I'm struggling right now where to take myself technically, whether to stick with dSLRs or experimenting with film, RF, MF or something other. It would be a jump back to where I started many decades ago, but I'm so tempted. Thanks for documenting your experience.
This is one of the truths that reminds me I don't have anyone to please but myself. I don't need to have a "pro" camera because I'm not a pro—never will be. I may want a feature (like ISO 12,800!) but it doesn't dictate if I eat or not.
I cannot convince myself that film is where it's at, but the digital alternative in the format I'm pursuing is, in camera terms, like buying a $75,000 car.
This is one of the truths that reminds me I don't have anyone to please but myself. I don't need to have a "pro" camera because I'm not a pro—never will be. I may want a feature (like ISO 12,800!) but it doesn't dictate if I eat or not.
I cannot convince myself that film is where it's at, but the digital alternative in the format I'm pursuing is, in camera terms, like buying a $75,000 car.
Don't we just know it!
Turning back to RF cameras - lots of places I've attempted to shoot with my DSLR are a no-go area. Camera is taken off me, locked away in a closet pending my exit!
Now I return with my little old G2 - "senile old man with his pre-war film camera, leave him to it, he's harmless"
I bought an M6 TTL off Fred Miranda. I have no lens yet, but that's a start. WOuld've liked an M7 but I can't swing it right now. The trouble with this whole thing is film. It just... sucks. Oh, it can look nice. but it's so expensive to process and have scanned. I have mulled over buying a scanner, but I would prefer to find a service that does it well for me that's not too expensive. My local pro lab (A&I) do a decent job but their scanning prices are outrageous and I cannot afford to keep spending $25/roll to process and scan film at medium res. High res is $35! Seriously? I'm paying way too much for labor.
I need a scanner or I'm gonna lose my shirt dealing with this.
Black M6 TTL arrived today—yippee! Must scrounge up enough for a lens. I think you're right, Molsondog, the used 50 Summicron is probably the best deal going in Leicaland.
Black M6 TTL arrived today—yippee! Must scrounge up enough for a lens. I think you're right, Molsondog, the used 50 Summicron is probably the best deal going in Leicaland.
So this is the first time I've been able to compare two different viewfinder magnifications. My friend's was 0.85x and mine is the standard 0.72x. There's not a huge difference, only each brightline occupies a slightly smaller area of the overall viewfinder. I notice with the 0.72, there's a bright line for 28mm which shares with 90mm. The 28mm lines are about the same size as the 35mm lines were on the 0.85. It'll be interesting getting used to composing in a smaller space—the 35mm lines took up the entire viewfinder before so I was spoiled.
If you're wondering what the hell I'm talking about, the viewfinder shows 6 different "bright lines", essentially the lines inside which your intended focal length is framed, and these boxes are of different sizes because there's only one viewfinder, so 135mm is REALLY LITTLE and 28mm or 35mm takes up most of the viewfinder. There are 3 different sets of lines which are visible depending on which lens you connect: 35 & 135mm, 50 & 70mm, 28 & 90mm.
Very nice! I was also thinking about this lens as a starter, partly because of the good deal and partly because it's a FL I'm very comfortable with. Keep 'em coming!
Been reading loads on film stock and have XP2 in the camera now. Curious to try Fuji Neopan CN, which has to be imported to the USA, but was Jeff Ascough's favourite film until he went digital SLR. One of my top people photogs, I have to say. The man's a master of available light and was an M6 TTL man for years and years.
Wonderful tonal range in that brickwork. Are you exposing Tri-X at a higher ISO? They look so clean compared to mine, which have been 400-800 depending.
Loving the M6 TTL, especially since it's mine now. Frustrating to have to wait to buy a lens, but my borrowed one is doing fine for now. Keep the RF shots coming.
There is no luxury of coming home and popping the CF card in the computer to see how it went. I have to finish off the roll. Devolving to film means becoming patient again.
Yes, I think I wanted an M7 as well, just for those times when I wanted the camera to think a little for me, but it's not a bad thing for me to have to do the brain-work.
Missing EXIFs and the instant gratification deeply, and after doing an afternoon's research on film scanners, it seems like there is truly no good solution that isn't prohibitively expensive, or wrought with inconvenience:
Epson V700/750 — good on MF and photos, not great on 35mm
Nikon Coolscans — expensive, still the best game in town, on the way out and not really supported
Plustek scanners — cheap, manual advance, not great resolution, blurry, no ICE
Canon 8800F — best of the Canons but really not great on 35mm.
Minolta film scanners — long gone
Watching a couple of these on eBay. Do they have D-ICE?
The MK11 certainly has ICE - not sure about the MK1 version.
Seemingly the MK1 is better for B+W but the MK11 is the one for colour and a lot, lot faster.
I've never used a MK1 so can't actually verify this but the source was a very prominent and successful New York based Pro on the GETDPI forum.
On both my Minoltas I use the OEM Dimage Scan software - tried Silverfast, Vuescan etc and couldn't see any improvement. The latest software is available on the Minolta site and works great.
ICE, of course, doesn't work on B+W (so we're told) but it does on my 5400!
Thank you both for the compliments and I hope you don't think I was showing off - just trying to endorse the scanner abilities.
As stated I'd shot these images 20+ years ago and had never seen them in all their glory until I bought my scanners a year or so ago.
I ain't no scanning expert so what you see is actually a reduction in quality from what I see on the lightbox. It is, after all, a second generation image.
I didn't need to do much PP. I scan as "flat" as possible i.e. low contrast and maximum range avoiding clipping at both ends. I use an 8x pass and that's about it. In CS3 I then adjust curves to boost the low contrast scan and I'm done.
Velvia/Provia and now Ektar 100G are brilliant emulsions and the Minoltas are as good as a drum scan (IMHO)
Just a couple suggestions - if you live near a Costco, they do C-41 processing (color negative) pretty well and at a very reasonable price - a roll developed and scanned for less than $5. The scans are pretty high-res (I forget exactly how high, but higher than a "pro" photolab scan for 4x the price).
Shortly after purchasing my 1st 'nice' camera (a D40 about a year and a half ago) I developed an interest in the broader scope of the photographic process (ok, I admit, partly spurred by Rockwell's film fetish), and started using film in non-auto cameras, beginning with a Nikon FE (and followed with a couple rangefinders, to keep this thread on track).
This year, I went primitive and signed up for a photo darkroom class at a local art school. It's been really fun, and has opened my eyes to the level of effort involved in pre-digital photography. Not for everybody (obviously), but it has accelerated my skills behind the camera, too, being directly involved in all the subsequent processing.
I'm currently setting pennies aside for an M6 TTL and 28 Elmarit-m ASPH (that's a lot of pennies).
I think I've found my B&W film for now: XP2. Is it maybe a little too contrasty? Maybe, but time will tell. I'm digging it for now.
But there's a problem, I forgot all about in the last decade's scrabble to digital and that is color temperature correction for tungsten. What am I supposed to do, again—80A? Simply adjusting the WB cooler or warmer in LR achieves a terrible result. I assume I need a cooling filter or something, but what can be done in post:
Just a couple suggestions - if you live near a Costco, they do C-41 processing (color negative) pretty well and at a very reasonable price - a roll developed and scanned for less than $5. The scans are pretty high-res (I forget exactly how high, but higher than a "pro" photolab scan for 4x the price).
Shortly after purchasing my 1st 'nice' camera (a D40 about a year and a half ago) I developed an interest in the broader scope of the photographic process (ok, I admit, partly spurred by Rockwell's film fetish), and started using film in non-auto cameras, beginning with a Nikon FE (and followed with a couple rangefinders, to keep this thread on track).
This year, I went primitive and signed up for a photo darkroom class at a local art school. It's been really fun, and has opened my eyes to the level of effort involved in pre-digital photography. Not for everybody (obviously), but it has accelerated my skills behind the camera, too, being directly involved in all the subsequent processing.
I'm currently setting pennies aside for an M6 TTL and 28 Elmarit-m ASPH (that's a lot of pennies).
Film's been a gamut of feelings, but when it's good, it's great. Looking into Costco, though I cannot imagine what the quality could be like. Can't hurt to try it once, eh?
Comments
Then I realised they were all working Pro's under pressure to meet deadlines
Film was not an option
Then I realised how lucky I am
I don't have, want or need any clients. No delivery deadlines, no pressure and no problems if I screw up.
So I can shoot film, take my time scanning (which I love) and spotting (thank God for ICE) and know it's all my own work.
I figured what film to use, the exposure, filtration and lighting and not some pre-programmed chip in my DSLR
I guess it's like comparing prints from the lab as opposed to my own darkroom.
The satisfaction factor is immense
And is there really a better sight than a dozen wonderful glowing trannies on a light box?
The blessing of being an amateur eh?
This is one of the truths that reminds me I don't have anyone to please but myself. I don't need to have a "pro" camera because I'm not a pro—never will be. I may want a feature (like ISO 12,800!) but it doesn't dictate if I eat or not.
I cannot convince myself that film is where it's at, but the digital alternative in the format I'm pursuing is, in camera terms, like buying a $75,000 car.
Don't we just know it!
Turning back to RF cameras - lots of places I've attempted to shoot with my DSLR are a no-go area. Camera is taken off me, locked away in a closet pending my exit!
Now I return with my little old G2 - "senile old man with his pre-war film camera, leave him to it, he's harmless"
Thank you very much!
Here are some of my shots with the Leica M8.2..You gotta luv this camera easy to carry and very discret
Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
I need a scanner or I'm gonna lose my shirt dealing with this.
Congratulations.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
If you're wondering what the hell I'm talking about, the viewfinder shows 6 different "bright lines", essentially the lines inside which your intended focal length is framed, and these boxes are of different sizes because there's only one viewfinder, so 135mm is REALLY LITTLE and 28mm or 35mm takes up most of the viewfinder. There are 3 different sets of lines which are visible depending on which lens you connect: 35 & 135mm, 50 & 70mm, 28 & 90mm.
Been reading loads on film stock and have XP2 in the camera now. Curious to try Fuji Neopan CN, which has to be imported to the USA, but was Jeff Ascough's favourite film until he went digital SLR. One of my top people photogs, I have to say. The man's a master of available light and was an M6 TTL man for years and years.
I think your shots are excellent - as opposed to being embarrassed I'd be absolutely delighted with these.
Love to see some more
Ray
I am reading this and glancing over at my Pentacon 6, sitting on the shelf. It's been I while since I took the big dog out for a walk.
Frame spacing is an issue, and it weighs about 5 kilos, but can you get color like this with a digital?
sure, you can get any color you want with Photoshop !
I still have a pair of Fed 5 rangefinders:
FED 5 and a 55mm f2.8 Industar (61) L/D lens (Zeiss Tessar design, the radioactive one)
FED 5 and a 5cm (yes, 5 centimeter) f2.0 Jupiter 8 (Zeiss Sonnar design)
Sorry, no recent image scans from either, but you can trust me that they are both capable of excellent images.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Loving the M6 TTL, especially since it's mine now. Frustrating to have to wait to buy a lens, but my borrowed one is doing fine for now. Keep the RF shots coming.
Care to share some more details ref exposure, processing?
And yes, I'm still shooting a Contax G2 but (to my shame I guess) I shoot Velvia or Ektar 100G slide.
Maybe I'll try a bit of Tri-X !
Yes, I think I wanted an M7 as well, just for those times when I wanted the camera to think a little for me, but it's not a bad thing for me to have to do the brain-work.
Missing EXIFs and the instant gratification deeply, and after doing an afternoon's research on film scanners, it seems like there is truly no good solution that isn't prohibitively expensive, or wrought with inconvenience:
Epson V700/750 — good on MF and photos, not great on 35mm
Nikon Coolscans — expensive, still the best game in town, on the way out and not really supported
Plustek scanners — cheap, manual advance, not great resolution, blurry, no ICE
Canon 8800F — best of the Canons but really not great on 35mm.
Minolta film scanners — long gone
That was a little depressing.
Also use a Minolta Elite 5400 II - restricted to 35mm but an amazing scanner and frequently seen on Ebay.
Agreed that official support no longer exists but the user groups are incredibly helpful and pretty instant.
Watching a couple of these on eBay. Do they have D-ICE?
The MK11 certainly has ICE - not sure about the MK1 version.
Seemingly the MK1 is better for B+W but the MK11 is the one for colour and a lot, lot faster.
I've never used a MK1 so can't actually verify this but the source was a very prominent and successful New York based Pro on the GETDPI forum.
On both my Minoltas I use the OEM Dimage Scan software - tried Silverfast, Vuescan etc and couldn't see any improvement. The latest software is available on the Minolta site and works great.
ICE, of course, doesn't work on B+W (so we're told) but it does on my 5400!
Hope this encourages you
http://reeray.smugmug.com/Travel/Around-the-World/9831215_DDMrv#668201241_qznNA
And here
http://reeray.smugmug.com/Photography/English-Memory/9824842_rWPND#668555014_Uh2yX
All shot 20 something years ago and recently scanned so some pretty old slides believe me!
As stated I'd shot these images 20+ years ago and had never seen them in all their glory until I bought my scanners a year or so ago.
I ain't no scanning expert so what you see is actually a reduction in quality from what I see on the lightbox. It is, after all, a second generation image.
I didn't need to do much PP. I scan as "flat" as possible i.e. low contrast and maximum range avoiding clipping at both ends. I use an 8x pass and that's about it. In CS3 I then adjust curves to boost the low contrast scan and I'm done.
Velvia/Provia and now Ektar 100G are brilliant emulsions and the Minoltas are as good as a drum scan (IMHO)
Shortly after purchasing my 1st 'nice' camera (a D40 about a year and a half ago) I developed an interest in the broader scope of the photographic process (ok, I admit, partly spurred by Rockwell's film fetish), and started using film in non-auto cameras, beginning with a Nikon FE (and followed with a couple rangefinders, to keep this thread on track).
This year, I went primitive and signed up for a photo darkroom class at a local art school. It's been really fun, and has opened my eyes to the level of effort involved in pre-digital photography. Not for everybody (obviously), but it has accelerated my skills behind the camera, too, being directly involved in all the subsequent processing.
I'm currently setting pennies aside for an M6 TTL and 28 Elmarit-m ASPH (that's a lot of pennies).
But there's a problem, I forgot all about in the last decade's scrabble to digital and that is color temperature correction for tungsten. What am I supposed to do, again—80A? Simply adjusting the WB cooler or warmer in LR achieves a terrible result. I assume I need a cooling filter or something, but what can be done in post:
Film's been a gamut of feelings, but when it's good, it's great. Looking into Costco, though I cannot imagine what the quality could be like. Can't hurt to try it once, eh?