• Film! Who still uses it?
    2,511 replies, posted
[img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8332/8150735217_a06e680417_c.jpg[/img] pointless photo, but all the other photos on the roll were for some stupid uni brief it's reversal film which is lovely.
Nobody would by chance have a spare negative film adapter compatible for the Coolscan IV, would they? [img]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21P3E6BwbHL._SL500_SL160_.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=MIPS;38307863]Nobody would by chance have a spare negative film adapter compatible for the Coolscan IV, would they? [img]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21P3E6BwbHL._SL500_SL160_.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I do. although postage from australia would be a total bitch
Depends on how much you want for it.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/musicifmath/8169808982/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8068/8169808982_e325deb58c_z.jpg[/img][/url]
i do [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/T23Bv.jpg[/IMG] i have nikon f3 with 55mm f1.2 lens
A few 35mm shots from when my good friend John who i met in America, came to London. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/2vu4U.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/uvkPx.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/MJK2l.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/qt3TU.jpg[/IMG] and another just for kicks, only really works at this resolution. Taken at 1/8th of a second handheld. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/6EuLa.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/550222_190274084443008_1990348745_n.jpg[/IMG] wassup nm jus chillin with a 5 x 4, u?
Can someone suggest a decent film camera under £50 ($75 - $100)
Where abouts are you? if you're in the UK, I'm still selling a few film cameras,that are quite good but I just don't use them anymore.
just go to a pawn shop, thats where i got mine! Carena CX-300 body, a carena 50mm 1.8, a technika 70-210 and a technika 70-300 for £40!!
Does anyone here have a Canonet? I really like the looks of them and would love to know how they are as a camera. Are they quite reliable? Are the lenses nice and sharp?
[QUOTE=HiddenMyst;38446591]Does anyone here have a Canonet? I really like the looks of them and would love to know how they are as a camera. Are they quite reliable? Are the lenses nice and sharp?[/QUOTE] I have a Canonet QL17 GIII in chrome and black, and a Canonet QL25 and Canonet 28. So yeah, i've got some canonets. I was scanning my QL17 GIII Black pictures yesterday, and i must say that i LOVE the way the camera renders images; way more than the Canonet QL25 or 28. From what i've heard, the QL19 GIII (or non GIII small version) should be just as good, but with a 45mm 1.9 lens instead of the 40mm f/1.7 on the QL17 GIII. I'm not home at the moment, but this evening I will upload the pictures I scanned yesterday. You can see what I mean with the rendering thing. I now get why some people compared the QL17 to a Leica CL with 40mm f/2 Summicron; its just THAT good, only without interchangable lenses. In terms of reliability; the QL17 GIII I got through Trogdon gave me some heavily underexposed pictures in 2 whole rolls of 12 shots. It could be that the film i used was heavily expired, but it could also be that the camera wasn't used for a long time, and needed to warm up again. The black QL17's film advance mechanism did some strange trick to me near the end of a 36 exposure roll of Portra 400(it required me to really push the advance lever, and it really didn't feel right), and heavily scratched the last 8 or so pictures, and the last 4 pictures were overlapped; I hope it only does this once as a already have a new roll in it. I never had any problem at all with my Canonet QL25 or 28 though. If you're getting a Canonet, I still would recommend getting a QL17 or QL19 (the later small version of the camera, GIII or not).
Anyone have any experience with a Olympus OM10? I nabbed one on eBay for £20 with a 50mm lens and literally know nothing about it :v: My other camera is an EOS 30
has anyone here used/heard of the [URL="http://www.the-impossible-project.com/"]The Impossible Project[/URL]? I still have a SX-70 somewhere lying around and it would be p cool to shoot with it again
[QUOTE=communistcat;38442689]Where abouts are you? if you're in the UK, I'm still selling a few film cameras,that are quite good but I just don't use them anymore.[/QUOTE] Yes UK.
I've got a Ricoh KR-10 with Rikenon 50mm f2 that I'll sell for £25 including P&P [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/8186340880/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8477/8186340880_1dae8e11dd.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/8186340880/]For Sale Ricoh KR10[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/communistwolf/]CommunistWolf[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/8186336416/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8066/8186336416_68e72d5b56.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/communistwolf/8186336416/]For Sale Ricoh KR10[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/communistwolf/]CommunistWolf[/url], on Flickr Send me a PM if you're after it and we'll sort something out
[QUOTE=tommo120;38450765]Anyone have any experience with a Olympus OM10? I nabbed one on eBay for £20 with a 50mm lens and literally know nothing about it :v: My other camera is an EOS 30[/QUOTE] pretty nice camera if it has no manual adaptor (the thing that you plug into the camera and use to set shutter speeds), then you'll only have aperture priority mode available i had one, but it had a problem with the focus in the viewfinder not correlating to the real focus setting; turned out this was because there was something jammed in the mirror mechanism, which made it not quite return to the 45 degree position. found a few other people on the internet complaining about that, so watch out for focus issues i guess. if it all works correctly, it's a damn nice camera to use,even without a manual adaptor the way aperture priority works on it is cool as well; the meter in the prism only really gives you a guideline for the shutter speed the camera will select. the proper meter used for taking photos is located under the mirror, and measures light reflected off the film during the exposure, so the camera doesn't actually do discrete shutter speeds. [editline]14th November 2012[/editline] has a nice, big viewfinder too
[QUOTE=frag4life;38449405]I have a Canonet QL17 GIII in chrome and black, and a Canonet QL25 and Canonet 28. So yeah, i've got some canonets. I was scanning my QL17 GIII Black pictures yesterday, and i must say that i LOVE the way the camera renders images; way more than the Canonet QL25 or 28. From what i've heard, the QL19 GIII (or non GIII small version) should be just as good, but with a 45mm 1.9 lens instead of the 40mm f/1.7 on the QL17 GIII. I'm not home at the moment, but this evening I will upload the pictures I scanned yesterday. You can see what I mean with the rendering thing. I now get why some people compared the QL17 to a Leica CL with 40mm f/2 Summicron; its just THAT good, only without interchangable lenses. In terms of reliability; the QL17 GIII I got through Trogdon gave me some heavily underexposed pictures in 2 whole rolls of 12 shots. It could be that the film i used was heavily expired, but it could also be that the camera wasn't used for a long time, and needed to warm up again. The black QL17's film advance mechanism did some strange trick to me near the end of a 36 exposure roll of Portra 400(it required me to really push the advance lever, and it really didn't feel right), and heavily scratched the last 8 or so pictures, and the last 4 pictures were overlapped; I hope it only does this once as a already have a new roll in it. I never had any problem at all with my Canonet QL25 or 28 though. If you're getting a Canonet, I still would recommend getting a QL17 or QL19 (the later small version of the camera, GIII or not).[/QUOTE] Wow thanks. That's exactly what I needed to know. I was swaying towards the QL17 anyway because I'm a sucker for bright lenses and the 40mm focal length would feel comfortably like the 20mm I have in m4/3
First "digital enlargement"; film scanned and then processed in the computer. Thoughts? [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/nrobertsphotos/8186986014/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8065/8186986014_c520aef656_b.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/nrobertsphotos/8186986014/]catharsis[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/nrobertsphotos/]n.roberts[/url], on Flickr Shot on an Argoflex E with 100ISO fujifilm, 120 size.
Great shot, love the mountain in the background - rather ominous in contrast to your homely setup in the foreground. Only criticism is that you posted it too big! Shrink that sucka, not all of us run in 1080p native.
Well, those Canonet QL17 GIII pictures I was talking about. Here they are: [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8191909996/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8340/8191909996_f072b2a077_c.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8191909996/]Scan-121113-0006.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8190844903/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8481/8190844903_f1c9b82959_c.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8190844903/]Scan-121113-0013.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8191933314/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8479/8191933314_17d44de8d9_c.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8191933314/]Scan-121113-0015.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8190871157/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8490/8190871157_65b1caf059_c.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8190871157/]Scan-121113-0027.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8191975226/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8203/8191975226_2bde2cc26e_c.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/8191975226/]Scan-121113-0032.jpg[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/leevmeister/]Leevmeister[/url], on Flickr You can check out the rest here: [url]http://www.flickr.com/photos/leevmeister/sets/72157632024092087/with/8191975226/[/url]
This is film, I suppose. "Self Portrait: The Pieces I Put Together" link to big image :[url]http://i.imgur.com/8qcpK.jpg[/url] First time I've ever had a legitimate reason to raise the enlarger up as high as it could go c:
Local shop just got their stock of Kodak Portras. $85 for 5 rolls holy shit.
Looking to invest into a medium format camera. Hoping you guys would have a few ideas as to what I should get. - Relatively cheap. - Preferably SLR/Rangefinder. - Preferably obtainable within U.S boundaries. - If you have any personal experience with said camera, it'd be nice to hear about it.
[QUOTE=Slippery-Q;38536901]Looking to invest into a medium format camera. Hoping you guys would have a few ideas as to what I should get. - Relatively cheap. - Preferably SLR/Rangefinder. - Preferably obtainable within U.S boundaries. - If you have any personal experience with said camera, it'd be nice to hear about it.[/QUOTE] Couple things. If you're trying to avoid a top-viewing system, you're out of luck unless you're interested in spending, well, a lot of money. The cheapest viewfinder medium format camera I'm seeing on eBay right now is running about $700. Now, an old TLR... I picked up an old [URL="http://junkstorecameras.com/images/argoflex.jpg"]Argoflex E[/URL] on eBay for $75. This thing is great. Nothing automatic except the shutter duration, absolutely nothing in the way of a light meter (I bought a [URL="http://ian-partridge.com/weston1.jpg"]Weston Master V[/URL] along with the camera and meter every shot before I take it) and no focus confirmation system, so you either need an external rangefinder or just need to take a guess at the distance to the subject using the distance indicators on the top lens. Or the little pop-up magnifying glass to inspect the ground glass. It takes a size of film spool that isn't made any more, so you need to trawl around old camera stores or eBay to get 620 film spools and spend 20 minutes in a dark room respooling 120 film onto the 620 roll in order for the camera to accept the film. It's hard to get sharp results without a tripod and a shutter release, lest you shake the camera body while releasing the shutter or move the camera while exposing the film. I own a DSLR and a run of the mill SLR from the 80's that I do all my other photography with. It takes less than 5 seconds with either of those to take a decent picture, it takes at least five minutes to take a decent picture with the Argoflex and I love it. It's absolutely fantastic how long it takes to set everything up. tl;dr: Convenience (that comes with a SLR or rangefinder body) can't really be a factor if you're trying to get a cheap medium format camera. You can of course get a DSLR $10,000+ Hasslebad medium format body w/ all the fix'ns of a modern camera, but you can definitely get an old TLR medium format camera, with time take all those nice high res images you've come to know and love from medium format film scans, but you need to sacrifice convenience.
Check Craigslist, they have some nice deals every so often. I've certainly seen mamiya's and blad's for less than I'd ever expect.
[QUOTE=Sirrus;38538610]Couple things. If you're trying to avoid a top-viewing system, you're out of luck unless you're interested in spending, well, a lot of money. The cheapest viewfinder medium format camera I'm seeing on eBay right now is running about $700. [/QUOTE] i guess you could go for a mamiya C series TLR, they have a separate prism attachment which goes over the focusing screen and lets you use it almost like an slr
first development and enlargements [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorybernardjones/8205080060/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8065/8205080060_3df794c454.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorybernardjones/8205078016/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8341/8205078016_c01a3224bd.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorybernardjones/8203990023/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8488/8203990023_dfb577d102.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorybernardjones/8203994737/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8202/8203994737_27ab18da76.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorybernardjones/8205091152/][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8205091152_dd99314f91.jpg[/img][/url]
[QUOTE=Sirrus;38538610]Couple things. If you're trying to avoid a top-viewing system, you're out of luck unless you're interested in spending, well, a lot of money. The cheapest viewfinder medium format camera I'm seeing on eBay right now is running about $700. Now, an old TLR... I picked up an old [URL="http://junkstorecameras.com/images/argoflex.jpg"]Argoflex E[/URL] on eBay for $75. This thing is great. Nothing automatic except the shutter duration, absolutely nothing in the way of a light meter (I bought a [URL="http://ian-partridge.com/weston1.jpg"]Weston Master V[/URL] along with the camera and meter every shot before I take it) and no focus confirmation system, so you either need an external rangefinder or just need to take a guess at the distance to the subject using the distance indicators on the top lens. Or the little pop-up magnifying glass to inspect the ground glass. It takes a size of film spool that isn't made any more, so you need to trawl around old camera stores or eBay to get 620 film spools and spend 20 minutes in a dark room respooling 120 film onto the 620 roll in order for the camera to accept the film. It's hard to get sharp results without a tripod and a shutter release, lest you shake the camera body while releasing the shutter or move the camera while exposing the film. I own a DSLR and a run of the mill SLR from the 80's that I do all my other photography with. It takes less than 5 seconds with either of those to take a decent picture, it takes at least five minutes to take a decent picture with the Argoflex and I love it. It's absolutely fantastic how long it takes to set everything up. tl;dr: Convenience (that comes with a SLR or rangefinder body) can't really be a factor if you're trying to get a cheap medium format camera. You can of course get a DSLR $10,000+ Hasslebad medium format body w/ all the fix'ns of a modern camera, but you can definitely get an old TLR medium format camera, with time take all those nice high res images you've come to know and love from medium format film scans, but you need to sacrifice convenience.[/QUOTE] t[URL="http://compare.ebay.co.uk/like/200847739489?var=lv&ltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar&adtype=pla&crdt=0"]his one's 400$[/URL] [editline]21st November 2012[/editline] [URL="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Asahi-Pentax-67-BODY-with-TTL-METER-PRISM-FINDER-and-neck-strap-/251186247989?pt=UK_Film_Cameras&hash=item3a7bddf935"]this ones 366$[/URL] [editline]21st November 2012[/editline] [URL="http://www.ebay.com/itm/KIEV-6C-TTL-MF-Pentacon-Six-Copy-Russian-Camera-6s-VEGA-12B-Lens-EXC-/200848059115?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item2ec37a2aeb"]this ones has 1 min left but is only 199$[/URL] [editline]21st November 2012[/editline] [url]http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p2047675.m570.l1313&_nkw=pentacon+six&_sacat=0&_from=R40[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.