Originally posted by Nesster What a superb series, atmosphere in spades... it's hard to pick a favorite, maybe #5 for the line of white buoys (?) but 1,3,4 three kill also. Not that the others are any slouches...
Thanks!
Originally posted by GeneV Don't know how it compares to the 3.5, but the M28/2.8 was the lens used for my TMX 100 shot, above.
Originally posted by KJon Agnostic, nice to see you posting (and shooting with an ME Super again). Looking at your photos is always an education in B&W. Did you get your old ME Super fixed or is this a new camera? Also, see your shooting the M28, f2.8. I have the f3.5. Do you know if there's a lot of difference between the two? (and don't say "half a stop <g>")
Best,
Kevin
P. S. That Tri-X doesn't look any the worse for its age. Thinking about age a lot as tomorrow's my father's 73rd Birthday.
Thanks! I found a replacement for my broken ME Super together with that M 28/2.8 for a price I could not resist. In fact I also bought an MX and a Z1 last week for prices I could not resist.
The difference between the M28/2.8 and 28/3.5, to be exact, is 2/3 of a stop!
I don't know how they compare though, never owned the M 28/3.5. I do have the Takumar S-M-C 28/3.5 and the Super Takumar 28/3.5 which may or may not be of similar design to the M 28/3.5 but I have not shot with either of those 28's enough to really compare. The Taks I have only shot once each on digital and the M 28 only on the two rolls of b&w film shown above.
The Tri-X is in fact quite horid
It's only because these scenes have a very small dynamic range and because I used Noiseware Pro on the scans that they look more or less presentable.
Fuji Provia 400X, Rolleicord Vb:
Last edited by Agnostic; 02-07-2010 at 12:54 PM.