Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-20-2009, 01:06 PM   #31
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
I've been shooting exclusively film since June, and I'm getting tired of it - the cost, the problems, the screw ups, the grain, the poor color, the limiations. I wish someone would invent a digital camera soon.

10-20-2009, 02:08 PM   #32
Forum Member
Nando's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sault Ste. Marie, Canada & Coimbra, Portugal
Posts: 82
QuoteOriginally posted by little laker Quote
I was just doing a google search, Reala vs Ektar.... wondering what film I should pack along tomorrow (I have 34 exposures left on a roll of Velvia so it's probably good for the day)
I really don't know what roll to bring along., to capture the autumn colours.
Since I've never shot a roll of Reala I don't know what to expect from it, and I don't want to take a chance with winter approaching so fast

I do have the Sigma packed along, and if the conditions are right might do a small digital vs film shootout.
I find that Reala is more consistent when it comes to colour and deals with changing lighting conditions better. I find that Ektar exhibits very strong reds indoors and strong cyans/greens outdoors. I find that I must spend more time adjusting colour in the post-processing with the Ektar but despite this, good high-resolution scans are gorgeous. The Ektar has finer grain but a well-scanned 35mm frame from Reala is certainly good enough for a very big print. If you are getting prints done at a lab, I'd DEFINITELY go with the Reala as they'll have an easier time handling it. However, if you are planning on scanning the negatives onto your computer yourself, go with the Ektar. I take that Kodak designed Ektar with scanning in mind.

I've learned that choosing a good lab is very important. I've seen noticeable differences in the film grain from one lab to another. Its important to choose a lab that always uses fresh chemicals and that replaces or replenishes chemicals properly. Luckily, I have a good lab in my small town. I suspect that many labs are now using chemicals longer than they should.
10-20-2009, 02:12 PM   #33
Pentaxian
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,856
QuoteOriginally posted by Nando Quote
I want a full-frame sensor so I can keep the focal lengths I like and I don't have to figure out where I should be positioning myself.
Same here.

Chris
10-20-2009, 02:17 PM   #34
Pentaxian
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Queens NYC
Posts: 4,856
QuoteOriginally posted by Jonson PL Quote
Processing a film that has been in the camera for a while, Iím also more detached from the photo. And can better see what works or not.
When I keep watching the pictures on the back of the DSLR, and have computer time shortly thereafter, I havenít separated the event from the photo quality. The idea and thoughts from a fun outing, didnít necessarily make it onto the image
An excellent point. Never underestimate the power of the latent image!

Chris

10-20-2009, 03:04 PM   #35
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Posts: 652
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisPlatt Quote
An excellent point. Never underestimate the power of the latent image!

Chris
Yes Indeed. Great point!
10-20-2009, 03:23 PM   #36
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Posts: 652
QuoteOriginally posted by Nando Quote
Ektar 100 is fabulous. I tested a roll a few months ago. I scanned the film with my Coolscan V and found it to be the finest grained film negative film I've ever seen. However, I do have some Adox CMS 20 in the freezer that I've yet to use.

I'm currently working through my stock of Fuji Reala but once it runs out, I intend on making Ektar 100 my regular lower-speed colour film.
Agree. It's something special and worthy of the excitement it's generated, but like all things has some flaws too. In my limited experience with it, I've noticed that shadows and underexposeure go blue very quick, even indoors with no sky to reflect. If underexposed the reds can block up and loose all detail. Outside of that the colors have been very accurate and similar to my K10d, just more saturated. The grain is very tight and when scanned at 2540-3175 SPI; really only visible in smooth or out of focus areas. Skin tones are really good for such a saturated film, and in the right light, have that soft warm filmy glow like all the kodak negative films I've used. I haven't shot any Reala to compare, but do have 5 rolls arriving tomorrow. I don't typically like Fuji negative films and usually find them a bit biased towards the cool colors, but I've heard nothing but good things about Reala and wanted to give it a fair shake. From what I've seen greens are typical fuji(i.e. awesome) and blue skys are very vibrant, something I love about Provia.

I used to have a Coolscan V too. It's a great scanner for sure! Sadly I sold mine for something that scans larger formats, and still miss it sometimes for 35mm.
10-20-2009, 03:59 PM   #37
Veteran Member
KJon's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Connecticut, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 542
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
I've been shooting exclusively film since June, and I'm getting tired of it - the cost, the problems, the screw ups, the grain, the poor color, the limiations. I wish someone would invent a digital camera soon.
Nesster, I've been shooting film exclusively since May (with a few "cheats" here and there, i.e. a few digital photos). I still can't get enough of it. Granted I wasn't much of a film shooter back in the day, so I never really wrapped my head around it or photography in general until digital came along. Had I only applied myself to it when I was younger, I might have gotten it out of my system. Now I'm a confirmed film addict. The lousy shots only make the good ones look better and all the more special because of the pain involved in taking the bad ones .

In light of the quality of the film shots you've been posting, I sincerely hope your tongue is planted firmly in your cheek in making the comments above. As far as the costs go, what the hell, it's only money <g>.

Best,
Kevin
10-20-2009, 04:54 PM   #38
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
LOL, yea, partly in cheek, the tongue. But partly serious too, as many of the foibles of film are coming back... and add to that the foibles of age. I photographed a lot in high school and college - took courses and everything, I got pretty good in the dark room and all. But wife won't let me have a full set up, so all I can do now is develop.

For the first time I've also gone back - before light meters, before focus aids, and before coupled shutter arming. I can appreciate where each step of automation solves a problem... yet when you add them all up, I've stopped at the manual metering SLR. Never really got the hang of applying exposure comp.

10-20-2009, 05:42 PM   #39
Veteran Member
KJon's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Connecticut, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 542
This is the only shot I've had any luck with exposure comp. It was strongly back lit and I'm insufferably pleased that I got anything out of it at all...

ME Super, M50 f2, Portra 160VC



Still looking forward to the experience of shooting my SV, but I still haven't found the time (or the funds) to send it out for much needed service.

Speaking of funds, I found a smoking deal on CraigsList on four lenses and two camera bodies that I couldn't pass up; I'll enumerate the details in the "show us your film shots" thread, but the stuff that people are practically giving away is amazing. It takes some of the sting out of processing costs, but it does tend to nip at the wallet rather than taking a huge bite the way new gear does.

I'll post some shots from my "finds" after the film has been processed (and I find out if stuff actually works ).

Best to all,
Kevin
10-20-2009, 06:58 PM   #40
Veteran Member
raymeedc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 951
I shoot alternately with DSLRs (almost exclusively with prime, manual lenses), film SLRs & a variety of rangefinder & zone focusing, meterless 50s cameras. My approach with all of them is basically the same..... a CDS powered Gossen Luna Pro, recalibrated to be used with modern 1.5 volt batteries, keeping in mind the time-honored sunny 16 rules, sometimes supplemented with a little histogram help when using a DSLR, & manual focusing, strictly hyperfocal guesstimating with my zone focusing models, of course, keeping these basic DOF rules in the back of my mind even when focusing with my DSLRs. Consequently, switching from one extreme type of camera to another is an effortless transition for me. Shooting semi-regularly with cameras possessing no focusing or metering aids keeps me disciplined & unwilling to rely on some of the crutches too easily available with today's auto-everything machines. Making my own decisions about each shot, whether it turns out rightly or wrongly, is also more enjoyable for me, without which factor I would not be a photographer.
10-20-2009, 07:17 PM   #41
Veteran Member
lbenac's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Burnaby, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,313
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisPlatt Quote
Same here.

Chris
And here. A larger DR at higher ISO would not hurt either.

Luc
10-21-2009, 02:58 AM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,713
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nando Quote
I find that Reala is more consistent when it comes to colour and deals with changing lighting conditions better. I find that Ektar exhibits very strong reds indoors and strong cyans/greens outdoors. I find that I must spend more time adjusting colour in the post-processing with the Ektar but despite this, good high-resolution scans are gorgeous. The Ektar has finer grain but a well-scanned 35mm frame from Reala is certainly good enough for a very big print. If you are getting prints done at a lab, I'd DEFINITELY go with the Reala as they'll have an easier time handling it. However, if you are planning on scanning the negatives onto your computer yourself, go with the Ektar. I take that Kodak designed Ektar with scanning in mind.

I've learned that choosing a good lab is very important. I've seen noticeable differences in the film grain from one lab to another. Its important to choose a lab that always uses fresh chemicals and that replaces or replenishes chemicals properly. Luckily, I have a good lab in my small town. I suspect that many labs are now using chemicals longer than they should.
Thanks Nando,
I finished off the roll of Velvia, and slid in a roll of Ektar. I'll probably try the Reala next.

Although I think I'm the only one who's gotten Ektar developed in the lab I work in I've been very pleased with the results.
Here's 2 examples, no edits of any kind to either pic... other than re-sized.




If Reala gives me better results I'll be a very happy camper

Your probably right about some labs using their chemicals longer than they should. Them even just taking the time to clean the filters can make a HUGE difference. Which only takes about 15 minutes
10-21-2009, 02:11 PM   #43
Senior Member
ramair455's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Okc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 284
Guys be careful about about using "quick labs" for your C41 processing. Development times for film really effects grain. The faster/hotter the chemistry, the grainer your film will be. Quick labs will crank up the temperature to decrease development time, so thay can have "prints ready in 30 minutes"

Go to pro labs for your C41
10-21-2009, 04:01 PM   #44
Veteran Member
lurchlarson's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oregon, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 683
I like my ME Super a lot but I just can't relax and enjoy shooting like I can with my digital. For some reason every time I take a picture I keep thinking "there goes 25 cents, this had better turn out".
10-21-2009, 05:20 PM   #45
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by little laker Quote
I was just doing a google search, Reala vs Ektar.... wondering what film I should pack along tomorrow (I have 34 exposures left on a roll of Velvia so it's probably good for the day)
I really don't know what roll to bring along., to capture the autumn colours.
Since I've never shot a roll of Reala I don't know what to expect from it, and I don't want to take a chance with winter approaching so fast

I do have the Sigma packed along, and if the conditions are right might do a small digital vs film shootout.

Of course, I'm only an "amateur's amateur", however I have been amazed by the results possible using plain old Kodak Ultramax 400 or Fujicolor Superia 400, but what would I know?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
computer, couple, day, film, photographs, results, roll, sigma, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why is film still better than digital? krypticide Photographic Technique 116 11-06-2010 07:56 AM
Nature My first bug shots since film days charliezap Post Your Photos! 3 06-14-2010 02:04 PM
Film to digital octavmandru Pentax Film SLR Discussion 9 04-13-2010 02:00 PM
Film vs Digital dylansalt Photographic Technique 23 06-30-2008 08:42 AM
sunrise (3 pix, from my film days) khardur Post Your Photos! 2 05-13-2007 02:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:48 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top