|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
10-08-2021, 10:15 PM
|
| |
P67 & 67 200/4, shooting T-max 400:
Phil.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
04-19-2021, 05:54 AM
|
| |
Norita 66 • Noritar 1:2 80mm
FujiFilm Neopan Acros II developed in Caffenol CL 60min stand @ 20°C
Scanned with Plustek OpticFilm 120 at 2400dpi with Silverfast AI Studio 9
Clausen • Luxembourg
Caffenol CL
500 ml Filtered Water
8gr Anhydrous Washing Soda
5gr Vitamin C
0.5gr KBr
20gr Instant coffee ("Cora")
60 sec. slow agitations then let stand for 59 minutes
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
04-13-2021, 08:48 AM
|
| |
Nikon F4, 28-70D, Tri-X, DF96 Monobath
 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
04-12-2021, 08:27 AM
|
| |
Nikon F4, 28-70 D, TriX, DF96 Monobath
 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
04-01-2021, 09:34 PM
|
| |
Okay, I've been using EI 6 for overcast days, EI 12 partly sunny and EI 25 for summer sun using an R72 filter as well.
Rollei IR, EI 12, Rodinal 1+25
Deep In Thought by tuco, on Flickr
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
12-07-2020, 02:39 AM
|
| |
A disclaimed to begin. I am by no means a rangefinder fanboy. The M2 is the only serious RF in my kit (I also have a fixed-lens Olympus but that's a different thing), alongside far to many SLRs and a couple of TLRs. I'd fairly 'agnostic' with these things.
Yes and no. As Eric and Huss have pointed out, all rangefinders are not equal when it comes to focussing. Eg. my M2 is very, very different to my 35RD. Personally, I find it easier to focus with a *good* rangefinder than an SLR in most situations (assuming a lens wider than 50mm). I find this especially true in poor light.
But yes, for street I'm usually either zone focussing or (as I did for the shot above) pre-focussing.
I agree and politely disagree :)
So to answer the original question and elaborate!
I think good RF's work well for this kind of shooting for a few main reasons.
- They're very, very quiet, and it's rare for people in a street scene to hear the *schnick*. The same cannot be said for my MX or F2.
- They work much better than SLR's for zone focussing. The reason being that everything in the viewfinder is in focus, so you can set the lens to where-ever, and the viewfinder is still crisp and sharp. Do the same with an SLR and the viewfinder shows whatever is 'in focus' from the mounted lens at max aperture, with everything else out of focus.
- The top left positioning of the viewfinder lends itself to shooting with both eyes open (or more to the point with the photograph above, *waiting* with both eyes open).
- The fact that the viewfinder isn't 'through the lens' means that you can see beyond the frame. This is fantastic for timing dynamic shots like the one I shared.
---------- Post added 12-07-20 at 08:43 PM ----------
A very cold day at Kitchen Hut | Tasmania
Hasselblad SWC/M (38mm Biogon) and HP5+
 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-11-2020, 05:17 AM
|
| |
Dolerite columns in the mist | Cradle Mountain, Tasmania
Nikon F2, Nikkor-S 50/f1.4 and Tmax400
 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
05-07-2020, 08:44 PM
|
| |
A few masks that I've sewn with my trusty Singer 301.
Canon EOS 30 w/ EF 50mm f/1.8 II on Delta 100 and processed in SP-110EC
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
06-12-2019, 11:45 AM
|
| |
Thanks for the reply. Again, great photos. I particularly like the first shot of the elephant and the sunset shot. Wonderful!
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-11-2019, 06:46 AM
|
| |
A small aside: Isn't it interesting that the negative image appears as positive when viewed against a dark background?
This was never suggested to me and I stumbled on it quite by accident.
I was amazed when I first discovered this effect. I almost fell over! :eek:
Chris
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-11-2019, 09:09 AM
|
| |
Usually when I see negatives photographed, it is in ambient light, not backlit, so its a little disorienting to tell with your photos, but overall the negatives look thin to me. Especially when you look at the first image above, but look at the second image on the negative. The fact that your hand behind the image is more visible than the image film makes it seem very thin. That could be a trick the backlighting is playing, but I think it is pretty rare that my negatives are that transparent.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-11-2019, 09:25 AM
|
| |
The scan's are flat that's for sure. Not enough contrast.
When I see a "positive" in my negative, it's an indication of a little under exposed/developed side side of things too. Looking at the negative on a light box with a loupe is a good start. In terms of density, blacks go no deeper than the film's base density. So how much of your negative has areas that are at or near the film's base density is something to look for ( eg the guys hair back of face). That would be an indication of exposure. If, say, you wanted more detail in those areas, you could conclude not enough exposure (shadows were placed too low) assuming the development time is good. And next look at the highlights. Can you see detail in that area. A good development time will place your highlights in recordable range assuming good exposure.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-11-2019, 09:39 AM
|
| |
The negative looks a little thin to me, too, but that doesn’t mean the scan isn’t also less than awesome...
I suspect issues with the thin neg were compounded with an imperfect scan...
-Eric
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-13-2019, 04:51 AM
|
| |
Your midtones are great, but between the white collar and the shadowed hair that's quite a large dynamic range to fit on a negative.
A one to two stop "pull" might have helped but that could be difficult if you aren't doing the processing. A reflector to the left would help
for next time.
Nice bracken shot!
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-08-2019, 09:43 AM
|
| |
the automated scanning systems that labs use try really hard to normalize the exposure, and on an underexposed negative can impart the flat look narrow dynamic range that these images have. When you get the negatives back, they will probably look pretty thin. Whether that under exposure or under development, I'm not knowledgable enough to answer. You may have to run some more rolls to find out.
These scans are pretty easily rescued with photoshop or similar with the curves tool. I find most of my home scans need a new black point and new white point set, which is all I did here.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
01-04-2019, 10:48 AM
|
| |
IF the screen is misaligned then yes, but it could be the lenses as well. Before jumping to conclusions, I would run a test roll with both lenses at infinity and take good notes with shots using the lens on the infinity mark and at what your eye thru the finder appears to be infinity. Shoot with the apertures wide open. Also save a couple shots for a wall or focus chart test at 5 and 10 feet using the OVF for focusing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-19-2018, 11:58 AM
|
| |
According to the 67II sales manual, all 4 screens, including the BA-61 were multi coated to improve finder brightness over the older models,
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
11-22-2018, 09:47 PM
|
| |
One of my all-time favorite lenses.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
11-07-2018, 09:56 PM
|
| |
This is a good visual reference of the Canon, Minolta, Nikon and Pentax lineup in chronological order -> Canon, Minolta, Nikon & Pentax
---------- Post added 11-08-18 at 12:04 AM ----------
Probably because the first Canon SLR - the Canonflex, was as spectacular a failure as the Nikon F was a success.
My collection of first model SLRs from each brand. I am still hunting for a Minolta SR2.
 |
