|
Santa is strapped posted:How do you find the field of view? You look through the viewfinder 
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
 untitled by PC-P, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Ok so at risk of getting laughed out of here, just how bad are those cameras sold at lomography under the absolute best conditions? Like the Diana F+, which I think has a glass lens. Or any others that do. Let's say you bought professional 120 film and had it scanned professionally, is it still gonna look like poo poo? How does it compare to a 35mm p&s? There is literally no reason to buy a Lomo camera over a 35MM P&S for anything other than stylistic purposes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
I just shot a contrasty sunset scene using Astia since that's what was in the camera, is it gonna turn out ok?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
I picked up the uber-lens of the RZ system this week, the 110mm f/2.8 W:  I can see why people love this lens. It's the fastest, lightest, and smallest lens available for the RZ67. It makes carrying and hand-holding the camera much less of a pain. It's also wickedly sharp. Hopefully I'll develop some actual film shots with it soon and not just Polaroids.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:I picked up the uber-lens of the RZ system this week, the 110mm f/2.8 W: I love my RB system and since I don't really give a poo poo about the weight my only regret about buying into it is the lack of fast lenses like this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:I love my RB system and since I don't really give a poo poo about the weight my only regret about buying into it is the lack of fast lenses like this. Aside from the 110/2.8, which is only 2/3 stop faster, all of the RZ lenses are the same maximum apertures as their RB equivalents.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
I'm having some issues with my Bronica SQ, which I bought some time ago and haven't had time to play around with. It seems the film advance lever cranks too far. Once fully cocked, the shutter inside the lens has closed about a centimetre, and you can't remove the lens, which you're supposed to be able to do only if the shutter is cocked. But if I stop winding about 1/8 of a turn before it clicks into place, then the shutter is fully open and I can remove the lens but I can't actually fire the shutter, if that makes sense. It's just a vanilla SQ body, battery is fresh, lens is Zebzanon-PS 135mm f/4.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
lading 8x10 is easy peasy. especially with the film tent. why didnt i get that thing sooner holy poo poo. Film holders loaded up and hoping the rain clears up for a day of shooting tomorrow. Anyway, My friend has this RB67 that I convinced him to buy, all the shots that came out have this, what I'm assuming, is a light leak... is that in the back or is it in the camera? Is there a little repair kit you can get for the mamiya backs like the hassys? It was like a 10 minute job on the hassy. One some of the pics the 'leak' is nowhere near as bad as the others, some it's non-existent. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
That looks like the result of bad seals/flocking/whatever around the dark slide slot on the back. I've seen light seal kits out there for the RB67. I doubt it's a more difficult job than it is on the Hasselblad. Given the shape of the leak and the inconsistency of its appearance, it would make sense if it was the dark slide slot, since a light source would have to hit it at just the right angle to cause the fogging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:That looks like the result of bad seals/flocking/whatever around the dark slide slot on the back. I've seen light seal kits out there for the RB67. I doubt it's a more difficult job than it is on the Hasselblad. Given the shape of the leak and the inconsistency of its appearance, it would make sense if it was the dark slide slot, since a light source would have to hit it at just the right angle to cause the fogging. I would have thought that kind of leak would be more horizontal across the frame seeing as it would be coming from the side of the camera? Would it be a leak from the top of the camera/film back seeing as some of them it's more faded at the bottom and gets less faded towards the top of the frame? I'll post another example of what i mean when i get home.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 12:03
|
|
|
Upon further research, it's probably not the dark slide slot, but there are a lot of foam seals in the RB67 Pro and Pro-S backs, and any number of them could be going bad. Your friend should just get it re-sealed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
I'm looking at getting back in to larger formats (ideally 4x5) portraits for university next year. I've had a fair bit of play around with this before but anyone had a go with b/w reversal processing sheet film at this size? Seen a few examples/read a few processes around the way, but just curious if anyone's got first hand experience? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
After two unsuccessful trips to the Post Office I have contacted FPI-Prostar to file a claim. I have no idea why someone would steal flocking material. I doubt it will result in anything, but I figured I might as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
 img058 by Stingray of Doom, on FlickrShot from a moving boat, so I didn't expect things to turn out this well. Had to crop the bottom of the frame a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Also pick up a gf670 and a 67 and an rz67 And a GW690, they are practically free these days.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Nilson posted:I'm looking at getting back in to larger formats (ideally 4x5) portraits for university next year. I've had a fair bit of play around with this before but anyone had a go with b/w reversal processing sheet film at this size? Seen a few examples/read a few processes around the way, but just curious if anyone's got first hand experience? I've done it a couple of times. Looks amazing, but is quite a pain honestly. You basically get Ilford's guide and try different times until you figure them for the film and exposure rating you want. One thing I did find I liked changing was using paper developer for the second development (I was using Dektol, not Ilford stuff), as the film got more density but not any fogging in my experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
Ilford DD-x really doesn't like Fuji Acros, it was pain in the arse getting these in a somewhat lookable state (taken with the GW690): Mt Macedon by mr_student, on Flickr  Mt Macedon by mr_student, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 12:25
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Ilford DD-x really doesn't like Fuji Acros, it was pain in the arse getting these in a somewhat lookable state (taken with the GW690): Yeah that about mirrors my experience with this combination, the tones looked really odd -- also grainier than usual. But, if you use Fuji's own microfine though you can get tones and grain that are unreal. It's so fine-grained that even my high-res scans can't really "see" the grain at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
Had a birch tree come down on my P67 last night. Tripod is toast, but the camera still shoots like a champ.  There may be some more scratches on the body, but considering how loving brassed the prism was originally who the gently caress knows. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Camera has gained more character.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Yeah that about mirrors my experience with this combination, the tones looked really odd -- also grainier than usual. It seemed to obliterate the mid-tones for some reason, DD-X works well with Fomapan, got some really nice results with DD-X/4x5 Foma 100. I'll probably just go back to Rodinal, but I might pick up some of that microfine developer off Japan Exposures: http://www.japanexposures.com/shop/film-analog/microfine-film-developer.html Can you get it any cheaper than that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Spedman posted:It seemed to obliterate the mid-tones for some reason, DD-X works well with Fomapan, got some really nice results with DD-X/4x5 Foma 100. Yeah, maybe one or two dollars cheaper, but not by much I guess. It's actually cheaper than D76 here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 09:58
|
|
|
Is there anything more satisfying than finally getting some ultra-curled up rolls of 120 onto a spool first time, an easy c-41 development and then quick check of the film..... to see you idiotically never bothered checking the bottles, somehow missed the difference in chem colour and blixed them before developing. Amazing. I've never made a mess of E-6 since it requires a bit of thought, but c-41 I routinely make a mess of every so often. Good thing the dev was at the end of its lifespan anyway. Aside from that idiocy, the weekend did provide an interesting comparison between the Bronica GS-1 and Pentax 67. The Pentax is heavier feeling to carry around, but is much easier to hand-hold: the grip is simply better than the Bronica's speedgrip, and the shape of the camera lends itself to a much more ergonomic spread of weight. That said, I did find the lack of an interchangeable back to be a little irritating, because I'm fairly regularly switching from ISO100 to ISO400 film mid-session to catch variance in lighting conditions. I plan on using the Pentax long-term as a low-light MF solution (due to the faster lens selection), so the likelihood is that at some point it'll just become "Permanently Portra" and the lack of a back will be inconsequential in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
 Yes, Turkey by JaundiceDave, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
 Beo Crescent II by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
The Clit Avoider posted:I plan on using the Pentax long-term as a low-light MF solution (due to the faster lens selection), so the likelihood is that at some point it'll just become "Permanently Portra" and the lack of a back will be inconsequential in that regard. alkanphel posted:
Yeah, see, I loved Portra for a little while and then realized that Alkanphel shot Provia 100F all the time and tried some and my god 6x7 slides are amazing, so basically what I'm saying is now I always carry my heavy-rear end Pentax 67ii on my tripod with a cable release. Portra is still my C41 love though. Also, though it is slower, for long shots Provia has an amazing reciprocity curve.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Yeah, see, I loved Portra for a little while and then realized that Alkanphel shot Provia 100F all the time and tried some and my god 6x7 slides are amazing, so basically what I'm saying is now I always carry my heavy-rear end Pentax 67ii on my tripod with a cable release. Portra is still my C41 love though. Also, though it is slower, for long shots Provia has an amazing reciprocity curve. Portra is pretty easy, even if the curve isn't as linear. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Ok, I've shot a few rolls of 120 on the Fuji GW690 and while practice makes perfect, it's still taking an uncomfortably long time to dial in focus and exposure. Plus the good idea of lugging around the X-E1 to act as a light meter is really help me nail exposure in dynamic scenes, but it makes it really cumbersome to take anywhere. If I want to stay in medium format land, is there anything with an easier focusing system and/or a built-in light meter? Fewer things to do and quicker shooting time would be extremely beneficial for my subject matter. luchadornado fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
A Gossen Digisix is a good investment if you plan on shooting any meterless cameras at all IMO
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
That looks cool.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Ok, I've shot a few rolls of 120 on the Fuji GW690 and while practice makes perfect, it's still taking an uncomfortably long time to dial in focus and exposure. Plus the good idea of lugging around the X-E1 to act as a light meter is really help me nail exposure in dynamic scenes, but it makes it really cumbersome to take anywhere. someone in the thread recommended this to me when i was considering the same dilemma. i opted to get a gf670 instead, but this really seemed like the optimal lightmeter for the system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Geektox posted:I'm having some issues with my Bronica SQ, which I bought some time ago and haven't had time to play around with. Anybody has an idea of what I could do to fix this or who I could send it off to?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Ok, I've shot a few rolls of 120 on the Fuji GW690 and while practice makes perfect, it's still taking an uncomfortably long time to dial in focus and exposure. Plus the good idea of lugging around the X-E1 to act as a light meter is really help me nail exposure in dynamic scenes, but it makes it really cumbersome to take anywhere. If you don't want to do anything, get a GA645 or one of its cousins that can operate with full auto everything, basically a big point and shoot. The downside being its neg is half the size of the 6x9.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Anybody has an idea of what I could do to fix this or who I could send it off to? It appears that Tamron still services Bronica cameras, although that page may be out of date. I would call and ask whether they can do anything for you. KEH also does flat-rate repairs for medium format cameras and lenses. Honestly, if it's a problem with the body itself, you should probably just buy another one that works right. KEH pricing on SQ bodies is less than half of their flat-rate body repair quote and about half as much as getting a "minor repair" from Tamron. TheJeffers fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Anybody has an idea of what I could do to fix this or who I could send it off to? You could email Frank Marshman (camerawiz@msn.com), talked to him a bit when I got my S2A. He sent me a whole list of checks to perform, maybe he will walk you through some troubleshooting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:A Gossen Digisix is a good investment if you plan on shooting any meterless cameras at all IMO Their website gives a 25 degree FOV for the reflectance meter -- in your experience, is this narrow enough to substitute for a spot meter?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:Their website gives a 25 degree FOV for the reflectance meter -- in your experience, is this narrow enough to substitute for a spot meter? Nope you need a viewfinder to effectively use a spotmeter and I wouldn't care for one that was much over one degree.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
Oh god, I made the mistake of looking into the Mamiya 6/7. A few quick questions: 1) The resolving power of the GW690 lens is rated lower than a bunch of other lenses, especially the Mamiya's. In practical use, how does this play out? If I try printing A0 @ 300dpi for example, am I going to say "ugh this GW690 isn't cutting it, should have gotten a Mamiya"? 2) Apparently its impossible to get some parts for the 6.. if I get the 6 am I potentially going to end up with an unfixable camera at some point? 3) A lot of people on other forums have strong opinions on 6 vs 7 vs 7ii. I don't give a poo poo about their opinions, what does Dorkroom think about these three?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
Helicity posted:Oh god, I made the mistake of looking into the Mamiya 6/7. 1) Lol no. Your technique will fail you long before the resolving power of the lens. 2) If you break a part you can't get then yes. 3) Buy all three and sell the two you don't like to some scrublord that doesn't already have a medium format camera.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 15:58
|
|