I've always understood light seals to be critical parts of the camera and amongst the easiest replaced, with there being available for most cameras. It's actually something I'd like to have a go at replacing but my Nikkormat seems pretty sound.ilford wrote:HP5 PLUS is a high speed, medium contrast film making it especially suitable for action and press photography and also an excellent choice for general purpose photography. Nominally rated at ISO 400, it yields negatives of outstanding sharpness and fine grain under all lighting conditions. HP5 PLUS has been formulated to respond well to push processing and film speeds up to EI 3200/36 are achievable with ILFORD MICROPHEN developer maintaining good shadow detail and well separated mid-tones with sharp grain.
shortscale photography thread.
Moderated By: mods
Again, I think the rating on HP5 as described by Ilford as a 'nominal' rating, so it could easily be labelled 800 or 1600 if they wanted to.
Perfect, now I'm anxious to see how it looks, maybe I will have it developed by a lab if it's not terribly expensive. There's one right near my work, but they tend to be overpriced with pretty much everything.
I guess I'll order some replacement foam for both cameras. Funny, the seals in my T70 look brand new, even though it's from the same time period as the AE-1. The camera must have hardly been used, because although it looked awful on the outside (covered in grunge that was probably smoke residue), it's seemingly in perfect condition mechanically. It's interesting to me that Canon simultaneously produced the AE-1 Program alongside the T70, which is far superior in every way (except maybe styling).
I guess I'll order some replacement foam for both cameras. Funny, the seals in my T70 look brand new, even though it's from the same time period as the AE-1. The camera must have hardly been used, because although it looked awful on the outside (covered in grunge that was probably smoke residue), it's seemingly in perfect condition mechanically. It's interesting to me that Canon simultaneously produced the AE-1 Program alongside the T70, which is far superior in every way (except maybe styling).
this is what happens when you don't replace your light seals.
if you have a case that the camera fits in or somehow manage to never expose the back to any direct light it will be probably be fine but it's easiest to just replace the seals. I just cut some thin strips from some foam tape I had and used that on my Nikon FE. works great now.
if you have a case that the camera fits in or somehow manage to never expose the back to any direct light it will be probably be fine but it's easiest to just replace the seals. I just cut some thin strips from some foam tape I had and used that on my Nikon FE. works great now.
check out this camera I got.
Canon A35F
I've been fairly unimpressed with a lot of Canonet photos as well as Olympus Trip 35 and Yashica Electro 35 so I generally wrote off these consumer rangefinders as being kind of poor image quality. But no. I was wrong. I gave this one a stab because I wanted another small camera with built in flash and this one looks really cool so I thought what the hell. it is sort of like the final Canonet model. I don't know what people are doing to get such poor pictures out of these cameras because my pictures came out super sharp and just absolutely perfectly exposed.
I really like the 40mm lens because it's not truly wide like a 35mm it's just gives you that little more than a 50mm to let the image breath a little.
here's the set
it's auto-exposure with exposure lock so using it is very similar to how I described the T50 earlier in this thread. it takes care of pretty much everything and leaves you to concentrate on composition. it gives you simple control of what you need and nothing you don't. really fun camera to use.
Canon A35F
I've been fairly unimpressed with a lot of Canonet photos as well as Olympus Trip 35 and Yashica Electro 35 so I generally wrote off these consumer rangefinders as being kind of poor image quality. But no. I was wrong. I gave this one a stab because I wanted another small camera with built in flash and this one looks really cool so I thought what the hell. it is sort of like the final Canonet model. I don't know what people are doing to get such poor pictures out of these cameras because my pictures came out super sharp and just absolutely perfectly exposed.
I really like the 40mm lens because it's not truly wide like a 35mm it's just gives you that little more than a 50mm to let the image breath a little.
here's the set
it's auto-exposure with exposure lock so using it is very similar to how I described the T50 earlier in this thread. it takes care of pretty much everything and leaves you to concentrate on composition. it gives you simple control of what you need and nothing you don't. really fun camera to use.
Sorry, I left out this crucial word from my post earlier.BacchusPaul wrote:I've always understood light seals to be critical parts of the camera and amongst the easiest replaced, with there being kits available for most cameras. It's actually something I'd like to have a go at replacing but my Nikkormat seems pretty sound.
So, this time last year I was in New Zealand and for my birthday my parents sent me some money. I wanted to get something proper, rather than just spending money on petrol, beer and crisps, so I bought my camera and I've loved it ever since.
It was my birthday again a few weeks ago and I find myself in a similar situation. I think that I'd like to get something cameraish with this year's birthday money, and given that it's a very old Nikon I'm using, there's no shortage of nice lenses about the place for absurdly cheap prices.
I'm thinking I might go for something off the list below*, either the 50mm f/1.8 or the 80-200mm f/4 provided I can get one at a decent price (basically, the 50mm looks like a very useful lens, and the 80-200mm looks like a stupid techy lens to treat myself with. One's super useful, one will be fun and completely different to what I have, so I'd be happy with either).
I'm wondering if anyone has any other ideas? I'm open to suggestion, but I'm not sure about getting another 35mm system because I've yet to realise the limitations of the one I have (it works perfectly and never doesn't do what I want it to). I've thought about a 120mm system but I'm not certain I'd get a huge amount more enjoyment than I currently get from 35mm and besides, I'd sort of decided that if I ever went 120mm I'd go with a Hartblei refurbed Kiev 88, for no real reason other than I like them and have decided that might be the one to go with. And they're a wee bit well beyond my budget.
* - http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/cheapskate-lenses.htm
It was my birthday again a few weeks ago and I find myself in a similar situation. I think that I'd like to get something cameraish with this year's birthday money, and given that it's a very old Nikon I'm using, there's no shortage of nice lenses about the place for absurdly cheap prices.
I'm thinking I might go for something off the list below*, either the 50mm f/1.8 or the 80-200mm f/4 provided I can get one at a decent price (basically, the 50mm looks like a very useful lens, and the 80-200mm looks like a stupid techy lens to treat myself with. One's super useful, one will be fun and completely different to what I have, so I'd be happy with either).
I'm wondering if anyone has any other ideas? I'm open to suggestion, but I'm not sure about getting another 35mm system because I've yet to realise the limitations of the one I have (it works perfectly and never doesn't do what I want it to). I've thought about a 120mm system but I'm not certain I'd get a huge amount more enjoyment than I currently get from 35mm and besides, I'd sort of decided that if I ever went 120mm I'd go with a Hartblei refurbed Kiev 88, for no real reason other than I like them and have decided that might be the one to go with. And they're a wee bit well beyond my budget.
* - http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/cheapskate-lenses.htm
The lighting in that venue was really dark so I only took 10 pictures with the T70. Even at ISO 1600 and f/1.4 the meter was requiring shutter speeds below 1/30. Here are a few taken with the X-Pro1 though.
I think I may start shooting RAW with it, because the JPG processing really does some funky things in lighting like this. Most of the pictures, the blacks are completely black, and it ended up looking like the subjects in the foreground had been photoshopped into a black background. And the highlights tend to be over-saturated.
I think I may start shooting RAW with it, because the JPG processing really does some funky things in lighting like this. Most of the pictures, the blacks are completely black, and it ended up looking like the subjects in the foreground had been photoshopped into a black background. And the highlights tend to be over-saturated.
Last edited by Dillon on Fri May 17, 2013 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Paul: What lens(es) are you using now? IMO a good 50mm is a must for any camera bag. It's always the first lens I buy if I don't have one already. I have a 70-200mm and it's quite useful for three things: waste-up portraits (80mm to ~125mm is a perfect focal length for this), action / sports, and wildlife. Not much else, as it's too cumbersome to carry around on a daily basis it's too long to be used indoors for most things.
That A35 looks neat, I may have to keep my eye out for one.
Strange, my AE-1 doesn't have that problem. Think I'll replace the seals anyway.Mages wrote:this is what happens when you don't replace your light seals.
That A35 looks neat, I may have to keep my eye out for one.
yeah it only happened on that one roll. it must have gotten a hit of unusually direct sunlight or something. after that I fixed it up and I haven't had any more problems.
paul: what lens do you have now? I think I saw on your flickr photos something about a 55mm nikkor? I have the 50mm series E. it's good but probably wouldn't be that different than the 55mm. maybe see if you can get a 35mm. they are wider so can be useful. good when you are in a tight space and can't back up to get something in the frame. also good for epic wide-view landscape shots, hah.
it's all about what kind of photography you're interested in pursuing. long lenses are good for portrait photography or anything where you'd like to get a close up shot with very little angle distortion. they are also obviously good for getting close-up shots of things that are impossible to get close to, such as in nature photography. for most general walking around taking pictures photography something around 35 - 50mm is going to be the most useful. go below 35mm and it gets super wide and is almost like a special effect. it just depends on what you're interested in really. personally I don't think I'd need anything beyond like a 70 - 80mm lens and then most pictures I could get with something like that I could basically do with 50mm. I'm just not personally interested in that kind of photography. but maybe you are! so I would just think about what kind of photos you're going for, and get a lens to help you with that.
paul: what lens do you have now? I think I saw on your flickr photos something about a 55mm nikkor? I have the 50mm series E. it's good but probably wouldn't be that different than the 55mm. maybe see if you can get a 35mm. they are wider so can be useful. good when you are in a tight space and can't back up to get something in the frame. also good for epic wide-view landscape shots, hah.
it's all about what kind of photography you're interested in pursuing. long lenses are good for portrait photography or anything where you'd like to get a close up shot with very little angle distortion. they are also obviously good for getting close-up shots of things that are impossible to get close to, such as in nature photography. for most general walking around taking pictures photography something around 35 - 50mm is going to be the most useful. go below 35mm and it gets super wide and is almost like a special effect. it just depends on what you're interested in really. personally I don't think I'd need anything beyond like a 70 - 80mm lens and then most pictures I could get with something like that I could basically do with 50mm. I'm just not personally interested in that kind of photography. but maybe you are! so I would just think about what kind of photos you're going for, and get a lens to help you with that.
Well see, that's the thing. The lens I have is cracking good. It's 55mm and great for day to day stuff. The only downside being that it's wide open at f/3.5 which isn't that big a deal, but I suppose a quicker lens might be useful.
I think I might be trying too hard to convince myself that there's something I want out there that's worth getting.
I'd also maybe consider developing equipment just because of the fortune it'd save me in the long run (I commonly have more exposed film than unexposed, waiting for pay day to get developed. It's pretty expensive here).
I think I might be trying too hard to convince myself that there's something I want out there that's worth getting.
I'd also maybe consider developing equipment just because of the fortune it'd save me in the long run (I commonly have more exposed film than unexposed, waiting for pay day to get developed. It's pretty expensive here).
Took some pictures in my kitchen today, most of them came out crap as it was 125iso film(expired in 1997 ilford fp4) and so I was using slow shutters and I got a bit of mirror slap.
Link to the album on my facebook page as I can't be trumped with flickr
link
Link to the album on my facebook page as I can't be trumped with flickr
link
that's cool hurb. this girl does these really great sort of domestic photos like that.
oh yeah, that's true. or loading or unloading film in direct sunlight. actually it might have been something like that. I don't remember if I did this then but now I always unload the camera in subdued light and put the roll directly into a fully black container.Goots. wrote:It's possible that those light leaks might not even be from the camera and just from letting 35 mm film sit around waiting to be developed which I've dealt with in a more extreme situation, ruined a lot of shots by not developing them for like a year.
I can think of a couple thingsBacchusPaul wrote:Well see, that's the thing. The lens I have is cracking good. It's 55mm and great for day to day stuff. The only downside being that it's wide open at f/3.5 which isn't that big a deal, but I suppose a quicker lens might be useful.
I think I might be trying too hard to convince myself that there's something I want out there that's worth getting.
I'd also maybe consider developing equipment just because of the fortune it'd save me in the long run (I commonly have more exposed film than unexposed, waiting for pay day to get developed. It's pretty expensive here).
-50mm 1.4. would love to have one. they're super nice.
-35mm. they're useful for reasons I stated before.
or you can always just get a compact 35 like a Mju II. a lot of cameras in that class have 35mm lenses.
-
westtexasred
- Shortscale Cultural Minister
- Posts: 16977
- Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Minneapolis
BacchusPaul wrote:Just got back a whole load of film today. 7 rolls (Seven!)! Some of them are below, more are on my flickr. One of them was a roll of Ektar, which I'd never shot. I think I quite like it. Pricey, though.
WARNING! CHEESEY BLACK AND WHITE SHOTS OF PARIS INSIDE:
► Show Spoiler
They are all quite brill Paul!
Had two rolls developed yesterday. The first was Fuji Superia 800 in a Canon AE-1 Program. The second was Kodak Portra 800 in a Canon T70. The Portra is a bit nicer...finer grain, and sharper. But it also costs twice as much. I think I may pick up an EOS camera and use the same film to see how much different it looks in a modern camera. I'm starting to also think, though, that I won't shoot any more film (at least color film) until I can develop on my own.
Fuji:
Portra:
Fuji:
► Show Spoiler
► Show Spoiler
I'm considering selling my entire digital Canon setup. I don't really want to, but...I guess I've realized that I don't use it enough anymore to have $2000+ invested into it. It's only going down in value as new gear comes out, and I could use the money now to pay off debt and such. Plus, I have just as much (if not more) fun with my film cameras. Really, that's what it's all about for me, since I'm not making money off my photos. The only thing I'm worried about is the availability of film, and the price of film going up. Has anyone here been in the same situation? What'd you end up doing?