[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 96 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



the most based film to ever do it edition

old thread: >>3485436
All analog/film photography related questions and general discussion is to take place in this thread.
35mm, 120, medium format, large format, instant, polaroid, instax, C41, E6, B&W, developing, scanning, labs, darkroom etc.
Post photos as often as possible, we want to see that beautiful grainy goodness!

useful links:
http://istillshootfilm.org/beginners-guide-film-photography
https://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php

>posting in /fgt/ doesn't make you gay, unless you're a portrafag

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2014:06:06 09:50:12
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width495
Image Height496
>>
first for Mamiya RB67 is the best MF system
>>
File: wolf 100% crop.png (1.47 MB, 1092x575)
1.47 MB
1.47 MB PNG
Just picked up a Canoscan FS4000US to replace my dying Nikon LS2000. Got it off craigslist for $150 new in box.

Resolution is pretty good compared to the LS2000 or my v550. Pretty happy with it.
>>
Got a Nikkormat FT-2 with a Nikkor-H 50mm f/2 lens for £95 yesterday.

Did I do good?
>>
>>3490239
My story was about how I faced multiple fast-breaking soviet cameras, bought Contax and was happy. I think you might have an inner market in Brazil, we have a huge one in Russia, so you will not need to pay twice the price for shipping. Try it out if it is so, that is how I started. If you will go with the ebay route then I am afraid it could be nothing but an acceptable soviet camera. You may go with almost any Zenit but my personal recommendation will be Kiev-19. I am not a pro so its just an opinion but try to avoid soviets, really.
>>
>>3490334
fuck fuji
Kodak 4 lyf
>>
Anyone tried this film? I've never heard of it until seeing it on that site I took the image from. Pretty good price too.
>>
>bought a roll of Velvia 50 from local getting spot
>23 €
>come home
>PROCESS BEFORE 2019.07

Will have to pay 35 € more to see the damn pictures too.
>>
>>3490344
>first for Mamiya RB67 is the best MF system
Not a great achievement. There aren't many of us who feel that way.
>>
>>3490395
It's Fujicolor 100. It's alright and I would buy it while living in Japan as it was pretty easy to score rolls for <$3. I would not pay a cent more than that though. Seeing people sell it for $10+ a roll in the US is hilarious. It's just some cheap 100iso film that has the graininess of 400 speed stuff. I wouldn't go out of your way to buy some.

>>3490396
>not researching prices of film or developing before going out to buy a roll

If that's what slide costs for you, fuck slide. If you really want to shoot slide, at least develop it yourself.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1200
Image Height800
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
just got a bunch of expired kodak gold 200 from 2011 for $1.37 a piece. supposedly cold stored.
should I expose it at box speed or at something slower? thinking maybe at like 125, just to be on the safe side. I've never shot expired film that old.
>>
File: 024A.jpg (333 KB, 1200x805)
333 KB
333 KB JPG
>>3490462
At box speed. Film used in attached pic is at the very least from 2006, if not older, developed normally last year.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.0.21
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution96 dpi
Vertical Resolution96 dpi
>>
>>3490463
oh sweet, thanks man. gonna burn throught a roll at box speed to see how it comes out.
I was kinda bummed when I saw it was 8 years old and thought I'd have to shot it at something slower. good to hear I can still shot it at 200.
>>
I read that for expired film, you have to shoot it at half the speed for every decade.
I highly doubt there is an exact relationship for film, but quickly applying the rule I came up with the following mathematical expression if you really wish to be exquisite:
current ISO= box speed*(0.5)^(number expired years/10).
For your expired film we have:
box speed= 200
number expired years= 8
So plugging in the data int my equation:
current ISO= 200*(0.5)^(8/10)= 114.86
Approximate to the nearest ISO setting your camera has, which is indeed 125.
But if the result was 111, I would approximate to 100 for example.
>>
>>3490462
Sorry forgot to tag your post.
>>3490475
>>
>>3490475
Absolute bullshit
>>
>>3490475
>>3490476
yea, I heard about the "half speed for every decade" thing but I wasn't quite sure if it applied to color negative film, knowing how forgiving it is within a stop of underexposure, unlike BW and slide film.
that's a neat math expression. I'm saving it just because it seems like the kind of thing that would keep my anxiety at ease a bit when I have to make a decision like this lol
>>
>>3490487
>knowing how forgiving it is within a stop of underexposure
Negative? Forgiving with underexposure?
You might want to think that again mate.
>>
>>3490489
fug, it's the other way around, right? overexposure for color negative. too much underexposure makes it come all mushy noisy when I crank the blacks and shadows up.
>>
>>3490396
Yeah, that's why I shoot digital instead of colour slide. Still got like eight rolls of Agfa something-or-other, rebranded Fuji Sensia IIUC, in the fridge, but I've not got a sous-vide or the 10-roll E6 kit.
>>
>>3490487
you always want to shoot slide near box speed...even if super expired. slide gets washed out looking when it ages. overexposing it will just make it worse
>>
>>3490553
A tangent but I noticed when shooting some Ektachrome 160T which I got cross processed (got a few rolls for free, expired and room temp stored, basically just lomo material now) that it seemed to look better at 100 rather than 160 - I shot a test roll switching between the two speeds. So when cross processing expired slide maybe some slight overexposure might help. You might blow out the highlights somewhat, but the blacks/shadows could look so grainy and bad that I’d rather lose some highlights as a tradeoff.

Note, I did this with one roll only really, and my test was not at all technical.

Expired slide in E6 though, just shoot at box speed. Might be color shifted to hell though even if properly freezer stored, I had some Velvia 50 that was completely pink and awful, while other film I got in the same batch were all fine.
>>
Guys I think I'm retarded I literally just broke a fucking film retriever trying to get film out of a roll I accidentally rewound. How do I fucking use a retriever? I did the thing where I rotate the spindle clockwise and I thought I heard a click but when I pulled out it did not work.
>>
File: 75510012.jpg (913 KB, 1545x1024)
913 KB
913 KB JPG
I also just bought all the stuff to start doing b&w 35mm at home, a few questions: 1) How do I make sure my chems are at 20c for the whole process time? 2) Should I make my dilutions with distilled water, or is tap okay?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelQSS-32_33
Camera SoftwareQSS-32_33 5.00.015 2006.02.15
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1545
Image Height1024
>>
>>3490582
>How do I make sure my chems are at 20c for the whole process time?
Measure temperature before pouring, mix at 19°C. This way when temperature rises during processing, it'll be 19½°C .. 20½°C, which is good enough for most any combination of film and developer. One or two degrees don't make any real difference at development times longer than (say) four minutes. Rodinal in particular is less sensitive to temperature with increasing dilutions, esp. the 1+100 stand dev recipe ignores temperature entirely.
>2) Should I make my dilutions with distilled water, or is tap okay?
Distilled is necessary only if your tap water is particularly ratty. You'd know if it were. There may be issues with hard water (i.e. where it's got calcium in it therefore a slightly sub-7 pH value) but I don't know of that since mine isn't.
>>
File: 1280x960x2.jpg (80 KB, 1280x960)
80 KB
80 KB JPG
>>3490579
Just use tape.
>>
>>3490582
>1) How do I make sure my chems are at 20c for the whole process time?
The temperature doesn't change enough to matter during the process. You only care to bring it to the specified temperature, and then you're good. Also, you only care about developer temperature, wash/stop/fixer are not temperature sensitive. Keep in mind not too have extreme changes though (>10 degrees ºC) because you'll fuck up the emulsion with reticulation (the emulsion layer becomes like a dried raisin from sudden expansion/contraction from the abrupt temp change).

>2) Should I make my dilutions with distilled water, or is tap okay?
Tap water absolutely fine. I mean you'll be washing with tap water anyway, what's the point of using distilled water for the diluted working solution? I use tap water even for the stock solutions, and even for ""picky"" developers like Xtol.

Lastly, a quick tip to regulate temperature, is if you're using 1:1 solutions. Instead of heating/cooling anything, I just measure the temperature of the stock developer solution. If, say, it's 17 °C and I need it at 20, I stat the tap slowly increasing the hot water tap until the water flowing is 23°C.
Then when I mix it with the stock solution half and half, the working solution temperature will be 20 °C.

That way I don't have to wait until the chemicals are heated up.
>>
>>3490579
It's quite easy when you get a hang of it, I have it in muscle memory so I'm not sure I can explain but I'll try. First, you spin until you hear the click, then you push the retrieving tongue in. Then spin the film again a bit, this time "against" the tongue, if you did it correctly you should hear a noise and feel the sprocket holes going over the teeth in the retriever. Then you just use the sliding thing on the retriever to pull the leader out.

>>3490582
Just check that it's at 20c when you start, no need to worry after that. Only the temperature of the developer really matters to be honest, as long as it's in the ballpark (to avoid reticulation for example). I guess water depends on where you live and what the water's like, I've always just used tap water for everything with no issues.
>>
>>3490591
Actually now that I think about it, I think I messed up the order a little. So after you hear the click, then you spin it back a little, and then push the retrieving bit in.
>>
>>3490582
I used to be like you, now I just hand feel tap water to the right temp and wing it. 15 separate sheets and no issues with my dev. BW had insane lattitude, you have to fuck up BAD to get poor negs. My water temps range from 60-80 (when i experimented with temps), times from 4-6 mins.
>>
>>3490607
Shitty phone scan but you get the point. This one was 75 degree well water at 4 mins, Foma 100

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makemotorola
Camera ModelXT1650
Camera SoftwareSnapseed 2.0
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:05:29 20:29:06
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3
Lens Aperturef/1.8
BrightnessUnknown
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeAverage
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length4.51 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3917
Image Height5223
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto Bracket
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationLow
SharpnessSoft
Geodetic Survey DataWGS-84
>>
>>3490344
What makes it better than the RZ67?

And please don't say it's because it's mechanical.
>>
>>3490653
because it's mechanical
>>
is 12$ for developing + scans per roll decent or should I look into developing myself? already interested in doing so just for the fun of it
>>
>>3490655
Thank you.
>>
>>3490656
That price sounds pretty good, assuming the scans are decent. I started scanning myself with a mirrorless+macro lens not only to save money, but it also gave me more control over how the scans came out. I don't care enough to set up my own 6 bath E-6 so I still have the lab develop them.
>>
>>3490658
(it was differentfag considering Pentax67 the best one)
>>
>>3490396

It isn't worth it and you will be incredibly disappointed
>>
>>3490396

Tfw in UK you can get e6 developed for £4

Tfw have a fridge full of 5 pack velvia I bought for £24 a box
>>
>>3490396
Where do you live anon ?
>>
Does going through old negatives give you guys feels?

I'm cataloging around 75 rolls that I've sleeved since 2013 and I get super nostalgic when I look over them.

Just don't get that with digital
>>
>>3490334
Anyone have a link to the cracked version of NegativeLabPro? Had the plugin files located on my desktop instead of the LR plugin folder like a wanker and when I was cleaning my desktop I deleted it thinking it was the crack installer I downloaded months back.
That original link I posted in /fgt/ ages ago 404'd and I can't find any working mirror links, help an anon out.
>>
File: 024.jpg (522 KB, 1200x805)
522 KB
522 KB JPG
>>3490671
Norway

>>3490669
>>3490502
Go shoot it then

>>3490668
no u

>>3490414
Price of the film itself figures, but I should look into doing it myself.
Or just brush the dust of my digital crop frame, lmao
.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.10.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:01:13 16:07:52
>>
>>3490682
Trondheim?
>>
>>3490396
>>3490682
>Will have to pay 35 € more to see the damn pictures too.
JapanPhoto devs E6 for 89Kr.
>>
>>3490683
Oslo. Thinking about moving, any good labs up there?
>>3490684
Well, you make it easy for me then. Tried it yourself? Got E100 for about 160 kr from China, so maybe it's viable to keep doing it.
>>
>>3490687
>any good labs up there?
Well there's JapanPhoto and Elitefoto. Elitefoto is the cheapest option to develop C41 if you scan yourself (69kr), but their scans are garbage. JapanPhoto is better, but you have to get prints for C41, so it's always 179Kr.

>>3490687
>Well, you make it easy for me then. Tried it yourself?
Yeah, twice. They send the film to some other lab so expect 2 weeks+ waiting times. You get the developed slides and okayish scans on a CD. No prints.
>>
>>3490688
thanks fren
>>
>>3490688
>You get the developed slides
Should maybe add that you get them unmounted in strips of 4.
>>
How long before fujifilm discontinue all their film production lines?
>>
>>3490704
I've been buying fuji filmsocks exclusively for a few months now and shilling it to all my friends, because if tney stop making film kodak will instantly double their prices
>>
>>3490704
who the fuck knows. they like dropping unexpected bombs so...
>>
File: image%3A4455.jpg (181 KB, 667x1000)
181 KB
181 KB JPG
This thread needs more photos.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8200i
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2592
Image Height1800
Pixel CompositionUnknown
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:06:01 22:12:24
Image Width2592
Image Height1800
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width667
Image Height1000
>>
File: image%3A4456.jpg (1.29 MB, 2592x1800)
1.29 MB
1.29 MB JPG
both 25mm f/4

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8200i
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r15 (Feb 28 2019) 1fa95fd 28.02.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2592
Image Height1800
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019.06.01 22:08:25
Image Width2592
Image Height1800
>>
>>3490681
here ya go fampai
https://files.catbox.moe/8r6yqe.zip
downloaded it but never actually used it so dunno if it's the same one you want or if it actually works. filename says it's WIN NLP 1.2.1
>>
>>3490720
forgot upload pic
>>
>>3490720
>>3490721
That's not the crack just NLP still haven't found a mirror ):
>>
>>3490724
welp, it's the one that was posted here on /fgt/ from some chinese hosting site some time ago so dunno.
>>
>>3490609
This is a fantastic shot, anon. Where did you take it?
>>
>>3490751
Really? I felt like the river took up too much foreground. 10 miles up the road from Rio Costilla Park, keep left at comanche peak. North New Mexico.
>>
Does point and shoot cameras understand what ISO film being used, or are they designed for using some standard amount?

I can't really figure out how to ask this question better. I'm a beginner.
>>
>>3490788
Film canisters nowadays have a sort of bar code made for film that point and shoots and most modern film cameras can read and change settings to accomodate. These codes contain information like ISO and emulsion type afaik.
>>
>>3490724
There was a crack posted on some russian site. torrents4u.ru or some shit like that.
>>
I want some higher ISO film, specifically for urbex photography. Can someone rattle off some products for me to check out? I'm interested in both color and b&w.
all the best,
newfriend
>>
>>3490801
Colour: Kodak Portra 800, pushed Portra 400
Black and White: Kodak T-MAX P3200, Ilford Delta 3200
>>
>>3490801
Superia Venus is a great film if you can get your hands on it.
>>


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNikon
Camera ModelLS-30
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:06:08 00:45:25
>>


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNikon
Camera ModelLS-30
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:06:08 00:45:07
>>
>>3490830
How do you even get a picture THAT grainy? ISO 3200 film developed in rodinal?
>>
>>3490830
Cute. Scanner grain or ISO 3200?
>>
File: prettybois021.jpg (1.18 MB, 2119x3287)
1.18 MB
1.18 MB JPG
Arista 400 pulled 2 stops.
>>
>>3490832
>>3490833
Kentmere with replenished D76 works quite strangely. Give a good exposure or even a + 2 over and be image is fine (like this >>3490831), but slightly underexpose even half a stop and the gobs of grain show up. Kentmere is a classic emulsion style film, pronounced grain even when pulled 2 stops. I’ll scan the print soon hopefully, the diffuser I have on my enlarger really hides the grain.
>>
>>3490836
Dang. That turned out nice.
>>
File: prettybois017.jpg (865 KB, 2144x3327)
865 KB
865 KB JPG
>>3490853
That's exactly what i thought
Here's an other from the same roll
>>
>>3490334
Why must this hobby be so expensive? Dealing with obsolete technology even. Goddamn
No wonder people shooting with film usually have stylish, fine clothing, and live on well decorated apartments
>>
>>3490883
i dunno man. i shoot ~100 rolls a year and the film + chems cost me no more than $600. $600/yr for a hobby isn't much. hell season passes to the local ski hill used to cost me more than that.

if you're in n. america...there's really no reason for film to be prohibitively expensive.
>>
>>3490883
>>3490922
In fact, shooting 100 rolls of bulk-loaded RPX 400 (or something of equal price) per year and developing in HC-110(b) comes out to less than 400€/year with fixer and storage sheets etc. but some upfront cost for cartridges and a bulk loader, dev gear, scanner, and so forth which pays for itself with use.
>>
>>3490653

You can use the updated RZ67 lenses and backs on it but can't use RB67 stuff on the RZ.
>>
There's a shitload of Nikon f60 (and a few f50) for sell in my local market. I don't know why but there are so many. Is this a good buy ? For around 100$ I could get three cameras and 3-4 lenses.
>>
File: 000286000035.jpg (984 KB, 1545x1024)
984 KB
984 KB JPG
I woke up too early with heartburn from like two full bottles of wine from the previous night and I went out to the beach and used ektar for basically all it's good at:

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera SoftwareEZ Controller 6.50.008 (160222)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1545
Image Height1024
>>
>>3490991
decent cameras, but on standard nikon fashion, they got crippled for being lower end, bottom-line models. on the f60 you can't use non-DX coded film, as it has no way of manually setting the ISO. f50 lets you set the ISO, but it's an older model and the control interface is kinda funky as everything is done with a series of pushbuttons.
kit lenses are pretty decent tho, the 28-80 in both D and G works well as an all around kit lens for cheap.
I'm a nikonfag but for cheaper '90s AF cameras I prefer canon eos cameras.

>For around 100$ I could get three cameras and 3-4 lenses.
better get one higher-end camera, like an F80, N8008 or F90/F90x, instead of 3 low-end cameras.
>>
>>3490956
I don't own the cameras but everything I can find says the opposite is true.
>>
>>3491052

In any event if thats the case, the clear winner is the RB because the RZ does 99% of the same shit and takes the same pictures and people want 2500 for them where as a full RB kit is like 800 bucks if you buy at collectors prices
>>
File: 9224_01.jpg (94 KB, 900x675)
94 KB
94 KB JPG
I'm so fucking pumped just bought a Minolta CLE w/ 28mm for a really good price online can't wait for it to arrive hope it's not busted
>>
>>3491083

CLE is great, but no one will touch the thing because it is kinda rare and parts are in short supply.

I hear it shares a lot in common with the Minolta XD, and the only truely irreplacable part is the circuit board.

I have a CLE w/ grip, tripod, flash, 28mm, 40mm, 90mm, and shoulder bag and love the little thing.

Money is getting tight and I might have to sell it though. Probably gonna be the last body I let go of.
>>
>>3490681
>>3490720
>>3490726
>>3490790
Okay lads I have an update. I remember making a mega link w/ the NLP crack so I went though the /p/ archive found that link and it turns out I uploaded the normal version instead.
Did some more digging on my computer and found the crack!
Here's the link to the working Negative Lab Pro crack.
https://mega.nz/#!V9pwUCrb!Rh_lXoeNK9ukoPsYS6KcVN0ibwUqOm9kWQmYiCX3MJo

I swear to god I'm fucking retarded
>>
>>3491088
I've taken apart and fixed cameras before I'm just hoping the electronics in it will be fine.
Thoughts on the 90mm? Really interested in getting it, I've never really used a lens longer than 50mm so I'm keen to try it out. Also wanna get the CLE Auto Flash.
Mainly excited to have a rangefinder I can use without an external lightmeter or Sunny 16.
>>
>>3491095
The 90mm F4 is ok, it's the same lens as the Leica Elmar-C 90mm F4. You might want to consider getting a Leica 90mm F2.8 though, they are still quite compact and affordable. The Tele-elmarit 90mm f2.8 is a really good match.
Can't beat 90mm minolta prices though, I see them go for as low as 200 euro regularly.
If you want the flash start looking for it right away, it took me months to find one for sale.
>>
>>3491095

The 90mm is nice, I have gotten some great shots with it. But it is also quite hard to use with the rangefinder, especially since I wear glasses.

As for the flash, it can be tough to find. Took me awhile to get my hands on one and the finish on it is messed up. The flash port is the same as Minolta’s other SLRs, so it can use the X-700 flashes too. I think the largest one may block the shutter button however. Avoid third party ones too, they can fry the guts.

And did you get a clean version of the 28mm? Took me forever to find one.
>>
>>3491062
>>a full RB kit is like 800 bucks
You tickets need to stop paying these stupid prices. You're making me pay more for gear. I paid 300 for my Pro-S kit worn the 90 C and a Sekonic meter back in 2011. They seem to be going for around 400 now. But you fuckers paying 800 are the reason I had to pay over 150 for my 150mm SF last year.
>>
>>3491129
>You tickets
And this is why I shouldn't be posting while away from a computer.
>>
>>3491129
>if you pay at collectors prices

Don't think your shitty worn out RB falls into that category bud. Also a single lens doesn't even come close to being a full kit lolololfag

man, just stop posting period if you can't into reading
>>
File: edit-01-08-18#2.png (1.33 MB, 1289x790)
1.33 MB
1.33 MB PNG
>>3491095
>Thoughts on the 90mm?
Lovely lens. Here's a 100% crop on HP5+ in HC-110.
>>
File: edit-009-2019 (3).jpg (261 KB, 694x1000)
261 KB
261 KB JPG
>>3491142
and a shot on Foma 400.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8200i
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2592
Image Height1800
Pixel CompositionUnknown
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:05:25 23:28:53
Image Width2592
Image Height1800
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width694
Image Height1000
>>
File: 1398307546033.png (36 KB, 872x625)
36 KB
36 KB PNG
>>3490687
>>3490683
Probably 90% of the time I've used JapanPhoto (CEWE in Germany) for E-6, there has been some sort of fault or damage to the film. Had them dev my 4x5 Provia from Machu Picchu, and it was full of black spots in one corner of the sheet.

Using CEWE is a gamble. Antonio Stasi in Bergen does it, but is stupid expensive. 140kr per 120 roll and 70kr per 4x5 sheet (minimum 6 sheets).

Will have to do it myself, but the Tetenal E-6 kit from fotoimport.no is 1095kr + 125kr shipping. Fotoimpex.de and Macodirect.de is like 900kr including shipping and customs, but they are no longer allowed to ship chemicals by air.
>>
>multiple norwegians discussing how expensive everything is
Must be sunday on /fgt/! he says, fingering his M7
>>
File: R1-06282-0010.jpg (2.12 MB, 2000x1338)
2.12 MB
2.12 MB JPG
>>3491157
And to think I would make the jump to medium format soon.

Quality wise, Oslo Foto does a great job, though.

>>3491167
The next time you meet one, be sure to ask about it :3

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFujifilm eSystems, Inc.
Camera ModelDigital Link
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:06:09 17:04:49
Comment13. jan 19
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3491062
>wanting to spend 800 instead of 2500
Fucking poorfag
>>
>>3490579
I just tear the canisters apart with my thumb. Works every time. (Although I did cut myself once somehow.)
>>
>>3491157
Hmm, guess there might be more problems with large format, but at least my 2 rolls 35mm and my 1 roll of 120 film turned out pretty well.
>>
File: IMG_20190609_132744-1.jpg (538 KB, 1657x1000)
538 KB
538 KB JPG
Just got a roll back that was completely black, no edge markings on the sprockets at all, would that mean the camera body had a light leak and ruined the film? I don't think it was a development issue, I got another roll back from the same studio shot through a different camera that turned out fine.
The camera was an olympus XA i got for cheap in rough condition, the shutter works fine and the metering is correct, but I did have to DIY some light seals since the originals were completely gone. Did I just do a shit job or what
>>
>>3490653
Because it doesn't use electronics
>>
>>3490883
Film is as expensive as you make it. You can spend less than 100 per year on it including all your kit, stock and dev. Or you can spend 10,000.

The biggest thing you can do to save money is shoot conservatively. Of course if you snap away like you've got a DSLR you're going to run up your bills. But if you work off the idea that you're lucky to get 20 really good photos per year, and you should only trip that shutter when you think you've got a winner, you'll see your costs plummet even if you're shooting the most expensive format possible.

I genuinely think I spend less on 4x5 than most people here do on 35mm.
>>
>>3491273
Was it fresh stock? It would have to be a pretty enormous light leak to make the negs 100% black - as in, rewinding the entire roll with the back open kind of enormous.
>>
>>3491273
It would have to be a hell of a light leak to completely wipe your shit out. More like the lab fucked up or the roll was defective to begin with.
>>
File: IMG_20190609_133109_281.jpg (164 KB, 1080x1813)
164 KB
164 KB JPG
>>3491278
>>3491285
That was my thought too, I don't think even a bad leak would completely black the entire roll. I've shot a lot of different film through different cameras recently, it's possible that this one was pretty old. Although I've shot film many years expired with no major issue, maybe I forgot to set this one to overexpose when I loaded it. I'll give the camera another try with something I know is brand new. Thanks for the tips. It's a really fun camera to use and even in the condition I found it in I got it for a steal so I'm really hoping I can get it back to good working order
>>
>>3491289
It wouldn't have anything to do with underexposure. But if it was a random old roll you had lying around, then yeah I'm not too surprised it cam back blank. Expired film is a crapshoot at the best of times, and if you don't know how old the roll is, what it's been used for or how it's been stored, then don't count on getting anything out of it.
>>
File: D8kZ6MRUcAA8q08.jpg (182 KB, 900x1200)
182 KB
182 KB JPG
picked this up yesterday - first medium format camera. super excited to try it out. came with a couple rolls of ektar 100 expired in 2013 and a roll of ilford fp4.
>>
>>3491299
How much did you pay?
>>
>>3491314

$2000 canadian for lens and body
>>
>>3491315
damn. from what I see on those cameras, that's a pretty good price!
>>
>>3491273
>Just got a roll back that was completely black
Black or blank (i.e. just the translucent film base)?
Completely black, with no markings, means it was exposed to light outside the camera. As of someone pulled the film out of the canister before developing.
Completely blank, with no markings, means someone fucked up development massively, like using fixer before developer. Or far too hot temperature and then squeegeed the whole emulsion off the base.

In either case, it has nothing to do with the camera.
>>
>>3491299
Darn dude, what a camera to have as your first MF. Treasure that thing, they really are special.
>>
>>3491335
Completely black with no markings. I wasn't sure what would cause a roll to come out with no markings at all, I feel like it must have been no good from the start. I'm just glad the camera itself isn't to blame for anything
>>
>>3491356
Nah it's not the roll either, it's the handling of the roll.
Maybe someone opened the back while rewinding, or pulled it out of the canister in broad light and then wound it back in.
No expired film, no matter how fuckold, and no amount of wrong development can result in a totally black roll with no markings.

Well in theory there are chemical foggers used for reversal processing that if used before the first developer, can do the same. But that's highly unlikely. It's far more likely someone messed with the roll, like pulling it out of the canister.
>>
>>3491366
It's also possible that his lightsealing job was sub-par. Generally sealing foam goes in the crack where the back's lips fit into, and not on the back itself, so it's plausible the excess foam would've permitted the mother of all light leaks to fog the film as it was carried through the camera.

But yeah, fuckery is what it sounds like. Hafta do a pretty bad job at lightsealing to cause an entirely black roll.
>>
>>3491366
>someone opened the back while rewinding
This didn't happen. I'd hate to find out they fucked up the processing, it's a local place I've developed at many times before with no issue, I didn't even open the envelope to check before I left.

>>3491369
>Generally sealing foam goes in the crack where the back's lips fit into, and not on the back itself
I've seen plenty of cameras with seals just on the back door that fit into the cracks on the body. It's definitely possible I didn't do a good enough job, I'll probably bite the bullet and shoot a fresh roll and maybe develop it myself to be sure.

If a leak in the body was to blame, I would assume some small bit of the end of the roll would still be okay, since it doesn't get pulled completely out of the canister until it's developed.
>>
File: 000090790016.jpg (2.4 MB, 2005x1414)
2.4 MB
2.4 MB JPG
>>3491366
>>3491383
It's very possible that the roll was badly expired. I got some film that was apparently sitting in a box since it expired in the 80s, and the shots came out like this.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2005
Image Height1414
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:04:12 09:52:22
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2005
Image Height1414
>>
neopan 100 acros is coming back fgts
https://emulsive.org/articles/news/brand-new-film-from-fujifilm-neopan-100-acros-ii-announced-begins-shipping-autumn-2019
>>
>>3491426
WTF THIS IS HUGE!!!!1
A big film company actually making a new revision of a film stock? and its Fuji none this less? Holy shit I'm pumped!!
(Tmax p3200 isn't new and Ektachrome is based off of c41 not old Ektachrome so don't bother)
>>
File: 01_o.jpg (134 KB, 800x600)
134 KB
134 KB JPG
>>3491426
>>3491438
GUYS https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1189352.html
>>
>>3491110
>The 90mm F4 is ok, it's the same lens as the Leica Elmar-C 90mm F4.
I was under the impression that it's the same lens but the Minolta version is multi coated and the Elmar is single coated. But yeah I have been considering the Tele-Elmarits 2.8 but I've heard focusing at wider apertures is harder because of the smaller rangefinder base-length

>>3491120
>And did you get a clean version of the 28mm?
Pretty sure it's clean posted it in the last /fgt/ and anon's said it looked good >>3485635
Got it off of a Japanese website so translation is a bit dodgy hence why I'm nervous about the camera actually working.

>>3491142
>>3491144
Very nice! love the second one
>>
>>3491438
>Ektachrome is based off of c41

No its not. Its an E6 slide film. I’ve developed it.
>>
>>3491438
>based off c41

you must be retarded
>>
>>3490669
>Tfw in UK you can get e6 developed for £4
Where tho??
>>
>>3491441

I can read moonspeak if you link to the item listing. Looks good though.

My CLE has been gathering dust since I had a kid. Not the easiest thing to use to take pictures of a rapidly moving toddler.
>>
>>3491426
>>3491440
I mean Fujifilm bringing back a film is always a good sign but it's not as if we're starved for great ISO100 B&W films. T-Grain films maybe a bit less so, but there's still strong offerings from Kodak and Ilford.

I guess the old Acros 100 was famous for its super low reciprocity failure, but I guess time will tell if Acros 100 II will have that as well.
>>
>>3491444
>>3491447
The new Ektachrome is based off colour negative technology then reversed engineered as slide film. Kodak lost the old formulas for Ektachrome so they had to make do with what they had.
>>
>>3491438
the new ektachrome is based off the old e100g, dumbass. it's actually identical if you compare the charts in the film data-sheets.

>>3491482
The announcement mentions celestial and night photography, specifically.
>>
>>3491483
>Kodak lost the old formulas for Ektachrome

lol what are your smoking. they stopped making ektachrome in 2013. you think they actually LOST the formulas in the intervening 5 years between its discontinuation and re-introduction?
>>
Anyone have any experience flying with high ISO film? (Specifically T-Max P3200 or Delta 3200)

What are the odds that you can get airport security to hand-check your film? I never had issues with fogging with ISO 800 film, but putting ISO 3200 film through an x-ray machine seems like a bad idea.
I know they always say it's safe for up to ISO 1600, so maybe you can point out the high ISO on the film? Not sure if the average airport security clerk will give a fuck.

I guess there's always the option to buy and dev on location, but finding P3200 as well as a lab that devs b&w on quick notice in Taiwan seems like a challenge.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 5D Mark IV
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.12 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2018:04:10 16:45:48
Exposure Time1/125 sec
F-Numberf/4.5
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating800
Lens Aperturef/4.5
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length98.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3491489
>What are the odds that you can get airport security to hand-check your film?

It all comes down to the individual person you're dealing with. They are under no obligation to hand check your film
>>
>>3491486
That's what I heard from insiders back when the Ektachrome was being hyped up. Not sure if they completely lost the formulas but I remember hearing they had to borrow color negative technology and reverse engineer it for Ektachrome or some shit like that. Kodak filed for bankruptcy in 2012, the same year they killed off all slide film production put two and two together
>>
>>3491480
thanks for your help anon!
https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/q290242097
>>
>>3491493
They could no longer source some required materials (EPA / political reasons) when they wanted to bring Ektachrome back...but that's very different than saying they lost the fucking formulas lol.
>>
>heard from insiders
fucking lmao it's that insider info fag again
>>
>>3491483
>he new Ektachrome is based off colour negative technology
What you're saying doesn't make sense.
All colour film "technology" is related, because in the end you have multiple layers of B&W emulsions with incorporated dye couplers.

But slides and negatives use very different routes in terms of colour correction and unwanted dye absorption. Negatives have the masking couplers (that produce the orange mask) as the major way that filters out unwanted dye absorption (i.e. colour impurities).

Slides can't use that. So they can only exploit vertical inhibition, i.e. development of a colour in one layer inhibits development of another colour in the adjacent layer.
They have to use solely DIRs and similar interlayer and interimage effects to colour correct. Negatives use those too for enhanced sharpness or saturation, but slides *have* to use them extensively to get even close to accurate colour.

Do you have any sources that "the new Ektachrome is based off colour negative technology then reversed engineered as slide film"?
The only example I know of where a negative was very closely related to a slide, was an old agfa maskless negative film (now rollei digibase something). For this film, they used *only* vertical inhibition to colour correct without using an orange mask, i.e. as you'd do with a slide film.

How could an Ektachrome slide be based off colour negative technology? In what way specifically?

The only thing different about the new ektachrome is the substitution of some materials with more environmentally friendly ones, and of course recalibrating the chemistry to produce correct colours with those new materials.
>>
>>3491489
>What are the odds that you can get airport security to hand-check your film?
0
>but putting ISO 3200 film through an x-ray machine seems like a bad idea.
Not really, I've had 4 passes with 3200 film (2 passes unexposed, 2 passes exposed). It was absolutely fine.

> so maybe you can point out the high ISO on the film? Not sure if the average airport security clerk will give a fuck.
They won't. If you insist, the bored clerk will call the even more bored shift manager who will take a glance and say "it has to go through the machine, the machine is rated safe for all films".

Maybe in US you'll have better luck but in Europe I haven't see a single country/airport that would even entertain the idea.
>>
>>3491504
>Maybe in US you'll have better luck but in Europe I haven't see a single country/airport that would even entertain the idea.
really?
I've never been to the US, but all my european flight experiences have been pretty lax. Would be surprised if they wouldn't just comply.
I remember once flying out of Greece, the metal detectors beeped as I walked through. The guard, sitting on a chair, pointed at me and asked "Belt?". I lifted up my shirt, and that was that. No further checks. He never even stood up.
>>
>>3491507
Yeah what you said is true.
It's not because they're security obsessed, they're pretty lax. It's just that they don't care/bother to hand inspect it. It's easier for them to just tell you to get it to the machine.
And desu half of them wouldn't even know how to inspect film nowadays, they'd pull the leader out a foot or show, ruining 5-6 frames.
I don't bother even asking anymore, and never had issues with fogged film.
>>
>>3491512
>>3491504
Guess I'll give it a try then. A bit of fogging in b&w negatives isn't the end of the world anyways.
>>
>>3491512
>half of them wouldn't even know how to inspect film nowadays
yeah, in my head they'd just eyeball it and pass it through, without any film pulling. Probably depends on the individual.
Guess there's no point if it goes through the machine fine.
>>
>>3491129

I paid 450 for a Pro-S body, prism finder, 50mm and 180mm lens, two backs and a WLF. I have the remaining 350 into everything else to run it, filters, pro packs of film, big ass Kalimar hard case that houses everything, left grip, changing back if a back jams and a ton of other small shit. A fairly large portion of it is in film though.
>>
>>3491489

Have done it. Usually I find if I have an old camera around my neck they will be a little more inclined to do it. I don't trust airport scanners at all with anything above 800 ISO. Most of the time they just wave it by but sometimes they actually perform a hand check.

I did have one hilarious incident years ago where TSA was being a bunch of jerks to me and other passengers for whatever reason so I called a supervisor out to hand-check 100 rolls of film because I felt like being an asshole back to them. I made up some elaborate bullshit story about how it was a special type of film that cannot be ran through a scanner and I had pictures of my late grandmother on them. They did it and opened every single canister of film and checked them. They even opened sealed in-box unexposed film and looked at it. It was all <400 ISO film lol
>>
>>3491489
Flown with 1600 iso black and white multiple times without any issues, but never with 3200. Wouldn’t be surprised if it was just fine though, I just don’t tend to shoot that high iso.

I’ve never managed to get my film hand checked in Europe (tried a couple of times), but always got a hand check just by asking politely when leaving Japan. I just put the film in a minigrip bag for easy checking.
>>
>>3491483
Read somewhere that it's based on E100G
>>
>>3491566
>Read somewhere that it's based on E100G
Most definitely. E100G was Kodak’s codename for the neutrally balanced ektachrome. The consumer version (basically the same but not refrigerated) was called Elitechrome.
>>
>>3491494

Stored in a moisture proof area, no problems with aperture blades.Small dust (like the stuff every lens has, nothing noteworthy). Minor clouding on whole lens.

Then they go on to say please be aware that it is a rather old lens so deterioration is to be expected...blah blah.

Sounds okay depending upon the clouding. Either way it is worth a shot. The terrible spotted ones sell for about as much.
>>
yo bronica sq bros, do your 50mms suffer from rear haze?
mine do, there's a cloud/haze on one of the rear elements
i disassembled mine, tried to clean it with hydrogen peroxide/lighter fluid/isopropyl alcohol/acetone, but the stain doesn't budge

any suggestions? should i leave the glass in those solvents overnight?
>>
File: river.jpg (552 KB, 799x1000)
552 KB
552 KB JPG
>>3490609

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makemotorola
Camera ModelXT1650
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:06:10 09:51:01
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3
Lens Aperturef/1.8
BrightnessUnknown
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeAverage
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length4.51 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width799
Image Height1000
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto Bracket
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationLow
SharpnessSoft
Geodetic Survey DataWGS-84
>>
>>3491504
I had no issues getting them to hand check it for me.
>>
>>3491095
Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 90 3.5 is a good alternative that can be had nice and cheap if you look for a deal and don’t mind the added expense of an m39-M adapter
>>
>>3491593
Mine doesn’t have it.
And no don’t leave it overnight in the fucking solvents! Depending on concentration, they might strip the coatings off!
This advice is for older uncoated lenses.

Did you disassemble it fully? You sure it’s not behind the element you’re trying to clean?
The worst case scenario is that it might be damage to the coatings, or (much more unlikely) the cement between cemented elements.
I haven’t disassembled a Bronica lens yet, but those have electronic connections for the shutter and aperture, there might be some cables inside, be careful not to fuck those up.

Also, try a shot or two with that lens and see how the film turns out. If it doesn’t show up, don’t sweat it.
>>
>>3491633
yup, disassembled it down to single pieces of glasses and all
it was surprisingly easy, only needed a spanner wrench to remove the locking rings
holding the blemished glass piece against light I could see the fogging on its surface, kind of like a dirty finger has made a thin smudge

thing is I noticed the fogging some months back but didn't care much
but last week when switching from a 80 to 50 I saw the view in the finder bloom like crazy (scene was side lit low angle sun)
seems to be common with the 50 too (at least with ebay sellers from japan), half of their listings I have seen mention "cloud in rear"
>>
>>3491593
nope. have had mine since 2007 with no issues
>>
>>3491697
>seems to be common with the 50 too
Really? Hadn't noticed since I haven't been in the market for one since 2012-13 or so.
Is this the S or PS version that you got?
>>
File: s-l1600.jpg (382 KB, 1600x1600)
382 KB
382 KB JPG
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Svema-Color-Expired-USSR-Film-36-Exp-lot-Of-6-Rolls-35mm/123752378037?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160908105057%26meid%3Dae8f7ef294804aa5bf1849d8edd78101%26pid%3D100675%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D15%26mehot%3Dlo%26sd%3D163713281294%26itm%3D123752378037&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236&_trkparms=pageci%3A4af606fb-8bc0-11e9-becc-74dbd1801ebb%7Cparentrq%3A4320f52116b0a4b7b6e6a644ffe9bb25%7Ciid%3A1
I bought this. What should I expect?
>>
and I found a tip someone in /fgt/ may find useful someday:
https://youtu.be/o6dB0cCzYBE?t=887
using acetone to loosen up lens' rings lock paint
mine was impossible to turn at first, but some dabs of acetone made a day and night difference

very helpful channel overall, man works with lots of film and tlr cameras

>>3491699
yup, at least that's what I've found while browsing ebay/yahoo auctions
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1373-J-Bronica-Zenzanon-PS-50mm-f-3-5-Lens-for-SQ-AS-is/192891765492?hash=item2ce93ec2f4:g:qwoAAOSw~LpcjFyi
https://www.ebay.com/itm/EXC-ZENZA-BRONICA-ZENZANON-PS-50mm-f-3-5-MF-LENS-FOR-SQ-SQ-A-SQ-AI-BODY/273802748298?hash=item3fbfea618a:g:n9QAAOSwJrdcr1BN
https://www.ebay.com/itm/EXC-ZENZA-BRONICA-ZENZANON-PS-50mm-f-3-5-MF-LENS-FOR-SQ-from-Japan-1548/303144489862?hash=item4694d1d386:g:sjAAAOSwH5NczsAd
>>
>>3491701
>paying $26 for 6 rolls of this shit

wew lad, fucking wew. buying 6 rolls of in-date superia would've saved you $6
>>
>>3491699
and mine's a ps
was crystal clear when I bought it a year ago
I have relocated to asia since
I think it has to do with Asia's heat and humidity
>>
>>3491489
>T-Max P3200
isn't T-Max P3200 actually 800ASA film meant to be pushed 2 stops to get the 3200, hence the P in the name?
800 film should be safe on hand luggage x-ray machines.
>>
>>3491299

turns out the roll that was inside it was velvia 100, pretty cool. took the last 8 shots of the roll myself. never shot slide before so that's a pleasant little surprise
>>
>>3491489
I fly every week (US domestic) and I've never had TSA deny me a hand check, even when they're busy and I totally don't look like a photographer. I keep the rolls in a ziploc bag and ask them if I can get a hand check on the film when I'm putting my bag into the X-ray.

Of course it's all ASA 50 so it's not like it needs a hand check anyway.
>>
do you need to overexpose expired 10+ years black and white film like you do with color negative? what about if it's been expired for less than 10 years?
>>
File: 14760004.jpg (150 KB, 700x571)
150 KB
150 KB JPG
What does /p/ think of the Fuji MF rangefinder series? Looking into getting a GW670ii or iii.

Pic is Provia 100 w/ RB67 and the 90mm K/L, when I had it three years ago.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelQSS-32_33
Camera SoftwareQSS-32_33 8.01.001 2008.01.15
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2510
Image Height2048
>>
Thoughts on Ilford xp2 with color filters?
Does it behave like traditional bw films?
>>
File: images.jpg (25 KB, 500x464)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
SOON LADS
>>
File: 1487893645761.jpg (133 KB, 444x453)
133 KB
133 KB JPG
>>3491839
>tfw 6x7 bork
>tfw no money to get it fixed

just a fucking weird issue of it not recognizing that there's film inside, probably something to do with the tension system
>>
>>3491029
that's p neat man
>>
>>3491715
Would that matter if you'll push it to 3200 during development anyways? It's like it's always been an ISO 3200 film.
>>
File: ZBKP405191006.jpg (1.81 MB, 1278x1280)
1.81 MB
1.81 MB JPG
Phoneposting some Portra snapshits from a few weeks ago.
>>
File: ZBKP405191007.jpg (1.8 MB, 1280x1280)
1.8 MB
1.8 MB JPG
>>
File: ZBKP405191010.jpg (1.68 MB, 1274x1280)
1.68 MB
1.68 MB JPG
>>
File: ZBKP405191009.jpg (1.22 MB, 1274x1280)
1.22 MB
1.22 MB JPG
>>
>>3491840
Post some work. I love that 105 3d juiciness
>>
>>3491809
>What does /p/ think of the Fuji MF rangefinder series? Looking into getting a GW670ii or iii.
They're great.
Mind you, the 670 and 690 have the exact same size, weight and lens. The only difference is the 670 has a a different mask and gearing in the film transport, in order to shoot 6x7 instead of 6x9 frames.

Personally I'd get the 6x9, since it gives a bigger negative using the same camera. But if you're certain you prefer the 4:5 ratio of 6x7 frames, the 670 will give you 2 extra frames.
>>
File: 2019-05-30 01.35.54 1.jpg (4.81 MB, 2480x3602)
4.81 MB
4.81 MB JPG
Had lots of fun with a shitty point and shoot and Kodak Vision 2

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera ModelSP-3000
Camera SoftwareVSCO Android Version
Equipment MakeFUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2019:05:30 11:09:00
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3602
Image Height2480
>>
File: 000048-2.jpg (2.65 MB, 3602x2480)
2.65 MB
2.65 MB JPG
>>3491885
ColorPlus200

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera ModelSP-3000
Camera SoftwareFUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-490
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:06:09 21:59:00
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3602
Image Height2480
>>
File: 000039-2.jpg (1.9 MB, 3602x2480)
1.9 MB
1.9 MB JPG
>>3491886
Spooky

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera ModelSP-3000
Camera SoftwareFUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-490
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:06:09 21:58:00
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3602
Image Height2480
>>
Newsflash: New Acros II in late 2019
>>
>>3491899
I'm happy.
I love Fuji b&w
>>
>>3491899
Just in time for me to clear my Acros stash by late 2021! Also,
>releasing a ISO100 film during the northern hemisphere dark season

Gotta hand it to them for trying though. Perhaps we'll see better communication from Fujifilm as well? Previously they were kind of stuck looking like villains because of various Internet blowhards and/or dicklickers.
>>
File: 161015906-2.jpg (1.13 MB, 1200x1174)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB JPG
What film stocks have you guys been enjoying lately? Out of habit I always use Tri-x but I've been shooting with Delta 400 this past month or so and have really liked it a lot.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeEPSON
Camera ModelPerfection V800/V850
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.3.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:06:11 12:50:24
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3491982
I've been shooting some HP5 recently and I've gotta say I really don't like it compared to Tri-X or Tmax 400
>>
Does anyone have any info about the reciprocity failure of Kodak Vision3 500T? Should I just base it on Portra or something?
>>
>>3492002
>If your exposure is in the 1-second range, increase your exposure 23 stop and use a
KODAK WRATTEN Gelatin Filter CC10R.
>In the 10-second range, increase exposure 1 stop and use a KODAK WRATTEN Gelatin Filter CC10R.
http://web.mit.edu/jhawk/tmp/H2-2up.pdf
>>
>>3491982
Trying to shoot more 100 speed, I bulkrolled some APX 100 (expired in '14, kept in fridge since '15) and found that Rodinal 1+24 doesn't develop it to full weight. Guess I'll try HC-110(B) next, but I'm running out of that golden stuff already again.
>>
File: DevRoll1021.jpg (3.75 MB, 3335x2143)
3.75 MB
3.75 MB JPG
>>3491982
kentmere because it's cheap. I have some rolls of HP5 but haven't shot any of it yet.
>>
File: Delta3200_ (14).jpg (401 KB, 1185x784)
401 KB
401 KB JPG
>>3492028
>kentmere because it's cheap.
Heh.
Kentmere here (Netherlands) is available only under the Agfa APX brand and idiots pay 10€/roll for it. It's the most expensive B&W film you can buy in the big stores (like camerexpress), tying with Delta 3200.
And actually more expensive that TriX/HP5+ (8€), TMax/Delta (9€) or FP4+ (7€).

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8100
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r15 (Mar 1 2019) 5e078a5 01.03.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Width1185
Image Height784
>>
File: DevRoll005.jpg (3.71 MB, 3303x2119)
3.71 MB
3.71 MB JPG
>>3492038
That's funny, I'm in USA so the markets are understandably different.
>>
>>3492038
Ever worry what brexit would do to availability of Ilford's stuff, and Harman-produced things in general, in the rest of Yurp? I'd be mightily pissed if Delta 400 cost 9€ apiece with a 3€ tariff, or the same for Ilford's papers, Multigrade dev, or rapid fix. I mean there's Foma and Rollei and Tetenal and Adox and whom-not, but that's not the same is it.
>>
>>3490334
Just came back from a ratty camera shop, and the japanese owner doesn't seem to be aware of the hipster factor surrounding film right now. I'm still learning, so he gave me a roll of expired 35mm film for free and pointed to a full bag of what I believe to be medium format films, also expired, saying something like "wasted money... they are 6 by 6, I used to shoot marriages with those".
Considering his attitude towards expired films, would it be worth it to buy a medium format camera and try to use the expired bag for cheap?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Delta3200_ (34).jpg (572 KB, 1000x686)
572 KB
572 KB JPG
>>3492053
>Ever worry what brexit would do to availability of Ilford's stuff, and Harman-produced things in general, in the rest of Yurp?
Man that would sting. Ilford easily has the greatest selection of papers (rc+fibre, different finishes, special shit like warmtone, direct positive, etc.). And actually their B&W film selection is the biggest of any company, still the only ones doing traditional grain ISO50 (PanF+) and ISO125 (FP4+).
Lastly, they make one of my favourite developers, Perceptol, for which again there's not a single alternative since Kodak dropped Microdol X. Simple as fuck developer, only metol based, but everyone keeps rehashing 10 versions of the same old phenidone/hydroquinone/ascorboc acid stuff, which look very similar compared to something like Perceptol.

In the UK Ilford prices were pretty good, you could get HP5+ for a fiver, and same more or less (±1£) for everything except Delta3200 and SFX.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8100
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r15 (Mar 1 2019) 5e078a5 01.03.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Width1000
Image Height686
>>
>>3492055

i just got my first medium format camera the other day but i don't have any film for it other than 2 expired rolls that came with the camera.. would i be able to buy them off you for a reasonable price?
>>
>>3492064
Yeah. The rest of the photochemical goods industry in Europe seems to exist as a complement to Ilford's offerings. Fucking single market and becoming mutually dependent over the decades. Guess we'd find out right quick which films are made in the UK tariff area though, finally putting to bed speculations about whether RPX 400 is one of Harman's or not.
>>
>>3492028

Bulk loaded ultrafine extreme 400 for the same reason.
>>
>>3492070
I'd have to buy from him first... I'll ask about the bag when I take this 35mm one to develop and I'll post the results here.
>>
File: IMG_5048.jpg (1.54 MB, 4032x3024)
1.54 MB
1.54 MB JPG
Got my home darkroom set up lads

Feels good. Got given a Durst M805 and a whole lot of very nice darkroom gear, so excited to print more
>>
File: IMG_2534.jpg (2.63 MB, 3024x3024)
2.63 MB
2.63 MB JPG
>>3492158
woops, pic rotated itself for some reason

here's my first print. Not the best for obvious reasons but not half bad either.

What would be the most obvious cause of dust on a final print? It's quite sharp so I get the feeling the dust is on the glass negative carrier
>>
Does the amount of time between exposing a roll of film and developing it matter?
>>
File: 000286000017.jpg (962 KB, 1545x1024)
962 KB
962 KB JPG
lmfao my ex is such a fucking bitch honestly glad I'm rid of her at this point.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera SoftwareEZ Controller 6.50.008 (160222)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1545
Image Height1024
>>
Had enough with having many different cameras and non-matching lenses all of middling quality. I'm thinking of changing it up and selling most of it and simplifying. Debate my choices for my consolidated kit;

135
Nikon FM3A
Konica Hexar AF

120
Rollei K4 (already own)
Fuji GX680

LF
Wista SP
>>
>>3491827
I used to shoot it a bit, not really a fan to be honest. Only an option for me if i have to use lab processing. It is not the same as traditional B&W at all while you can look up the sensitivity curves and density curves printing it is not the same though way easier if you are looking to print on B&W paper later as it doesn't have the orange mask of CN400 <discontinued>.

As to colour filters it still has an effect but you will have to experiment a bit but the simple process of using red filters to help your sky still works.
>>
>>3492160
Looks very good.

>>3492229
Depends on the film. At Pan 50 it's supposed to be crucial, as it seems to lose the latent image quite fast.
>>
>>3492257
I see no reason to making a gx680 your 120 camera if you plan to buy a Wista 4x5 too
>>
File: r001-015.jpg (1.8 MB, 3638x2433)
1.8 MB
1.8 MB JPG
Got my first roll back. Didn't really know what I was doing and this happened.

Think it's still quite interesting.
>>
File: r001-021.jpg (1.46 MB, 3638x2433)
1.46 MB
1.46 MB JPG
>>3492290
Colours look very nice. Don't see myself replicating this with digital.
>>
>>3492290
That's a double exposure. You exposed the same frame twice
>>
>>3492291

It's on a screen, so you already did.
>>
Thinking of selling off a few compacts I don’t really use anymore, and maybe replacing them with something a bit more premium. What are the best ones to look out for other than the Contax T2/T3, which are in insane price ranges already. Nikon Ti’s, Yashica T4/T5, Fuji Klasse? I’m fine with either 28mm or 35mm. Would like some amount of manual functionality like at least infinity focus, some amount of exposure comp and preferably something known to be reliable/repairable (which mostly counts out the film GR).
>>
>>3492316
>preferably something known to be reliable/repairable

That leaves 0 cameras I can think of.

Get yourself a nice interchangeable lens RF + a cheap $20 p&s for when you REALLY need something pocketable
>>
>>3492316
>>3492350

check out @ppp_repairs on instagram
>>
>>3492002
How do you develop 500T?
I'm interested because I've seen samples of 500T or Fuji 500D pushed to 3200, but I wonder how to get those results.
What chemicals do you use?
Have you pushed it?
>>
File: camera_chart.png (137 KB, 1329x1108)
137 KB
137 KB PNG
Can anyone please help me to find a compact camera that I will be happy with? I am wasting far too much of my time googling around and looking up reviews when I should be working.

I'd like a 90's/2000's film compact which costs about 100-150 euro, I am in the process of selling my Contax RTS system because I feel like it kind of got me sidetracked from my original desire when shooting film (to have something much smaller than my 5DII to take around with me and have fun with, but which can still take a good picture in most circumstances, including dim light)

The Contax TVS is basically almost exactly what I want but every single example is living on borrowed time due to the lens cable problem they have, and they're a tad outside my price range. A nice 28mm / 3.5 wide angle to take shots while walking around in low light in the evening, but also 56mm / 6.5 to take moderately good portraits or photograph scenes from a distance in ok light. My MJU II 115 strugles on the other side of 50mm unless it is a completely clear day, and the 38mm wide angle is hardly a wide angle at all.

Oh, and the ability to double expose would be nice. Generally important is not terrible viewfinder, not terrible shutter lag .etc. I'm going to be putting Gold 200 through the camera most of the time, since it's very cheap where I live, but I also want it to be sharp enough that it's worth putting Pan F or Ektar through for special occasions.

I would get a dual focal length camera, but almost all advice online seems to say it's a bad idea because the quality is invariably crap.

Is there anything I'm missing /fgt/? Anything you particularly recommend as being markedly better than the alternatives and within my price range? Anything I should absolutely avoid from my shortlist? Should I just suck it up and get a QL17?

Thank you for your help in advance.
>>
>>3492479
Espio 24EW is like the 120SW, but has an EC function and the zoom goes down to 24mm which should be quite nice. I've got a 120SW and it's definitely a premium compact, but don't pay over 30€ for it. Eats a CR2 cell per 4 rolls though, so that's like an euro per roll for batteries unless you get them in bulk.

My other compact love affair is to an Agfa 1035 which has a terrific lens, a seemingly perpetual battery life, and enough german steel to survive falling out of a pocket onto asphalt while bicycling. Don't pay more than 30€ for this one either, zone focus is for hipsters. 49mm filter thread, takes a china hood like a charm.

All of these are prone to getting meme prices at some point. Look at local for-sale ads and pick out one that looks nice and has good reviews, and doesn't cost over 30€.
>>
>>3492451
Where are you based?
The options in order of quality are
1. native ecn-2 chemistry
2. colour paper RA-4 chemistry
3. C-41 chemistry
>>
>>3492489
Yeah I always wanted the Agfa 1535. I missed it multiple times on ebay, then I realised it was fully automatic, and the size of it is kind of unwieldy. I already checked out the Espio 24EW but it's preetttyy dim and I have serious doubts about a 5x lens with only 7 elements.

As I stated the only film I can get cheaply is 200 iso so I can't live the tiny point & shoot + high iso dream.

I kind of think I know which one I want but first I have to sell my RTS, and thereafter I have to convince the guy listing it to lower his price a bit. I finally found flickr samples of the tiara zoom and its sharpness is stunning, it seemingly has very little distortion too.
>>
>>3492506
Yeah, 5.6-12.8 is quite slow indeed. Adequate at the wide end, gets to around f/8 at 50mm, and from then on it's flash or sunny days only. Those cameras are really for the wide-angle stuff and then zooming in a pinch.

I also thought the 1035 was a bit boxy and a bit large, until I shot two funerals with it in March this year. HP5+ at 400 ISO. Missed focus a couple of times shooting up close without a flash, which is uncanny for a zone-focusing camera. Ordinarily I'd shoot funerals with a Leica, but the difference here was that I was carrying the casket and couldn't have a kilogram of kraut on my shoulder while also getting great "somber-looking people as though someone had died" shots of opportunity.

My tip is, if you're willing to go full auto (except focus), go for the 535. It has the same great lens, same form-factor, same german magic innards, but top speed is just 1/500. 1535 is for people who don't trust guestimation, or "composition focus", but the camera doesn't really ask for any of that. But don't pay more than 30€ for a compact unless it's bathed in unicorn wee at the factory or something.
>>
>>3492316
>>3492350

This.

If the compact is any good, it isn’t repairable. They all have unique electronics that aren’t source-able.

Smallest camera that I can thing of that is easily repairable is the Leica/Minolta CL. Not really pocketable (unless you go with one of those M.S. Optic’s pancake primes), and it lacks a lot of stuff that makes compacts nice (motor drive, autoexposure, autofocus, etc.)
>>
>>3492316
If you really want something premium (i.e. you want to spend a bit of cash) but reliable go for the Minolta CLE. It's as small as your typical compact if you put a pancake lens on it, it has aperture priority and all the manual settings you want, and you can even interchange the lenses / share them with a digital system.

Less premium? There are 28 and 35mm compacts with infinity focus and exposure comp/manual iso, but they often have a minimum aperture of 3.5. The Nikon l35AF springs to mind as a not too expensive, very high performance 35mm f/2.8 camera.
>>
>>3492479
Go to a flea market and buy an Olympus Trip 35, put your cost savings into a small flash. Easy

Pic related

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.12 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2018:02:02 11:51:11
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1200
Image Height755
>>
File: $_20.jpg (39 KB, 800x534)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
i have one technical pan in the fridge and
some fresh ortho 25 + IR films
i don't know where and what to shoot
give me some ideas ?
inb4 just go out with a tripod....
i just don't know where to go, the city iam living in is totally small, 300k villain
for the technical pan i thought about portraits with dark/bronze skinned people maybe
and the ortho, just mixed stuff like architecture etc.
what do you think
>>
>>3492350
I already have a nice ILC RF and a pile of prime lens compacts (which is why I’m selling some off). That’s why I’m looking for something else.

>>3492531
>>3492552
Does the CLE when used like that really offer anything over something like an Olympus 35RC? Most people I know who have had a CL or CLE just sold it after a year or two.

The Rollei AFM35 seems like something that could work - Fuji Klasse but without the price tag.
>>
>>3492505
I want to have a go at C-41.
Can't get ecn-2 and I have no idea about RA-4
>>
>>3492561
>techpan
Techpan was an excellent astrophotography film during its time so maybe you should shoot some star trails with it. Though you'd have to go really far to avoid light pollution fogging and probably would have to compensate a lot more for reciprocity failure because it is not gas-hypered.
>>
File: 71h4bc-5meL._SL1092_.jpg (156 KB, 1053x1092)
156 KB
156 KB JPG
*Ausfags* Amazon Australia sells 3 pack of Ultramax for $12 a single roll from most places costs like $9.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Kodak-6034052-Ultra-Film-Yellow/dp/B003HLXNJO/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=
>>
>>3490334

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareInstagram
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width640
Image Height776
>>
File: ADOX_RA4_Kit.jpg (76 KB, 750x750)
76 KB
76 KB JPG
>mfw Fotoimpex finally stocks the ADOX RA-4 color paper developer kit again

29€ for 5m2 paper. RA-4 paper isn't all that expensive either.
We have a color enlarger head at our camera club. I'm really considering trying my hand at doing dark room color prints.

https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/fotochemie/adox-ra-4-kit-entwickler-und-bleichfixierbad-monokonzentrate-zum-ansatz-von-2500-ml.html?cache=1560445404
>>
>>3492702
I love shooting, developing, and scanning film, but this still made me lol.
>>
>>3492080

lemme know how you make out anon
>>
>>3491489
taiwan's a blast anon, hope u have fun
>>
Is Freestyle Photo worth a visit if I am going to be in LA?
>>
File: 20190614014353_noexif.jpg (4.75 MB, 4796x3199)
4.75 MB
4.75 MB JPG
Headed to Ireland soon. Any photo places I should check out in Dublin? Also where should I get my stuff developed?
>>
>Tfw when shit-tier country
>Tfw can't get C-41 chemicals
>>
what is the best soviet camera? excluding MF. I’m kind of sick of perfectly working japanese and german cameras
>>
>>3493153
Probably the Fed 2 or Zorki 4 or something, but if you ask me, Agat 18k and Lomo LCA. Quite a few good cameras came from there actually, quality control might vary though. I have shot some Zeniths that were pure ass.
>>
>>3493194
and what about your personal experience trying SLRs?
>>
>>3493014
Nope. Most people here send it to a lab in the UK.
>>
File: SRT201-K400-006.jpg (4.11 MB, 3319x2152)
4.11 MB
4.11 MB JPG
I developed and scanned these photos in a few days ago and just noticed these ugly shadow blocks in the trees in the mid-ground. Do you think this is a developing error or a scanning error? I was using a red filter if that makes any difference.
>>
>>3493309
software sharpening/unsharp mask gone crazy bad maybe? It seems to me it's along the edges of shapes, but then the grain doesn't seem overly sharpened so dunno.
>>
>>3493309
This is often due to the scanning software's dust removal (ICE). It doesn't work so well on black and white.
>>
>>3493309
>>3493317
Yeah man don't use digital ice on black and white, they are completely incompatible
>>
>>3493319

If I try it on my plustek, it takes 30 minutes to process and outputs junk.
>>
>>3493309
Digital ICE artifacts. You cannot use that mode with silver-containing emulsions, that is all black and white films besides XP2 (which is actually a neutered C-41 color negative film).

The reason for this is because ICE works by scanning through the film with an infrared lamp. Because dust reflects IR, this allows the scanner to figure out the precise location of dust particles and apply dust removal at those exact spots. However, this ONLY works with C-41 color negative and E-6 reversal films because they do not contain any silver particles as their images are formed entirely by color dyes which IR can pass through. In black and white film, the image is formed by metallic silver particles, which also reflect IR light. So the ICE goes haywire because in the IR scan the film shows up as nothing but dust particles.
>>
>>3493300
As I said, I’ve shot some Zeniths, they were all ass. Heavy, bad finder coverage, film advance that would tear the film etc. The RF’s and fixed lens cameras I’ve tried were much better.

I own a Kiev 6C which is an slr that I also like, but it’s MF. Can’t remember if they did any 35mm slrs.
>>
>>3491531
Then I totally misinterpreted your post. That's actually a really good deal depending on when you bought it.

>>3493323
This is a great post. I'm not the one who asked, but you did a great job of explaining ICE.
>>
first time in a loooooong time i went out specifically for shooting. usually i just carry a camera around with me everywhere. felt nice to be out for no other reason than simply shooting photos.
>>
>>3493360
What port anon? Wish I shot some of the one in Busan when I was there
>>
>>3493334
As russian I can say they did a lot. There were some copies of Nikon but idk if they are good.
>>
>>3493316
>>3493317
>>3493319
>>3493323
Appreciate the advice friends, I will rescan soon.
>>
>>3493153
Zorki (the first, without a number), Fed 2, and any rangefinder without a slow-speed mechanism. It's not that these work particularly well, but that ones with the latter are guaranteed to have extremely fiddly shutter speed selectors with a lot of play. When you do find one that works, it'll generally be either a Zorki or a Fed 2.

Soviet 35mm SLRs are uniformly dogshit. The best mass-produced east-bloc SLRs were Prakticas, from East Germany. Never touch a Horizont, or a Leningrad, or a Kiev 80 or 88. Some say the Voskhod is worth looking up if you can stomach guess focusing a 45mm triplet (i.e. Smena, but bigger) lens.

>I’m kind of sick of perfectly working japanese and german cameras
Yeah, soviet shit will fix that for next summer.
>>
>>3493376
busam port is rad. this is in halifax canada. here's how the scene looked through the vf. was shooting velvia 50
>>
>>3493400
what are you waiting for post results lmao
>>
>>3493413
waiting to finish another v50 roll before i mix chems so i can do 3 rounds of 3 rolls right away
>>
What're your thoughts on replenishing developers, /fgt/? In particular, how do replenishment regimes even work? How much virgin Xtol am I supposed to add to my bottle of reused stock-strength working developer per roll?

I'm considering trying to cheap out on developer this summer & spend the difference on Delta 100 while staying in budget, and 5 one-liter packs of Excel would go almost as far as HC-110(B) if adding e.g. 100ml fresh per roll (discarding old developer to fit) to the first litre were feasible. That'd be 40 rolls in Excel in ten-roll increments from powder no less.
>>
>>3493421
>How much virgin Xtol am I supposed to add to my bottle of reused stock-strength working developer per roll?
70ml/roll, per Kodak’s recommendations.
Kodak has extremely detailed spec sheets for their developers, so it’s worth downloading XTol’s one and taking a look.

Savings are not big unless you’re using huge tanks or going through insane volumes.
At 1+1, you need 150ml of xtol per roll. At 1+2 you need just 100ml. So yeah you save 30ml of xtol per roll. At 150 films you will have saved almost 5L, i.e. ~12$ that a packet of XTol costs.
>>
>>3493446
Compared to 300ml/roll at stock, which is the recipe for replenished xtol, I'd be saving 230ml/roll which is over triple your figure. Yours is of course true if I only develop at 1+2, and uses fresh developer always, but I'm gonna shoot more than just Delta 100.
>>
>>3493447
>Compared to 300ml/roll at stock
Yeah but who does stock xtol one shot?
Plus replenished works more like diluted in terms of speed/shadow detail and grain, rather than stock.

Anyway, I don't use replenished developers cause I prefer the reliability and certainty of one-shot when it comes to times and contrast.
Most of my stuff I do at 1+1 because it's a good compromise of speed, grain and dev times, and I'd go through 33rolls, approximately 200€ in film, before I finish a 14€ pack of Xtol.
>>
File: IMG_6265-positive-1.jpg (700 KB, 1620x1080)
700 KB
700 KB JPG
weather here has been shit but i have ektar loaded and want to go out shooting.. anyone have success using ektar during overcast and cloudy days?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 7.5 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:06:11 17:39:21
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/3.5
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/3.5
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length100.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3493449
There may be truth to the fox's words. Tell ya what, I'll develop most of my rolls in replenished stock, and use 1+1 and 1+2 out of the big 5L jug I'll need to cost-savings on Xtol over Excel. I don't have a recipe for N74+ in stock anyway.
>>
>>3492257
How is the GX 680? Prices on Rz/Rb 67s seem inflated so I'm wonder how they compare.
>>
Opinions on Kodak Vision3? Redpill me. It's for a short film.
>>
>>3493455
for me ektar looks great at dusk or in overcast and looks like absolute ass during sunny days
>>
>>3493486
9/11 was an inside job, shot on Kodak's previous Vision0 stock. They're complicit, in a sense Kodak is the photochemical Jew. Also women are shit, suck this warty old cock instead.
>>
File: IMG_7729-positive-1.jpg (826 KB, 1626x1080)
826 KB
826 KB JPG
kodak colorplus 200 minolta xg-m 28 f2.8 i believe converted with negative lab pro, dslr scanned

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 7.5 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:06:15 12:38:29
Exposure Time1/25 sec
F-Numberf/7.1
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/7.1
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length100.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3493455

I have one here for you to judge:
>>3491904
>>
>>3493530

i actually don't mind this, it has a very distinctive film look taste
>>
File: 704x422x2.jpg (107 KB, 1114x667)
107 KB
107 KB JPG
>>3490883
I spend 5 euro per roll for Gold 200 + Dev, (14 cents per frame) and do B&W with 1+50 or 1+100 rodinal while reusing fixer. A moderately good negative scanner from 2004 cost me 100 euro. (Sensible) film cameras can range from 5-500 euro, if you want something expensive that's your fault. It's perfectly possible to shoot film without breaking the bank - it just won't necessarily be that you're holding a T4 in your hand with Ektachrome in it. At a roll and a half a week, shooting film costs me less than a haircut.
>>
>>3493561
Bulk rolling Fomapan 400 is like 0.07€/frame, fampai. Twice as many frames for slightly over twice the total cost.
>>
>leave roll of 120 unfinished in camera for a few months
>finish the roll today
>go to unload film
>get fat, loosely wound roll since it loosened during that idle time

reeee my provia
do I even both developing at this point? don't remember being crazy about any of the pics on it, perhaps i just chalk it up to lesson learned on mishandling. it shouldn't even be a camera issue, i've shot rolls in the past that were perfect.
>>
>>3492760
Welp, nvm. Seems like the color enlarger is missing its power supply.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.