|
drat I had no idea people were that into it. Although, the one I posted has a more rustic vibe to it.
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 08:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:50 |
|
|
Had a go at some multiple exposures on the Bronica today. Any tips on these or is it just a piss and poo poo gimmick? Grey Day by s d photo, on Flickr Beach Double by s d photo, on Flickr Trees/Clouds Double Exposure by s d photo, on Flickr Trees/Bricks Double Exposure by s d photo, on FlickrBonus Pedro photo because I needed to rip through the last few frames before developing   Pedro 150mm Zenzanon Portrait by s d photo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 10:33
|
|
|
Finally got to shoot a plate or two with the new homebuilt 8x10. The plate is very over exposed as I was shooting as the light was disappearing and trying to get some detail in the vines (but got a little too much "detail"). Grapes by mr_student, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:12x16? How quaint. Is that Clifford Ross? gently caress that guy.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
 Clementi West, 2014 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Is that Clifford Ross? gently caress that guy. It's Keith Canham.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:
This kicks rear end for pretty much every reason.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:It's Keith Canham. Standing next to a Canham 20x24.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
Behold, super-lovely LF. Bench by rstop bstop, on Flickr Actually pretty happy I got a shot at all. Had to boost the contrast a lot in post -- I know Rodinal leads to a flat negative, but I was shooting with a red filter, so expected more contrast in the sky. I think next time I won't compensate as much for the filter, and develop a bit longer? (I did a 1:100 semi-stand for an hour.) [edit: also, the right-hand side -- I'm thinking the fading there must have happened during development, as it's on the wrong side for a light leak. Not entirely sure how it could have happened, though. rohan fucked around with this message at 12:38 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
Question for the Pentax 6x7 users here. I recently acquired one and it have been looking for a wider lens. Right now I have the 105mm, is the 55mm any good? Also is a teleconverter worth buying?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Question for the Pentax 6x7 users here. I recently acquired one and it have been looking for a wider lens. Right now I have the 105mm, is the 55mm any good? Also is a teleconverter worth buying? There's 3 different versions of the 55. The f/3.5 is the least sharp variant, and it's a little prone to flare, but it's still pretty decent. The big downside is that it uses big old 100mm filters. I would hold out for one of the f/4 versions. The P6x7 version is very good, the P67 is top-notch. The 75mm is also very good but the 55mm will be noticeably wider than the 75mm when compared to the 105mm. Obviously it's up to you, but teleconverters generally aren't a great idea. They all cost light - 1.4x costs 1 stop, 2x costs 2 stops. Most of them are cheap junk and have a pretty serious impact on image quality. That means that the 105/2.4 will be like a 200mm f/5.0 or something (if you shoot it wide open) while you could just go out and get a P67 200/4 for the same money. Doesn't make sense to me. The same for wide angle lenses - you end up with a normal focal length, when you already own normal lenses. It does make sense on supertele lenses though - if you own one of the big Takumars, or the EDIF lenses, so that you are getting some appreciable reach and getting a focal length that would be unavailable or very expensive, go hog wild. The grey Pentax TCs are probably the only ones worth considering.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Question for the Pentax 6x7 users here. I recently acquired one and it have been looking for a wider lens. Right now I have the 105mm, is the 55mm any good? Also is a teleconverter worth buying? Pentax made 3 versions of the 55mm for the 6x7/67. According to the reviews among Pentaxforums users, the later two f/4 lenses are better than the first f/3.5 Takumar, but they all should be excellent performers. The only practical argument I can see against the f/3.5 lens is that it takes a 100mm filter vs the 77mm threads on the later versions. As for a teleconverter, what would you be converting? Even with a 2x converter, the 105mm just becomes a 210 that's 2 stops slower. You may as well get an actual 200mm lens since they're not that much more expensive than a TC. e:f,b
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
 _DSC6854 by Stingray of Doom, on FlickrI found Mamiya Universal quite a travel friendly camera, as long as you use small lenses on it.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
I've been jonesing for a Mamiya 6/7 for a while now, but don't feel inclined to drop $700+ on a camera body. What are some of the more affordable 6x6 SLR options? Bronicas seem decent. I saw several on craigslist for around $400 or so. Are there any specific models to avoid?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
dog nougat posted:I've been jonesing for a Mamiya 6/7 for a while now, but don't feel inclined to drop $700+ on a camera body. What are some of the more affordable 6x6 SLR options? Bronicas seem decent. I saw several on craigslist for around $400 or so. Are there any specific models to avoid? SLRs? Hasselblad is the biggest one, Bronica SQ is also pretty big. There's also the Pentacon Six, the Kowa Six, and the Russian knockoffs of the P6 and the Hasselblad, the Kiev 6C and Kiev 88. There's also some Rollei SLRs like the 6006 and a few more Pentacon Six variants like the Norita 66. The Mamiya 6/7 require a lens that's nearly as expensive as the body, too. Either the 6 or the 7 cost roughly the same amount for a basic setup, the 6 body is more expensive since they're beginning to fail and parts are no longer available but the lens is cheaper, so overall it's wash. It's a lot of money, but they're the undisputed top of the line. Hasselblads are a bit cheaper to get into initially, putting pieces together on KEH I'm coming up with about $700. However once you go past the basic setup, additional lenses are just as expensive as the Mamiya 7 so overall the long-term value proposition isn't any better. Overall I'd think really seriously about the SQ or a Pentacon Six, they're affordable and have good parts availability. The Hasselblads do too, but they're pretty expensive too. You should probably stay away from the Russian models unless you like tinkering, get a real P6 if you want that mount. And the other models like the Kowas may run into parts and service issues, if things break getting them fixed may be a little challenging. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:08 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Also, if you're not married to 6x6, you can get into a Pentax 67 system all day long for under $500.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:Also, if you're not married to 6x6, you can get into a Pentax 67 system all day long for under $500. Yes, seriously, the P67 system is an amazing value for the money. It has some limitations, like slow flash sync and being huge and heavy, but the optics are great, service is available, and it's cheap. Any given lens is probably less than half of the Hasselblad equivalent. Crop the corners of that 6x7 frame off and presto, you have a square again! And if you crop the square to rectangular to print anyway, you get much more negative space. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:15 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
I'm kinda married to the idea of 6x6. I love them square photos. I know I can crop, but I want those extra exposures. I found this SQ http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/pho/4490350936.html Unfortunately there's no pictures, but I'll ask for them. It seems like a decent deal, unless the camera's beat to poo poo, any reason I should avoid it? There's also this Etrs kit for a bit more. http://sfbay.craigslist.org/scz/pho/4490655012.html Edit: according to camerapedia, the etrs is 4.5 x 6 bummer. dog nougat fucked around with this message at 20:27 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
If you're worried about losing 2 exposures off a roll (12 on 6x6 to 10 on 6x7), medium/large format is probably not for you. Once you've caught the bug, it's usually a race to see how few exposures you can get from a roll (phrased differently, how big a negative you can get). You're going to be reloading constantly by 35mm/digital standards anyway. Yeah, ETRS is 6x4.5, not square. Also a nice piece of equipment. The SQ is probably the best value for a 6x6 SLR, so if it's not beat up then go for it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
MF/LF is definitely not the place to minmax your film usage
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
I know, I have a Yashica, so I guess I'm used to the 12 exposures, plus I like the default square pictures without having to crop. While I'm never going to give up my TLR, I'd really like to move onto a MF SLR. Really it's just a hobby/for entertainment purposes, if I wasn't interested in watching my money disappear I wouldn't shoot film anyway. Edit: Really I'd like something that handles like my F3, but still takes square pictures. I imagine a Mamiya 6/7 would be a dream to shoot with but as I said, I'm not prepared to throw that much down on what is basically a hobby/for fun. dog nougat fucked around with this message at 22:03 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Just go buy a Fuji GW690 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Ok, 6x9 I can get behind, just because it's weird. The prices seem pretty reasonable after a quick ebay glance.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
dog nougat posted:Edit: Really I'd like something that handles like my F3, but still takes square pictures. I imagine a Mamiya 6/7 would be a dream to shoot with but as I said, I'm not prepared to throw that much down on what is basically a hobby/for fun. not square but the answer is obvious. pentax 67 kit lens (105mm f/2.4) is pretty comparable to a kit 50mm...   size inverse.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Yeah I'm starting to think that's a good route to go. Plus it looks like some sorta weird oversized clown camera. There was some gigantic Polaroid MF at the camera shop here that looked even more ridiculous, but incredibly unwieldy. Unfortunately there aren't any on craislist in the bay area, I'd really like to get my hands on the camera before I go throwing money at it. dog nougat fucked around with this message at 22:32 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
I've never really investigated any film gear other than 35mm, but for some reason I assumed that there were no medium format SLR bodies. Now I have a new (attainable) dream camera I want to save up for. But I should probably get better at photography first. It's really bigger than it looks in that photo 
BANME.sh fucked around with this message at 23:59 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Just get a Mamiya 6. They're so sexy to shoot with.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I've never really investigated any film gear other than 35mm, but for some reason I assumed that there were no medium format SLR bodies. Now I have a new (attainable) dream camera I want to save up for. But I should probably get better at photography first. I found my mate's p67 far easier to shoot with than my Bronica SQ - it's huge, but between the gangsta wood grip and how well balanced it is, it's actually not that difficult to use. That said, none of them are even close to the design or feel of a Mami 6/7 (or my baby, the stupidly priced gf670 that I managed to score on the cheap)
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
dog nougat posted:I've been jonesing for a Mamiya 6/7 for a while now, but don't feel inclined to drop $700+ on a camera body. What are some of the more affordable 6x6 SLR options? Bronicas seem decent. I saw several on craigslist for around $400 or so. Are there any specific models to avoid? Let me attack this problem from another angle: What is it about the Yashica that dissatisfies you? Because, whatever that is a rangefinder may be worse for it. If you're chasing image quality, then yeah a Yashica isn't top of the line, but are you sure you're not scanner or film limited first and foremost? Personally, I have all three types, and when composing I prefer ground glass view over everything else. It's by far the easiest and most consistent to visualize. SLR (assuming pentaprism) is OK too, with rangefinder style composing being my least favorite (and most error prone) way to compose. If you want straight verticals and horizon lines that align, it's not impossible, but more difficult on a rangefinder - in my experience. Rangefinders and SLRs like the P67 offer quicker handling, comparatively; 35mm shooters still run circles around me and I've been doing this for years. Yeah the Mamiya 6 is expensive, it's a nice camera with some very nice lenses, but it's also electronic. Which means if the board or a component on it fries you're stuck with a $700 paperweight. I'd only buy if I got an amazing deal on one. That said I wouldn't buy a Mamiya 6 in the first place, as IMHO there's way more and better options for 6x6. (Rolleiflex or Cord, Minolta Autocord, Hasselblad, Bronica, Mamiya Six (The folder), Pentacon Six, etc etc...) Another thing about the Mamiyas 6/7 is the meter. It's nice to have but also covers a tiny spot that is not always in the same position as the parallax lines and RF spot move. It's good for some general guidance - and not much else. Thinking is required. Also, re: parallax: at infinity you cover about 80% of the frame only, so expect people's heads, tops of fences etc in your composition until you learn to mentally compensate. (The Fuji 690 Avoids this by also shrinking and growing the frame-lines as appropriate, neat.) VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 02:24 on May 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
I first bought a Seagull (cheap Chinese 6x6 TLR) and didn't like shooting with it at all. Didn't like the downward viewing, the boxy form factor made it harder to transport IMO, found focusing to be a hassle using the tiny little magnifying glass over the glass. I bit the bullet and bought a Mamiya 6 and a 75mm lens and absolutely love it. I do enjoy rangefinders though so I think I was predisposed to liking it. I love that the lens collapses into the body for more compact storage/travel and I have found the meter to be perfectly acceptable. I shoot mostly ~*~street~*~ and travel photography with it so I'm not too worried about straight lines in architecture for example. I rarely use it on a tripod. I really like how smooth the corners, edges, and dials are; they never stick on my clothes when I bring it up to my eye to shoot while on a neck/shoulder strap. I do sometimes feel like I'm playing with fire w.r.t. the lack of spare parts available but I take pretty good care of it and it has been working flawlessly since I got it BGN of KEH. Not saying it's the camera for you, just my two cents.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
I just wanna add that I loving love my Pentax 67. I would definitely recommend it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
If you like 6x6 you owe it to yourself to look at a Hasselblad in person. The 500C/M is the smoothest and most comfortable camera I have ever owned.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:If you like 6x6 you owe it to yourself to look at a Hasselblad in person. The 500C/M is the smoothest and most comfortable camera I have ever owned.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I've never really investigated any film gear other than 35mm, but for some reason I assumed that there were no medium format SLR bodies. Now I have a new (attainable) dream camera I want to save up for. But I should probably get better at photography first. Just so you know, it's pretty hard to use as you would use a 35mm SLR. It's really freaking big, and it's really freaking heavy. The pentaprism is actually one of the reasons it's so heavy. Also, the light meter is fairly difficult to use. My shots started getting better after I stopped using the prism's meter, and using an external light meter. Also, you're only getting ~10 shots a roll, and those shots are costing you ~50 cents each, just in terms of film cost. Swapping rolls also requires moving a spindle from one side to the other, so it's a more intensive process than swapping in new 35mm. Because of the weight, the light meter, and the cost, I've found myself being much more choosey about which shots I'm taking. Consequently, I've mostly ditched the prism and have been using the waist level viewfinder, and I find I'm much happier. Though, the image is reversed, so thats a whole different pain in the rear end, but still. Awkward Davies fucked around with this message at 15:09 on May 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
I'm considering a Mamiya RB67. How does this sound? Mamiya RB67 Pro-S with waistlevel Mamiya 120 Pro-S back Mamiya 50mm f4.5C Anything else I'd need (aside from neck and back surgery)?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:I'm considering a Mamiya RB67. How does this sound? Nope, that's all you need for a working system. The 50 is a good lens. It's very wide on 6x7 (24-25mm equivalent in 35mm) and I'd find it too wide to be my only lens, but RB lenses are so cheap that it shouldn't be a problem if you want to get something like a 90 or 110mm later.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
So for the Pentax 6x7 using a waist level finder makes it possible to use as a walk around camera? Right now I've been using a tripod everywhere I go with mine and lightening the load would be nice.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:So for the Pentax 6x7 using a waist level finder makes it possible to use as a walk around camera? Right now I've been using a tripod everywhere I go with mine and lightening the load would be nice. Or you can just man up and shoot it handheld, it's really no big deal. Get a big wide camera strap and the grip and get good shooting technique. I shoot my P67 handheld all the time
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:So for the Pentax 6x7 using a waist level finder makes it possible to use as a walk around camera? Right now I've been using a tripod everywhere I go with mine and lightening the load would be nice. With a little bit of cardboard and gaffer tape you can find out for yourself. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:50 |
|
|
Whelp. This thread has convinced me I need a 67. It'd be nice to get my hands on one before I before I throw my bux down, just to see how
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 21:26
|
|