[nickthetasmaniac]

So, today I finished a roll of Ektar and quickly had it developed. I got the negatives back and they look very very thin.
Well, long story short, I think I accidentally had my Contax set to ISO 640 for the entire roll.
Surprisingly, I got fairly decent images...

Contax G2
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 35/2
Kodak Ektar 100 @640
Epson V750-M Pro

Very impressed for 2.5 stops under!

[cooltouch]

Very impressed for 2.5 stops under!

I agree, Nick. Really good for underdeveloped. Surprising, in fact.

Colton, I meant to ask you when I first saw your original post -- did you have a local pro lab develop your pics, since you were able to have them quickly developed?

Here in Houston, I've run out of sources, short of the one pro lab I know of, that will develop film and return the negatives. The local pro lab does excellent work, but it comes at a price: $10 and up per roll just for developing. I've sent stuff to Dwane's on occasion, but I've started to do my own C-41 now. Been doing E-6 for years and B&W since the beginning. It isn't hard to do -- biggest problem I have is procrastination, in fact. I've got over a dozen rolls of C-41 waiting for me to get around to them . . .

[Swift1]

I agree, Nick. Really good for underdeveloped. Surprising, in fact.

Colton, I meant to ask you when I first saw your original post -- did you have a local pro lab develop your pics, since you were able to have them quickly developed?

Here in Houston, I've run out of sources, short of the one pro lab I know of, that will develop film and return the negatives. The local pro lab does excellent work, but it comes at a price: $10 and up per roll just for developing. I've sent stuff to Dwane's on occasion, but I've started to do my own C-41 now. Been doing E-6 for years and B&W since the beginning. It isn't hard to do -- biggest problem I have is procrastination, in fact. I've got over a dozen rolls of C-41 waiting for me to get around to them . . .

Michael,

there is one remaining lab in my area. I wouldn't call it a pro lab. They have a Fuji minilab. Most of their business is is printing peoples digital photos. I think there are just enough of us shooting film for them to justify keeping the machine.
When I first started shooting film 6 years ago, they would do develop-only for $3, now they charge $6.50
I know them pretty well now and usually if they aren't real busy they will develop my film while I wait (15-20 minutes).
Unfortunately, doing my own developing is impossible. I send my E6, B&W, and 4x5 to Blue Moon Camera in Portland. Hopefully my local lab will keep developing C-41 for awhile...

[dsmithhfx]

[dsmithhfx]

there is one remaining lab in my area. I wouldn't call it a pro lab. They have a Fuji minilab. Most of their business is is printing peoples digital photos. I think there are just enough of us shooting film for them to justify keeping the machine. When I first started shooting film 6 years ago, they would do develop-only for $3, now they charge $6.50 I know them pretty well now and usually if they aren't real busy they will develop my film while I wait (15-20 minutes).

That kind of mirrors the situation I find myself in here. Though there are probably more than one lab in the GTA, for me there is one place left that is reasonably convenient to drop off and pick up; luckily it is also the cheapest developing and best scanning I seen anywhere in > 10 years of not looking too hard. It is also easily the slowest, but quick turnaround is generally unimportant for the kind of pictures I take (e.g. the one I just posted was shot in March, and I got it back on Saturday).

It is 'Photolab' at Superstore (a chain of mega grocery stores that have branched into quasi-discount department store territory), an unadvertised service that I'm sure they are itching to kill, thanks to cheapskates like me (I try to make up for it by buying a few overpriced groceries).

They send out to Fuji Canada corporate HQ in Mississaugua (I think), the turnaround is generally 3-weeks, or 2 if they've been doing crack, the price is $5/24-exp roll scanned to CD with sleeved negatives -- that part is problematic. Scan quality is variable but generally better than I can do on my 1660 without hella more work. As I mentioned, the negatives are cut & sleeved. The bad part is that negative cutting is pretty hit-or-miss. Mostly miss, sometimes not too terrible, too often too terrible. Also the scans don't go out to frame edges -- at least they are made on the uncut negs so there's 4-5 shots/roll unruined right off the bat.

I don't expect it will last much longer, maybe a year or three, then I'm looking at much more expensive and inconvenient cross-town, or home developing.

[doggy1972]

AGFA Vista 200 (Fuji C200???)
Pentax P50
FA43 Limited
DSLR Scan

[UgurUgurlu]

Olympus Mju III
Kodak Colorplus

[doggy1972]

AGFA Vista 200 (Fuji C200???)
Pentax P50
FA43 Limited
DSLR Scan

[dsmithhfx]

[gofour3]

AGFA Vista 200 (Fuji C200???)
Pentax P50
FA43 Limited
DSLR Scan

Nice shot!

How do you like the P50 & FA43 combo, did you use one of the program modes?

Phil.

[Eyewanders]

Shot a couple rolls of Cinestill - hadn't in quite some time. Very pleased with the 50D results (the first two photos below) for the first time. Both it and the 800T (3rd photo) I rated a bit below box but cannot recall exactly how much - less than a full stop I believe.

pentax mz-3 | pentax-fa 43/1.9 | cinestill 50d | pakon f135


pentax mz-3 | fa 43/1.9 | cinestill 50d | pakon f135


pentax LX | pentax-m 20/4.0 | cinestill 800t | pakon f135

[doggy1972]

Nice shot!

How do you like the P50 & FA43 combo, did you use one of the program modes?

Phil.

Thanks Phil!
I like the P50 a lot tbh. I don't push process so, don't find the DX coding only issue a problem. Just shot in aperture priority. I like to use the aperture ring and have control over depth of field. Used the dof preview a fair bit, which really helps. Metering seemed good and it was nice to be able to use some exposure compensation on a couple of the shots and, used the exposure lock.Gave me a nice amount of control. Not sure I will use the program modes TBH. P has always seemed a little too automatic. Focusing screen was nice to use but, the viewfinder readout kinda covers some of the frame so I had to be mindful with my framing. Would have liked to have had 1/2000 sec at times. Overall a nice lightweight, inconspicuous camera. VERY easy to load too.
FA43 performed flawlessly at all times. A stunning lens thats really nice to use. Its also tiny. Didnt use the hood and saw no flare even on a sunny day. Seems to have 3d pop in spades too.

I'll try using the 2 P modes on the next roll and let you know.

Ian



---------- Post added 05-11-16 at 10:38 PM ----------

Shot a couple rolls of Cinestill - hadn't in quite some time. Very pleased with the 50D results (the first two photos below) for the first time. Both it and the 800T (3rd photo) I rated a bit below box but cannot recall exactly how much - less than a full stop I believe.

pentax mz-3 | pentax-fa 43/1.9 | cinestill 50d | pakon f135

That shot is stunning. 3d heaven

[edmundrt]

Super A, A50/2, Fuji Superia 200. Fairly sure this was at f2.8.
It seems from reviews that the f2 version of the 50mm A lens has a greater degree of sample variation than the others, but mine is excellent and for the £5 it cost me I definitely have no complaints.

[Eyewanders]

Super A, A50/2, Fuji Superia 200. Fairly sure this was at f2.8.
It seems from reviews that the f2 version of the 50mm A lens has a greater degree of sample variation than the others, but mine is excellent and for the £5 it cost me I definitely have no complaints.

The rock-bottom price of the f/2 variety really only reflect the huge numbers of them out there available and the the fact that there are 2 faster varieties in class. They're fantastic lenses for the price/size/weight IMO.

[Swift1]

Shot a couple rolls of Cinestill - hadn't in quite some time. Very pleased with the 50D results (the first two photos below) for the first time. Both it and the 800T (3rd photo) I rated a bit below box but cannot recall exactly how much - less than a full stop I believe.

Awesome work Kevin!

---------- Post added 05-11-2016 at 05:39 PM ----------

It seems from reviews that the f2 version of the 50mm A lens has a greater degree of sample variation than the others, but mine is excellent and for the £5 it cost me I definitely have no complaints.

I totally agree with you. The 50/2 is way underrated.