[eddie1960]

That could make a great thread in itself. Here's frame 37 from my last ever roll of Kodachrome 64. I had to dig the actual slides out to make sure, and ended up spending a couple of nostalgic hours with my lightbox and loupe and increasingly misty eyes. Now I'm thinking that I'll be taking the projector along when my family all get together for Christmas next week.

that's a very nice final frame - that would be a very interesting web project, just final frames of the final roll of Kodachrome people shot.

[cooltouch]

Thanks for your opinions, guys. As always, that is the risk when making changes -- not knowing when to say when. Mainly I objected to that crossbar at eye level. It just really bothered me. I could have left things alone right there. But while I was at it, I decided to see if I could bring out the print in the kids' tee shirts. To me, it was more an exercise in the possible, which I thought came out looking not bad. It was a real challenge bringing out the shadow detail without having everything get all clumpy and weird looking. A bit too blue, though. Yeah, the pointy finger does have sort of an ET quality to it, doesn't it? :-)

Also, thanks, Kris, for sharing. A nice little series. Yes, Dave, I must agree with Eddie. That is a nice final frame. Glad to read I'm not the only one who gets all misty-eyed and nostalgic when I look at my slides. And it does indeed sound like an interesting web project. Final frame of the final roll of Kodachrome.

[Frogonastring]

I've still got three or four rolls of Kodachrome 64 sitting in my fridge...I think it's four.
Sadly - and obviously - no longer able to get them processed in colour, but there's a few places in the UK you can get them processed to black and white (which is what I intend - I very much missed the boat on the last development, to the extent that I only bought them last year). Apparently they make very good, very contrasty B&W shots. Development costs a little extra because they have to hand scrub the remjet backing off...! Fun times.

When I get around to shooting them, I'll post some shots here.

[Cuthbert]

Thanks for your opinions, guys. As always, that is the risk when making changes -- not knowing when to say when. Mainly I objected to that crossbar at eye level. It just really bothered me. I could have left things alone right there. But while I was at it, I decided to see if I could bring out the print in the kids' tee shirts. To me, it was more an exercise in the possible, which I thought came out looking not bad. It was a real challenge bringing out the shadow detail without having everything get all clumpy and weird looking. A bit too blue, though. Yeah, the pointy finger does have sort of an ET quality to it, doesn't it? :-)

Yeah, also of some other recent derivative movies like 8mm and Horns, I don't know if you have seen them...they all have that kind of atmosphere, I assume you can't get out alive from the 80s.

However, I also liked your flame pic and ironically few days ago I also shot a fire for the first time, just for the curiosity of seeing what would have come out.



Canon F-1N with FD 50 mm f1.2, Portra 160.

[cooltouch]

Okay, given that this is a Pentax forum and all, I figured it was time I posted the following image:



Yup, that's an 8" Celestron Spotting Scope! Same tube assy as the 8" SCT telescope. The LX with motor drive was an item I picked up when I used to be a camera dealer. This shot was probably taken in 1991 or so. Even though I bought it as inventory, I recall developing a serious fondness for that camera and was loath to see it go. Thus, I didn't bargain at all over the rather high price I put on the camera. I've kinda wanted another one ever since, but I guess I continue to wince over the high prices the LX continues to command. I mean, I've bought a Nikon F3 with MD 4 motor drive for less, I've bought a Canon New F-1 with motor for less, and a Nikon F4s for less -- than what Pentax LX bodies tend to go for on eBay. It speaks a lot directly to the loyalty Pentaxians have toward this camera system, methinks. And I can kind of understand why. I didn't get to shoot with my LX nearly as much as I would have liked (because, beside my high price, it sold quickly), but I do have -- on my other computer, of course -- a series I took using natural light at night in B&W that was simply incredible what it could do.

[Cuthbert]

If you check on ebay the prices for the Pentax 50 mm f1.2s, both Ks and As, are ludicrous! They are even more expensive than the Canon 1.2s aspherical! Not to mention the Cult of the Holy Takumar...

[cooltouch]

Okay, Cuthbert, I can see you're a man after my own heart, still shooting a Canon F-1 -- with a 50/1.2, no less. I own three 55/1.2s: a 55/1.2 FL, FD 55/1.2 chrome nose, and FD 55/1.2 SSC. Still no Aspherical so far. A shade too rich for my blood. I just picked up the SSC a couple weeks ago, so I'm probably gonna sell the chrome nose. The FL, I'm doing a non-destructive, reversible conversion to EOS EF mount, just so I can have that sort of shallow DOF with my EOs system.

I'm becoming a big fan of Portra, especially 160. I like it better than Ektar. It gives rich saturation, quite reminiscent of slides, yet without the narrow exposure latitude. Grain is almost invisible. Oh, and it scans much better than Ektar. I'm not sure why, but when I scan Ektar on my Epson 4990, medium browns become purples. And I can't get good software negative reversals at all with it, using either Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro. Way too much cyan in the reversed image. But Portra has none of these problems. I keep holding my breath, though, hoping Kodak will leave things be and not cancel it along with all the other great emulsions it has recently discontinued.

---------- Post added 12-17-14 at 08:51 AM ----------

If you check on ebay the prices for the Pentax 50 mm f1.2s, both Ks and As, are ludicrous! They are even more expensive than the Canon 1.2s aspherical! Not to mention the Cult of the Holy Takumar...

Boy Howdy! Yeah, and this whole brand loyalty thing with Pentaxians extends well beyond the LX. I mean, look what Tamron PK-A Adaptall-2 mounts go for these days, just because they're PK-A! There's one eBay dealer who has five of 'em, selling them for $90 a pop!

I can't help but admire Pentax folks for their brand loyalty. It just makes it kinda difficult for me to participate, though, except out on the periphery all too often.

[Cuthbert]

Yeah, I also noticed we have similar tastes in photography, both gear and subjects! Unfortunately the people of my generation have lost the opportunity to enjoy Kodakchrome, I restarted shooting last year after a long period in which I had become "dormant" because I thought my pics were bad, then I realised the problem wasn't me but was bad films (Gold, Kodakcolor Plus...) and bad processing available in my area. I became a fan of Portra (both 400 and 160) and now I almost exclusively shoot that film, tried Ektar but it's pretty bad for people.

For the Canons, I would also like to buy an L but they are too pricey, in the end I am happy with the standard 1.2 that I got for a decent price, but I'm saving for the "big boy", the 85mm f1.2L that one day will be mine.

To use a citation from detective Callaham, this is me, the F-1 and Portra400:



It might become my official portrait!

[cooltouch]

I took a bunch of self portraits with both my old F--1s and Nikon F3 back over 20 years ago. I got 'em around here somewhere. I still had hair back then. And I wasn't a graybeard like I am now. I don't think I have any up at my website, or else I might post one. I'll check.

Here in Houston, a city with a greater metropolitan area of over 4 million people, there are really only two camera shops left. Since both shops maintain decent selections of used gear, I will stop in at both on occasion. A few years ago, I wandered into one of them and spied both an FL 55mm f/1.2 and an 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical sitting in their used display. They had one other lens I was interested in, so I negotiated a package deal. Ended up getting the FL 55/1.2 for about fifty bucks and the 85/1.2 Asph for about $350! !!! I was so stoked.



One of my favorite images I've taken with it so far:



My friend Dave with his modified Graflex 4x5. Canon F-1, 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical, Kodak Elite Chrome 100. I was shooting with the 85mm wide open that day. Point of focus was the writing on the 4x5's lens.

[LesDMess]

Wow, nicely done, Les! I believe I recognize that center Sea Fury -- probably Dreadnaught. I don't recognize the leading F8F or the trailing Sea Fury. Could just be new paint jobs, though.

Honestly, I would prefer boring blue skies to washed out haze or worse, having to shoot into the sun at some angle. Back in California, at a few air shows I went to, it was possible to get mountains in the background, which made for a nice backdrop. I believe it was the El Toro air shows. At the warbirds show at Minter Field outside Bakersfield, it was possible to get some of the distant mountains in shots when there wasn't too much atmospheric haze. Here in Houston, the annual show is at Ellington AF Base -- totally flat. So about all I can hope for at that show is blue skies.

So what camera were you using for the above shots?

I was using the EOS3+70-200L+2XTC for that wishing I had a 500mm+. I learned that shooting airshows and such requires some serious lenses as I tried all the cheaper alternatives.

That F8F was the Rare Bear and it went on to win that year and the next if I remember correctly. This one on Velvia 100F using the same rig.



I have gotten rid of all my EOS gear in favor of the manual world for sometime now.

[stevebrot]

So, if you've got your last roll of Kodachrome digitized, care to share some shots?

These are previously posted, but were from the last production run of K64.













Steve

[stevebrot]

that's a very nice final frame - that would be a very interesting web project, just final frames of the final roll of Kodachrome people shot.

Dying Colors

These were the last of the fall leaves on the ground. My last photo from my last roll of Kodachrome 64, mid-November 2010. Now everything fades to black and white...

[stevebrot]

I took a bunch of self portraits with both my old F--1s and Nikon F3 back over 20 years ago. I got 'em around here somewhere. I still had hair back then. And I wasn't a graybeard like I am now. I don't think I have any up at my website, or else I might post one. I'll check.

Here in Houston, a city with a greater metropolitan area of over 4 million people, there are really only two camera shops left. Since both shops maintain decent selections of used gear, I will stop in at both on occasion. A few years ago, I wandered into one of them and spied both an FL 55mm f/1.2 and an 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical sitting in their used display. They had one other lens I was interested in, so I negotiated a package deal. Ended up getting the FL 55/1.2 for about fifty bucks and the 85/1.2 Asph for about $350! !!! I was so stoked.



One of my favorite images I've taken with it so far:



My friend Dave with his modified Graflex 4x5. Canon F-1, 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical, Kodak Elite Chrome 100. I was shooting with the 85mm wide open that day. Point of focus was the writing on the 4x5's lens.

Hey you guys! Cut the camera p0rn! There is a thread for that!


Steve

[cooltouch]

I was using the EOS3+70-200L+2XTC for that wishing I had a 500mm+. I learned that shooting airshows and such requires some serious lenses as I tried all the cheaper alternatives.

That F8F was the Rare Bear and it went on to win that year and the next if I remember correctly. This one on Velvia 100F using the same rig.

I have gotten rid of all my EOS gear in favor of the manual world for sometime now.

Oh, of course, Rare Bear, probably the most famous F8F of all. I don't think I've ever seen it in person at an at airshow, although I've seen other F8F racers, despite the many dozens I attended back in the 80s and 90s in California. I have quite a few photos of one of Rare Bear's chief competitors, Strega, owned by "Tiger" Bill Destefani. But none up at my website. I used to live in Bakersfield, which is Destefani's hometown, so I'd see Strega and his other P-51, Mangia Pane (Eats Bread), flying around, plus they made most of the local and regional airshows. He had them hangered out at Bakersfield Municipal Airport for a while.

As far as lenses go, I've found that it often depends on the venue and whether or not I was able to finagle a press pass. At the Warbirds show at Minter Field, I could get a press pass and they'd let us out on disused portions of the runway sections, so we were away from all the show minions. Usually, though, that sort of access just costs a lot more to be able to sit in a special area that gives you few advantages over being stuck in the middle of the hoi poloi, so I never paid the extra and managed to get good photos nonetheless.

At the Minter Field shows, because we were out there a ways, I could make good use of a 500mm, but at most other shows, 300mm was more than enough. Here at the Houston event, I've found that, in some cases, 400mm is too much. 300mm is a good middle ground for here. A good 300mm zoom is often the best way to go because then I can zoom in some if 300mm is becoming too much.

My best lens right now for airshows is my Tamron 300mm f/2.8 LDIF. I have a couple of good zooms I like to use, as well, one AF, one MF. And I also like to carry wide angles for the static displays.

Steve, thanks for sharing! Yesterday I found a box with a bunch of Kodak slide boxes in it. I need to go through it and see if this is where my last of the Kodachrome slides are. If so, I'll fish out number 36 (or 37 or 38) and post it here.

[stevebrot]

If you check on ebay the prices for the Pentax 50 mm f1.2s, both Ks and As, are ludicrous! They are even more expensive than the Canon 1.2s aspherical! Not to mention the Cult of the Holy Takumar...

Pentax users are not particularly well-known for their rationality...





Steve