip, then pull out enough film to simultaneously insert both the cassette and take-up spool into their chambers through the camera bottom, install the bottom plate and lock it in place.
Canon rangefinders before about 1955 were the same, but went to back loading in the late 1950s.
Leica still required removing and threading the take-up spool until the M4 in about 1968, and you still have to load through the bottom even with the film cameras made now.
(And even the latest M10 digital removes the bottom plate to change the SD card.)

abruzzi · 09-13-2018, 06:21 PM

But, but...Leica!

I have a lot of respect for Leica, but it is amusing reading leicaphiles explaining that it’s no big deal to pre-trim the leader on all thier film rolls so when they’re out the can “quickly” change rolls.

On the other end, I find it amusing all the effort that went into trying to make loading film easier, which basically amounted to automating the “push the leader into the takeup reel” part of the process. I’ve found those efforts less than perfectly reliable. Several times my F4 didn’t catch the leader, and didn’t advance the film, the Canonet has been reliable but has this big flap that actually makes it harder for me because I can’t see if the sprocket holes are lined up.

dsmithhfx · 09-14-2018, 05:44 AM

Originally posted by abruzzi

But, but...Leica!

I have a lot of respect for Leica, but it is amusing reading leicaphiles explaining that it’s no big deal to pre-trim the leader on all thier film rolls so when they’re out the can “quickly” change rolls.

On the other end, I find it amusing all the effort that went into trying to make loading film easier, which basically amounted to automating the “push the leader into the takeup reel” part of the process. I’ve found those efforts less than perfectly reliable. Several times my F4 didn’t catch the leader, and didn’t advance the film, the Canonet has been reliable but has this big flap that actually makes it harder for me because I can’t see if the sprocket holes are lined up.

The easiest to load IME was the olympus stylus epic. You just had to drape the leader across the take-up spool and close the back . I had two, one the autowind died, and the replacement I lost quite recently (the loss tempered by worsening and irreparable light leaks from around the lens mount).

Vendee · 09-14-2018, 07:49 AM

Originally posted by dsmithhfx

The easiest to load IME was the olympus stylus epic. You just had to drape the leader across the take-up spool and close the back

The Canon EOS 3 is like that. You can also set a fast or slow rewind and can chose to leave the leader in or out on rewind.

**TomB_tx** · 09-14-2018, 08:14 AM

Originally posted by dsmithhfx

The easiest to load IME was the olympus stylus epic. You just had to drape the leader across the take-up spool and close the back . I had two, one the autowind died, and the replacement I lost quite recently (the loss tempered by worsening and irreparable light leaks from around the lens mount).

The Canon QL (Quick Load) system used on the Pellix QL and FT-QL (and others) in the mid 1960s was like that, but manual wind. The take-up spool had 3 spring-loaded arms with rubber grippers. You laid the film leader over the spool, and as you closed the back another flap held it in place, Then just advance to the first shot. I had an FT-QL about 1966. Very nice loading system (and nice camera).

dsmithhfx · 09-14-2018, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Vendee

The Canon EOS 3 is like that. You can also set a fast or slow rewind and can chose to leave the leader in or out on rewind.

Yeah, now that you mention it, my Rebel-TI and Sigma SA-7 also had similar ease of loading. I stopped using those cameras many years ago, but kept the stylus as my 'walking-around' camera (always with me). Now I need to find a replacement. I guess. I kind of didn't use it all that much in the past few years except as a backup (or alternate film) camera.

abruzzi · 09-14-2018, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by TomB_tx

The Canon QL (Quick Load) system used on the Pellix QL and FT-QL (and others) in the mid 1960s was like that, but manual wind. The take-up spool had 3 spring-loaded arms with rubber grippers. You laid the film leader over the spool, and as you closed the back another flap held it in place, Then just advance to the first shot. I had an FT-QL about 1966. Very nice loading system (and nice camera).

Maybe I'm the only person that has problem with the Canon QL system...

**bobbotron** · 09-14-2018, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by Vendee

The Canon EOS 3 is like that. You can also set a fast or slow rewind and can chose to leave the leader in or out on rewind.

I have a pentax PZ-10 that's pretty slick to load and unload, but not quite that nice!

Fyi thanks for all the suggestions. I shot at 1600. Didn't get that many shots but hopefully a few keepers.

tuco · 09-14-2018, 12:06 PM

Good or bad post some results.

**UncleVanya** · 09-14-2018, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by bobbotron

I have a pentax PZ-10 that's pretty slick to load and unload, but not quite that nice!

Fyi thanks for all the suggestions. I shot at 1600. Didn't get that many shots but hopefully a few keepers.

PZ-1 works much the same, leader in or out at least. Super easy to load.
Glad 1600 was OK. That's a better IQ ISO with Tri-X in my opinion.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fuji Neopan Acros pushed to EI 640	gabriel_bc	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	6	10-30-2016 06:38 AM
Lindsey Stirling concert tonight. Boise, Idaho	Dewman	General Talk	3	05-26-2015 01:05 PM
Pentax EI-100: A blast from the past!	ChrisPlatt	Pentax Compact Cameras	1	08-11-2008 01:02 PM
1st Equestrian event since EI	Mechan1k	Post Your Photos!	14	03-30-2008 10:22 PM

09-13-2018, 11:53 AM	#16
leekil Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 2,003	Originally posted by bobbotron I believe this to be a straw man argument, at least here in Canada. Concert venue == private property. Public place, I'd tell authority XYZ I'm in the right, and what was your badge number? The public place thing is the same in the US as Canada... in theory. It may be too late to get some, but I like the appearance of the grain of Tmax 3200 (at 3200).

09-13-2018, 12:45 PM	#17
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,348 Original Poster	Originally posted by tuco Sure, private property is different. But in your case I suspect no matter how belligerent people with phone cameras could be they still would not ban them like presumably they did with the larger gear. So I'm still standing by my camera discrimination thing. FYI, that scenario I described happen to me. Guilty until proven innocent is the mindset around here. Fair enough! I guess for me, I'm not going to fight it for a concert, but in day to day life I feel photographers rights are pretty well entrenched in public places. ---------- Post added 09-13-18 at 03:47 PM ---------- Originally posted by dsmithhfx Yes and I wish I had one (or any film RF with a fast lens) -- unfortunately they all seem to be pricey now. Dunno if I'd bother with concert shooting though. I can remember when they'd all be waving bic lighters, well before smartphones came along. I lucked out with the Petri, bought it for $30 Canadian. It's a nice camera, only gripe is that I find the film reel to be almost impossible to load, massively frustrating each time I need to change film.

09-13-2018, 12:57 PM	#18
dsmithhfx Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Toronto Posts: 5,141	Originally posted by bobbotron the film reel to be almost impossible to load Is that by design or is something a bit broken?

09-13-2018, 01:04 PM	#19
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,348 Original Poster	Originally posted by dsmithhfx Is that by design or is something a bit broken? The way you slip it in, it's such a pain to get it to start taking up the film. It just seems like a really fidgety design.

09-13-2018, 01:48 PM	#20
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,385	Originally posted by bobbotron The way you slip it in, it's such a pain to get it to start taking up the film. It just seems like a really fidgety design. Some cameras were really bad at that. Some were so easy it was funny. I never could get a bead on why some were so badly designed.

09-13-2018, 04:35 PM	#21
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	Originally posted by UncleVanya Some cameras were really bad at that. Some were so easy it was funny. I never could get a bead on why some were so badly designed. The famous Leica M3, M2 (and earlier) required you to remove the camera bottom plate, pull out the film take-up spool. Insert the film leader (aligned carefully) under a spring clip, then pull out enough film to simultaneously insert both the cassette and take-up spool into their chambers through the camera bottom, install the bottom plate and lock it in place. Canon rangefinders before about 1955 were the same, but went to back loading in the late 1950s. Leica still required removing and threading the take-up spool until the M4 in about 1968, and you still have to load through the bottom even with the film cameras made now. (And even the latest M10 digital removes the bottom plate to change the SD card.)

09-13-2018, 06:21 PM	#22
abruzzi Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: New Mexico Posts: 788	But, but...Leica! I have a lot of respect for Leica, but it is amusing reading leicaphiles explaining that it’s no big deal to pre-trim the leader on all thier film rolls so when they’re out the can “quickly” change rolls. On the other end, I find it amusing all the effort that went into trying to make loading film easier, which basically amounted to automating the “push the leader into the takeup reel” part of the process. I’ve found those efforts less than perfectly reliable. Several times my F4 didn’t catch the leader, and didn’t advance the film, the Canonet has been reliable but has this big flap that actually makes it harder for me because I can’t see if the sprocket holes are lined up.

09-14-2018, 05:44 AM	#23
dsmithhfx Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Toronto Posts: 5,141	Originally posted by abruzzi But, but...Leica! I have a lot of respect for Leica, but it is amusing reading leicaphiles explaining that it’s no big deal to pre-trim the leader on all thier film rolls so when they’re out the can “quickly” change rolls. On the other end, I find it amusing all the effort that went into trying to make loading film easier, which basically amounted to automating the “push the leader into the takeup reel” part of the process. I’ve found those efforts less than perfectly reliable. Several times my F4 didn’t catch the leader, and didn’t advance the film, the Canonet has been reliable but has this big flap that actually makes it harder for me because I can’t see if the sprocket holes are lined up. The easiest to load IME was the olympus stylus epic. You just had to drape the leader across the take-up spool and close the back . I had two, one the autowind died, and the replacement I lost quite recently (the loss tempered by worsening and irreparable light leaks from around the lens mount).

09-14-2018, 07:49 AM	#24
Vendee Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norfolk, UK Posts: 1,134	Originally posted by dsmithhfx The easiest to load IME was the olympus stylus epic. You just had to drape the leader across the take-up spool and close the back The Canon EOS 3 is like that. You can also set a fast or slow rewind and can chose to leave the leader in or out on rewind.

09-14-2018, 08:14 AM	#25
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	Originally posted by dsmithhfx The easiest to load IME was the olympus stylus epic. You just had to drape the leader across the take-up spool and close the back . I had two, one the autowind died, and the replacement I lost quite recently (the loss tempered by worsening and irreparable light leaks from around the lens mount). The Canon QL (Quick Load) system used on the Pellix QL and FT-QL (and others) in the mid 1960s was like that, but manual wind. The take-up spool had 3 spring-loaded arms with rubber grippers. You laid the film leader over the spool, and as you closed the back another flap held it in place, Then just advance to the first shot. I had an FT-QL about 1966. Very nice loading system (and nice camera).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-14-2018, 08:19 AM	#26
dsmithhfx Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Toronto Posts: 5,141	Originally posted by Vendee The Canon EOS 3 is like that. You can also set a fast or slow rewind and can chose to leave the leader in or out on rewind. Yeah, now that you mention it, my Rebel-TI and Sigma SA-7 also had similar ease of loading. I stopped using those cameras many years ago, but kept the stylus as my 'walking-around' camera (always with me). Now I need to find a replacement. I guess. I kind of didn't use it all that much in the past few years except as a backup (or alternate film) camera.

09-14-2018, 09:31 AM	#27
abruzzi Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: New Mexico Posts: 788	Originally posted by TomB_tx The Canon QL (Quick Load) system used on the Pellix QL and FT-QL (and others) in the mid 1960s was like that, but manual wind. The take-up spool had 3 spring-loaded arms with rubber grippers. You laid the film leader over the spool, and as you closed the back another flap held it in place, Then just advance to the first shot. I had an FT-QL about 1966. Very nice loading system (and nice camera). Maybe I'm the only person that has problem with the Canon QL system...

09-14-2018, 09:55 AM	#28
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,348 Original Poster	Originally posted by Vendee The Canon EOS 3 is like that. You can also set a fast or slow rewind and can chose to leave the leader in or out on rewind. I have a pentax PZ-10 that's pretty slick to load and unload, but not quite that nice! Fyi thanks for all the suggestions. I shot at 1600. Didn't get that many shots but hopefully a few keepers.

09-14-2018, 12:06 PM	#29
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,019	Good or bad post some results.

09-14-2018, 12:08 PM	#30
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,385	Originally posted by bobbotron I have a pentax PZ-10 that's pretty slick to load and unload, but not quite that nice! Fyi thanks for all the suggestions. I shot at 1600. Didn't get that many shots but hopefully a few keepers. PZ-1 works much the same, leader in or out at least. Super easy to load. Glad 1600 was OK. That's a better IQ ISO with Tri-X in my opinion.