/fgt/ - Film General Thread

>>3084213
Fucking Fuji, which film will they kill next? Velvia?

File: IMG_1627.jpg (43KB, 750x356px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 750x356px

Anyone knows an easy to make diy fixer? I cant find a photography store in my town, shipping takes a lot and I tried looking for sodium thiosulphate but nothing

Can I fix with water and salt?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Comment	Screenshot
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	750
Image Height	356

>>3084234
if you could fix with "water and salt" no one would ever buy hypo, genius. No shortcuts here, if silver halides were soluble in water film wouldn't exist in its current form. Thiosulfate is the cheapest/safest chem, the alternatives are cyanide compounds. Try looking for it in winemaking-related online stores, used there. What country are you in, btw?

File: 2017-05-25-0039-2.jpg (266KB, 1280x842px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1280x842px

What does it mean when color negative has really wonky colors? This was Kodak Ektar. I tried my best with the colors, but correcting for one area fucks up the rest of the image. Other frames in the same roll have the same issue but some don't.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 7200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5022
Image Height	3350
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3600 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:05:27 02:58:04
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1280
Image Height	842

>>3084256
It's your scanning settings.

>>3084234
Yeah you can but you need to make a super concentrated salt solution as much salt as you can dissolve into a liter of water (enough for two rolls of 35mm or one 120 roll) and leave it in the for a like a day. The results are not really of much use other than to say you did it.

I want to try out film. Whats a good slr that doesn't cost too much(<€250)?

Should I buy all the Fujicolor 200 I can find in Boots? They always have loads in stock where I live and no one buys them

>mfw "street photography" with 6x17 on a tripod

also:
>tfw no more 4x5 acros
will it still be producing in small scale in Japan?

File: untitled.jpg (735KB, 2014x657px) Image search: [Google]

735KB, 2014x657px

>>3084312
>forgetting the picture

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: shit.png (52KB, 1224x666px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1224x666px

>>3084244
can only find thiosulfate in bulk and shipping from large chem fabs

>>3084291
So I dissolve like uh, a shitton of iodized salt into the water and fix as usual? or I leave the entirety of the film inside the fixer solution?

I'm see-sawing it in a makeshift plastic tray with a stick in the middle to help myself kinda like pic related because I dont have a tank and reel readily available

I hope my makeshift tray can hold up to the chem use

>>3084314
leave the entirety of the film inside the fixer solution for a day**

>>3084296
Literally anything from Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Minolta, etc that isn't one of the cheap early AF models.

Off the top of my head, these are some of the better SLRs out there form the big camera companies.
>Nikon: F2, F3, F4, F100, FE, FM
>Canon: AE-1, A-1 F-1, EOS-1N and 1V
>Olympus: OM-1 to OM-4
>Minolta: SRT series, XD-7, XG series, X-700, Alpha/Maxxum 9000, Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum 9
>Pentax: Spotmatic, K1000, MX, LX

File: IMG_20170528_082926.jpg (109KB, 499x666px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 499x666px

>>3084298
If you like it, sure.
>>3084312
>will it still be producing in small scale in Japan?
Nope, since they released a japanese press release too. They don't release Japanese press releases if the film is still to be made for the Japanese market. :(

It's a beautiful Sunday, going hiking with this lil guy loaded with Gold 100.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	F-04G
Equipment Make	FUJITSU
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:05:28 08:29:27
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.0
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Focal Length	4.80 mm
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Mode	Auto
Image Height	1536
Rendering	Normal
Scene Capture Type	Standard
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	2048
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Brightness	8.2 EV
ISO Speed Rating	38
Exposure Time	1081/1000000 sec

>>3084383

Was it all sizes being discontinued? Or will they make 35mm for awhile or something?

File: Provia100Fexpired_008.jpg (326KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1000x667px

>>3084390
Only 4x5 and production doesn't end until 2019.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:27 18:52:42
Exposure Time	3.2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

What kind of results would I get using a built in flash (e.g. a11 in an olympus xa or canonaf35m) with provia 100f?

Can someone comment on my recent photos? This is my first batch that actually came out good.

>>3083929
>>3083930
>>3083932
>>3083933
>>3083935
>>3083940
>>3083942

I'll resize them next time, I forgot when I posted about what was in the sticky. I'd appreciate feedback since I'm not getting much in the other thread, maybe cause the file size.

>>3084314

read these for more info

http://www.apug.org/forum/index.php?threads/saltwater-as-fixer.34755/

http://caffenol.blogspot.com/2012/04/fixer-2-errare-humanum-est.html?m=0

>>3084417
wow so I must leave the film for several days, where I live it gets seriously hot btw haha and it gets to 40c at 2pm-4pm

I guess I have to find a 1L container, do the saltwater solution and dip the film and leave for as much time possible, 2 days to be sure?

Is it better to support Fuji and buy Fujifilm or Kodak and buy Kodak film?

Which company will produce film the longest?

>>3084458
I doesn't matter either way since your money doesn't have any say in what the company does, but I'd have to say Kodak since they're still active in the cinema industry and there's been a bit of a revival of 35mm.

File: Minolta-X-370-w-50mm-F1.7.jpg (109KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 400x400px

I want to try film for the first time(well, i did it already for a school project but it was limited.)

I have a Minolta X-370 i picked up at a goodwill store that seems to work properly.

What film should i get to start with? I want to shoot color btw. Any other stuff you think i should know about film photography would be appreciated.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:07:27 11:11:20
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	400
Image Height	400

File: May 27 2017 07.jpg (297KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1400x933px

Sup /p/?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Capture One Pro (for Sony) 10.0 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/6 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	0.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Image Width	1400
Image Height	933
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3084462

Fuji Superia 400 is always a good start.

Cheap and quite flexible film.

>>3084464
its that the p30 meme film?

File: May 27 2017 08.jpg (187KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1400x933px

>>3084467
Maybe.....

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Capture One Pro (for Sony) 10.0 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/6 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	0.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Image Width	1400
Image Height	933
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3084462
E K T A R

File: IMG_1607.jpg (333KB, 996x720px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 996x720px

>>3084462
hey cool man!
I bought myself a Canon AE1 Program and where I live there are literally no photography stores, so I have only been able to find scarce 35mm film, in pharmacies and so far only been able to gather 3 rolls, and there is no way for me to get developing chemicals, I found some in a site but as for now not an option because I'm kinda short on money, so I'll have to make-do with caffenol and >>3084314

Have you shot anything so far with your camera?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	paint.net 4.0.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1280
Image Height	720
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3084475
>Have you shot anything so far with your camera?
Nope, never bought film before.

There's a store in Montreal which sells both the Superia and Ektar that's been recommended so i'll probably go check for them and more information this week.

>>3084475

If I were you, I'd be ebaying film, and sending rolls off to get developed. Pricey, but quality is great.

Caffenol sounds fun actually, gonna have to try one of these days.

>buy a Fuji instax 90 classic
>love it

What's the most logical way to go from here? I absolutely love the instant film Polaroid concept, but from what I understand only third parties make Polaroid film anymore?

>>3084504
buying instax wide as well? instax mini film in japan is around 800yen per pack (10 pics) so I'd try to buy bulk there and instax wide is usually priced the same in most photo stores. it's either 15$, 15€ or 1500yen for 2 packs.

>>3084504
>Fuji instax 90 classic
>What's the most logical way to go from here?

That is it.

You have reached the endgame of instant film.

You could get one of those Fuji instant printers that link to your cellphone if you want.

File: IMG_1605.jpg (1MB, 2968x1668px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2968x1668px

>>3084478
If you're shooting in b&w you should try Ilford film, and as for colour idk, maybe Fujifilm and Kodak, iirc they both make top tier colour film

>>3084484
I live in Mexico and I have found 35mm on online stores like mercadolibre (latinamerican version of ebay) and also on a specialized store that also sells ilford b&w dev chemicals (dev, stop bath and fixer) but its kinda pricey atm for me but I do intend buying from there

Havent found a single store here in Mexico that still develops film, maybe film is ded in Mexico, or maybe I'm really shit at google

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2968
Image Height	1668
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3084504
Nowhere. Your only other options are overpriced and finicky Impossible Project film, and overpriced and discontinued Fujifilm FP-100C.
I guess you could always get an Instax 300 though if you want a larger exposure.

File: 1411480802202.jpg (66KB, 452x710px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 452x710px

>Find a good price on a Coolscan 9000
>No trays
>Look up the price of one of the 120 trays
>$400
It's just fucking ABS plastic, why does it have to be so much?

>>3084534
Time to start 3D printing replacements.

>>3084538
Shame I don't have a printer because I would totally pay someone to lend me their holder for duplication.
On the other hand I doubt some would want that to happen because they like selling $99 deadstock plastic for $400

File: ZBHP5VV05006.jpg (1MB, 1280x1274px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1274px

Scanning on a shatbed is suffering. Also when I tried Vuescan, it only got me far less sharp results than the Epson's own software. Not sure if I did something wrong, because Vuescan is so god damn clunky to use. What sort of output settings do people use? I tried scanning to JPG and TIFF at max DPI.

>>3084546
>>3084547
Noise aside, these look fine.

File: ZBHP5VV05001.jpg (1MB, 1280x1270px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1270px

>>3084549
Well they aren't terrible level IQ, but I'm not really getting the MF advantage over 35mm, my Plustek produces far sharper results off negatives over three times smaller. I guess I can only start saving up for a Reflecta.

>>3084552
These are great! I'm loving the juxtaposition of modern motocross against gorgeous 6x6 B&W tonality and depth of field.

>>3084546
I just use epsons software. 3200dpi, I turn off all their shit like sharpening, digital ice, etc. then go into curves and flatten out the contrast to make sure I'm clipping as little detail as possible, save as TIFF then edit in PS.

Your photos look fine btw, maybe a little flat but I see nothing to complain about.

>>3084312
Just get an xpan you fucking loser

>>3084462
Fujifilm Superia 400 X-TRA (you can probably get 4 rolls of 24 for about $13.99 at walmart), or the Fujifilm 200 ISO one (i forget the name), it's about $3 cheaper.

File: PICT0087 RSZ.jpg (677KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 1000x667px

I got a pretty 6/10 scanner, but managed to get this off well from a previous roll.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:27 23:34:07
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667

>>3084554
Thanks, it was fun to shoot too, got me fired up about shooting motorsports events. Got another roll cooking right now, will post more later.
>>3084556
Yeah for these I forgot to disable the sharpening, the damn software always enables it by default. I really need to get into the workflow, with Silverfast I just set the histogram a little and all I need to do in post is typically just dust removal and maybe minor contrast adjustments. With Epson software it seems I have to produce the flattest possible image from the scanner and then edit everything in post.

File: of120_01.jpg (163KB, 800x463px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 800x463px

>>3084552
Just get the daddy Plustek.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Phase One
Camera Model	P45+
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5201
Image Height	3010
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2012:05:11 17:09:48
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2012:04:17 18:23:55
Exposure Time	9466/757281 sec
F-Number	f/18.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/18.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Light Source	Other
Focal Length	80.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	800
Image Height	463

>>3084413

>3083929
first one is not bad, though nothing is entirely in focus, however the bench blocking the bottom 1/3 of the picture takes away.

>3083929
Same as the first one

>3083932
Aside from the jarring sun reflection near the man's mouth, it is a pretty damn good photo, but the reflections from the laminates (among other nitpicking) take away.

>3083933
it's aesthetically pleasing, nice and simple, but a bit of motion blur.

>3083935
Again, motion blur but a good photo, either stand still, or pick a lower exposure time. Good angle though.

>3083940
Might've looked better with a higher F stop/DoF, the blurry foreground objects put it out of place

>3083942
Personally the best, the mostly aligning symmetry with the cage cart slightly off angle make it somehow pleasing to look at.

File: IMG_7563.jpg (1MB, 2016x1512px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2016x1512px

>>3084584
my 2 cameras and the 2 lens.
Had a Vivitar 70-210 Macro, but broke during a trip about a month ago.

>>3084593
It costs way more than the Reflecta does though. More than I can probably save up before I must quit my job out of exhaustion.

File: 4chen photo resized 6.jpg (910KB, 2000x1325px) Image search: [Google]

910KB, 2000x1325px

>>3084599

So I intentionally oftentimes put objects in the foreground to help frame the photo, is this bad in photography? I'm trying to study and learn, I need to buy Ansel Adams books.

I get it can take away from the focus but it always seemed natural to me. Of course if we look at a classical painting there's never any blurry objects in the foreground, I wouldn't know how to make the objects in front and back look less blurry though.

Ya also motion blur I'm still getting used to, sometimes even when I'm focusing for quite a while on a photo I can get some like on the feet photo. I'm trying my best since with street photography you really only have 1-2 chances with most opportunities.

Also I keep my F stop at automatic, and shutter speed usually at 60 when I'm inside and outside.

Thanks for all the advice, I'll really try to keep it in mind. It's extremely helpful.

Also here's another photo I took with some blur in the foreground since I was focusing on the center, but is it fine in this case to have the human blurry if you want to focus on what's in front of him? There might be a small motion blur as well I think on the sides.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	EZ Controller 6.50.008 (160222)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3089
Image Height	2048

>>3084618
Go full manual. I highly recommend it, avoid using the auto settings, watch videos and read up on what every knob, dial and button do on your camera. The best way to learn is to go full manual, write up what you used on shots you may question (like f stop, apperture, etc.) and then work up from there.

File: 5421770662_72ffb94fd5_b (1).jpg (199KB, 1024x765px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1024x765px

What is /fgt/'s opinion on early aughts film cameras?

Considering a Minolta Maxxum/Dynax 7 for some old a-mount lenses I have.

Seems like a pretty nice body honestly. Lot's of bells and whistles I might never use, but some interesting stuff like STF, multiple exposures, and exif storage.

>>3084612
If you are talking about the x120, that is a hunk of shit, I have one and it's only good for a quick generating of digital contact sheets and previews.
It's fast as shit but at the same time well, ....shit.

The MF5000 is better but since you can get the Plustek 120 for the same price I would go to the latter, especially with their excellent support.

Also the biggest drawback of the Reflecta were the bundled film holders. They required you to cut down the usual 120 film stripes to single (6x7/6x9) or double (4.5x6/6x6) frame size.

>>3084624
Great if you want a heavy workhorse and don't care wasting film because it becomes very easy to do so.


The F5/F6/F100, Dynax 7/9 and EOS V1 are the pinnacle of film photography.
All insanely fast, perfectly metering beasts, you can't really go wrong with them but the shooting experience is different from an older manual slr.

File: 8403115419_565e6697da_b.jpg (209KB, 1024x731px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1024x731px

>>3084624
A Maxxum 9ti is honestly one of my grails.

Olympus XA or mju-1?

>>3084629

Yea there are a few a7 limited and a9 ti's on e-bay but they start at like $800 for the 7, and the 9 is like double that. Not sure it is worth it for a film body.

I ordered an a7 from ebay and it was busted. Tempted to just get the limited version...

>>3084628

Are they usable in manual mode? Or is there so much handholding you have to turn off it isn't worth it?

Is there any easy way to tell if a film is C41 or Traditional black and white before buying it? None of the descriptions for the films seem to state which it is.

Is TMAX 400 c41? I want to buy a pack after seeing the results. Absolutely stunning

File: 420112.jpg (169KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 600x600px

Anyone have experience with FOMAPAN films? Seems like they're the cheapest I could get where I am.

>>3084643
All black and white is traditional B&W unless stated otherwise. TMAX 400 is traditional black and white.

I think the only C41 B&W film that still exists is Ilford XP2.

File: image-unrelated.jpg (245KB, 1000x440px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1000x440px

>>3084552
>I guess I can only start saving up for a Reflecta.
Just use you m4/3 and a macro lens m8. Don't buy into the dedicated unit meme for 120, you know better than this.

I'd say stick with Epson scan desu, Your scanner is more than capable. Can you tell me what DPI you're going for when you're scanning?
This is fomashit 400 devved in 1:25 R09 scanned on a V500 for what it's worth.
>>3084644
They're the cheapest for a reason, if you're intending to do any type of long exposure work, you may want to look up their reciprocity failure first.
>>3084646
>>3084643
>I think the only C41 B&W film that still exists is Ilford XP2.
Correct. However XP2 is pretty nice if you're going for sharpness and speed.

File: vilia-russian-35mm-camera.jpg (104KB, 556x466px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 556x466px

just copped this for 7 euros did i fuck up

File: fomapan-400-004.jpg (181KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 667x1000px

>>3084644
Haven't tried 120, but Fomapan action 400 can be quite grainy.
Tried it at 30°C in 1+25 Rodinal and cont. agitation. Basically a development similar to C41.
Currently, I have another roll in the camera, but I pulled it to 200. Going to test the same development, but with rodinal 1+50 to get reasonable development time.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2191
Image Height	3352
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2400 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:02 18:31:57
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000

>>3084646
>>3084643

Thanks, I'll pick some up then. I'll develop my own traditional at some point, but till then it costs an arm and a leg

File: polend2.jpg (3MB, 3438x2248px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3438x2248px

>>3084644
They're cheap for a reason. Narrow dynamic range (compared to all alternatives), high grain, poor shadow detail unless you meter them slower than box speed. Handles like smooth godly silk in the darkroom, though. Only upside aside from price. Shoot a roll of fomapan, shoot a roll of whatever else you have available, see the differences for yourself, simplest and most educating/fun solution. Pic is foma400/rodinal 1:100 scanned w/ potato
>>3084653
Price-wise, yes, camera-wise, similarly, it's worth 2-3€ at best, basic triplet lens, 1/30-1/250 leaf shutter, manual focus, f4 40mm T-43 lens, no metering so good luck with that. Why'd you buy it, anon?

>>3084660
>Why'd you buy it, anon?
idk mane
the nice gypsy woman offered me it or said i was going to get a curse

>>3084639
I own both. I'd get the Mju I most likely because it's super cheap. Mine is also sharper than the XA. However, if they're similarly priced, get the XA and sell it if you don't like it. The best thing about it is the steadily rising price - otherwise I think it's overrated.

>>3084644
Foma's ordinary 100/200/400 speed films are fine for use with gear from the seventies and older. For hi-fi usage I'd recommend just about anything else. The 400 speed one doesn't look half bad in HC-110(b) though.

Foma's Retropan 320, on the other hand, is for some kind of retro lomofagging only. I can't think of any other reason to have a film without an anti-halation layer, in 35mm. Terrible "olde-timey" contrast without a filter, needs at least a medium yellow not to look like bullshit. You'll love this if your intent is to photograph your East European homeland using East European bakelite gear; I put my first roll through a Nikon F5 w/ 50mm f/1.8G and discovered just how far the rabbit hole goes in terms of how films can be different from one another.

For cheap film, I'd just go with RPX 100 or 400 (the 25 is super dicky about exposure). It's more than halfway good for like 50 eurocents more.

File: 4297225160_3d87356baa_o.jpg (1MB, 1962x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1962x2000px

>>3084644
I've been shooting the 400 in 35mm lately specifically for the grain and the vibe. I used to shoot the 100 and 400 in 120, and they were gorgeous, no gimmick, but the film base was sort of unruly when it came to staying wrapped up, loading it on reels, and scanning.

Pic related from 2010, Fomapan 100.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2010:01:22 23:27:31

>>3084629

Is the a9ti or a7 limited worth double or triple the cost of a normal body?

File: Filmomat.jpg (37KB, 640x401px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x401px

Has anyone tried this thing? I want one so bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=BhgOWvP1vZA

I kinda just store my film on the shelf in my room. Never gets any direct sunlight or heat or anything, but should I store them in the vegetable cooler in my fridge? Would I have to do anything with the film before taking one out to use?

>>3084816
Storing the film in the fridge would extend its expiration date, given that the canister has not yet been opened. Just make sure you give film time to return to room temperature before use.

>>3084774
Not unless you really want to commit to Minolta.

Marginal gains really.

Is one-hour drugstore film processing totally dead? Walgreens only seems to do 3-5 day service (i.e. they mail it out). I never used it for anything critical, but it was useful for test rolls for eBay cameras.

>>3084890
A literal "1-Hour Photo" business is a bit dead. However the business of a same day service is still pretty alive and well (at least where I live). Normally I go and drop off a few rolls to get the negatives at say 10 AM, and they appoint to be picked up at 3:00 the latest. It's a good business still, I hope.

File: 20120917_183424-450x600.jpg (31KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 450x600px

>>3084805
From some googling about it seems like the Filmomat cost about $2000. For that money you could probably buy a used professional film processor (like this one for instance http://www.ebay.com/itm/Noritsu-QSF-T15F-film-processor-SM-C-41-single-lane-135mm-APS-110-120volt-/201653823560?hash=item2ef3812848:g:tVwAAOSwdzVXvw~h )

OTOH these probably need chemicals in special containers and might not work well if you only develop film occasionally.

>>3084774
Like most other limited or titanium bodied cameras, there is very little in terms of improvements when compared to the regular cameras.

>>3084890
I still get 30 minute turn around on 35mm c41 no problem.

>>3084977
IIUC Noritsus take chemicals in just the bottles you see in the picture. They come off and get dumped and refilled manually. There's a youtube series on a guy trying to restore a (somewhat larger) processor which shows the gory details.

>>3084979
>>3084878

I really love a-mount, but it seems to be a dead end.

Maybe if I had bought an a99ii instead of a7ii...

Still, I might grab a limited/ti if I can find it under $300.

>>3084890
>Is one-hour drugstore film processing totally dead?

Yodobashi will do one hour developing and prints.

If you want scans or care taken while developing, it can take from a day to a week though.

>>3085076
>Maybe if I had bought an a99ii instead of a7ii...
You know the LA-EA4 exist, right?

>>3085080

Yea, that is what I am using the lenses with now.

It isn't as fast as the a99ii though.

And if I am going to buy a new lens from now, I might as well pick up the e-mount version.

File: 57470020.jpg (692KB, 2482x1807px) Image search: [Google]

692KB, 2482x1807px

recent randoms

all superia 400 I think

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:17:21
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 57490028.jpg (448KB, 1000x663px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 1000x663px

>>3085131
ah resized now

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:27:08
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 57490019.jpg (276KB, 1000x663px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1000x663px

>>3085132

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:27:00
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 57470032.jpg (380KB, 1000x733px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1000x733px

>>3085133

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:25:41
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 57470030.jpg (301KB, 1000x663px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1000x663px

>>3085134

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:26:14
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 57470027.jpg (368KB, 1000x663px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1000x663px

>>3085145

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:24:44
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 57470018.jpg (341KB, 1000x649px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 1000x649px

>>3085146

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:24:28
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 55400023.jpg (281KB, 663x1000px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 663x1000px

>>3085148

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:28:30
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 55370032.jpg (176KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1000x667px

>>3085150

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 22:28:10
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3085133

I really like this one.

>>3085076
>>3084774

Dunno about other places, but from the camera shop guys I have been talking to, a7 is hard to find. No one wants to part with it because it is such a fantastic film body and the only a-mount film body with guaranteed a-mount SSM and SAM support.

File: maxresdefault-71.jpg (104KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1920x1080px

It really reminds me of this shot from GITS.

File: Du5fO4ufXAUvuBNnr5KN2gt72DNv3F.jpg (125KB, 1856x1004px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1856x1004px

>>3085208
Wait no I mean this one.

File: unnamed.jpg (462KB, 1936x1936px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 1936x1936px

I happen to find this one.

Any idea what lens can I get? Probably around standard 50mm equivalent from a full frame format. Is that the 80mm? Preferably on the cheaper side.

>>3085226
>On the cheaper side
>Hasselblad
I gotta ask, how much did you pay for that?

>>3085228
>I gotta ask, how much did you pay for that?

It was given to me.

>>3085232
thieving nigger.

>>3085232
Well lenses are $500 for a basic 80mm and up so have fun with that.

>>3085235
>Well lenses are $500 for a basic 80mm and up so have fun with that.

Any chances for $200 and below lenses? I mean I tried searching Ebay and you are right they are $500 and above

>>3085226
>>3085232
>I happen to find this one.
>It was given to me.
confirmed for stolen

>>3085237
You can try, but a lot of them will be beat to hell or have fungus in the elements.
If you're that poor to steal a 500 EL and not afford the lenses, just sell the thing to get the heat off and get a Bronica SQ instead.

>>3085241
Newbie to medium format here
Bronica SQ or Bronica ERTS?

>>3085242
Do you want square format or 4:3 ratio? That's the major difference between the two.

>>3085247
Square but it is ok to crop since I want more shots per roll. Is that possible? to have 4:3 and crop it?

>>3085250
>Square but it is ok to crop since I want more shots per roll.
U wot? You don't get to pick and choose here, you get either square 6x6, or 4:3 6x4.5.

>>3085208
I miss grain in anime

>>3085253
Not true, if you get the SQ-A you can buy 6x4.5 backs (120J and 220J)

File: I woke.png (290KB, 316x292px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 316x292px

>>3085260
I actually didn't know the SQ had 645 backs. That's pretty neat.

>>3085241
>If you're that poor to steal a 500 EL and not afford the lenses, just sell the thing to get the heat off and get a Bronica SQ instead.

Are Carl Zeiss the only lens option?

>>3085271
To my knowledge, yes.
http://imagesandcameras.com/hasselblad-lenses

>>3085277
Can I just buy a cheap as Mamiya lens and adapt it to this system?

where do you buy film online from the UK?

>>3085277
>>3085241
>>3085235
What about this one for the Hassie?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Exc-Hasselblad-Carl-Zeiss-Planar-80mm-F-2-8-Lens-Hood-500cm-from-japan-/201937481094?hash=item2f04696d86:g:idYAAOSwcgNZDoFl

It's the cheapest that I can find.

>>3085277
There was actually one Schneider zoom lens

>>3085283
If ya wanna use bellows

File: untitled.jpg (608KB, 1234x810px) Image search: [Google]

608KB, 1234x810px

>>3085295
http://shop.silverprint.co.uk/Film/catalogue/171/

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3084641
Are they usable in manual mode? Or is there so much handholding you have to turn off it isn't worth it?

They are quite usable, but think more along the lines of using a dslr in manual mode.
I usually shoot in A with AF on because on the F5 it's accurate as fuck.

I could go all manual but it's easier without, it makes you lazy.

File: girl2.jpg (363KB, 1000x1400px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1000x1400px

>>3085242
just be aware they're both heavy clunkers with the handgrips. also if yours doesn't have the 120 film back you can use the 220 just remember you have like ~9 shots.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4000
Image Height	5600
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:29 18:08:12
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1400

>>3085660
Non of the information in this post is correct.

They can have handgrips, but it's an accessory.

They aren't anymore of a clunker than any other Mf Slr.

If you use a 220 back, you still get 12 shots on the sq and 16 on the etrs.

Don't post if you dunno what yer talking about fella.

File: 1483811901625.jpg (24KB, 515x515px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 515x515px

>>3085660

adorkable girls are my fetish

File: notanother.webm (159KB, 638x360px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 638x360px

>>3085668
>They can have handgrips, but it's an accessory.
>They aren't anymore of a clunker than any other Mf Slr.

>>3085680
What's your point? That post made it sound like the handgrip was an unremovable part of the camera. And saying a MF SLR is clunky is just silly. No shit?

>Cross shopping two SUVs

>Hey anon, did you know SUVs are kinda big and heavy?

>>3085684
but medium format cameras aren't suvs.

>>3085692
That's some weapons grade autism you have there.

File: next order.png (46KB, 1193x265px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1193x265px

So I'm going to shoot some pics at the harbor later or tomorrow around 5-8pm, lots of sun out.

Which film would be the best out of the ones I ordered for such a venture?

>>3085736
desu none of them are really perfect for your use case

buy some cheap 400 speed colour negative film

>>3085760

portra 400 or fujifilm 400h work? I can probably pick those up somewhere.

>>3085775
go with the fuji one, its gorgeous. portra is a meme.

>>3085775
yeah those are really nice

if you're new to film and prone to making mistakes maybe pick up something a bit cheaper though. Portra and 400h are pretty expensive

just found 20 piece of 35mm
Kodak Ektachrome E100SW Film
for 50€ but expired of course..
should i buy it ?

>>3085781
>E100SW
that was a saturated+warm variant of ektachrome. should work fantastic for you if youre into such tones.

>>3085660
who this qt??

File: C9EQhRGVwAAw5er.jpg (88KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 480x640px

>>3085493

I went and picked up an a7 at my local store that is in perfect condition except for the back. Pricey, but after getting burned twice in a row on e-bay I figured being able to test it was worth the extra cost.. Some stripped off the rubber.

I figure I can find a junk one somewhere and change them. From what I read it isn't too complicated.

But you are right, the AF is pretty nice. It is totally gonna make me lazy.

>>3085898
>when you let the school shooter kill you cause she a real qt

>>3085898
qt XD

>>3085668
>If you use a 220 back, you still get 12 shots on the sq and 16 on the etrs.

How do you convert a 220 film back to 120?

File: Provia100Fexpired_012.jpg (321KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 1000x667px

>>3085997
Not to be a smartass, but you put 120 film in it. Nothing else needs to be done.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:27 19:05:17
Exposure Time	8 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3086003
It doesn't fit man. By the way the camera is Bronica ETRS

>>3086006
How does it not fit? 120 and 220 spools are identical...

>>3086006
Are you confusing 220 with 620?

File: DSC03847.jpg (398KB, 1080x1350px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 1080x1350px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:25 08:37:28
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-5.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	1350
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: DSC02999.jpg (619KB, 1080x1350px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1080x1350px

>>3086017

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:31 17:41:43
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-4.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	1350
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: DSC05105.jpg (708KB, 1080x1350px) Image search: [Google]

708KB, 1080x1350px

>>3086018

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:17 15:25:05
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	1350
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3086017
What film did you use for this?

>>3086020
i might say acros, but i might be very wrong as well.

File: gotta go fast.jpg (2MB, 1440x1916px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x1916px

More enduro photos.

File: C55Ky9iVAAApJL7.jpg (151KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 900x1200px

>>3085928
>>3085994

She is so cute.

>you will never get to take gravure shots of qt nip girls

>>3086042
>>3086044
>>3086045
>>3086046
>>3086047
>>3086048
These are fucking nice, you should send them to the riders if you haven't already. I'm sure they'd appreciate them

>>3086112
I don't know who the riders or the event organizers are, I just happened to notice something was going on while driving home from work. They probably had a bunch of assigned togs on the scene anyway.

>>3086123
I've ridden in a couple events like this and your photos are a shitload better than what the guys paid to cover the event were taking. Motorsports photographers are almost always semi-retired guys with campchairs and fuck-huge tele lenses, so seeing actually decent photos of riders is pretty refreshing.

There will have definitely been a facebook event for the event, so do a bit of internet sleuthing. Who knows, could be a chance to break into the industry

>>3084890
My local does 20-minute dev.

what should i buy, minolta x300 or minolta x700? If i buy x300 would i regret for not buying x700?

>>3086138

X-500 or X-700.

700 has a program auto mode.

500 displays both metered and set shutter speeds in viewfinder (700 displays just metered).

Many recommend a full manual Minolta instead, but the X series are solid cameras.

>>3086143
There are no x-500 in my country, looks like i am going with x700

>>3086144

Probably called X-570 then.

>>3086146
yea found some x-570 but they are same price with x700

File: dateeeeeeeeeeee.jpg (20KB, 550x412px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 550x412px

>new camera
>start dicking with settings
>accidentally leave date imprint on
>don't realize until halfway through the roll

Fuck.

File: 2017051502.jpg (687KB, 1280x958px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 1280x958px

>>3086138
X-570 or X-700 are both fine. The latter has program auto mode which means the camera will choose both aperture and shutter speed. It's a niche thing but I've used it to good effect shooting motorsports (the enduro pics in this thread for instance) and airsoft games. Since it's mostly useful in fast situations, it's best used together with an auto winder. The X-570 displays more information in the finder, which is why many prefer it to the X-700, but you'll be fine with just either one.

X-300 is a budget model with much less features and not even that much cheaper these days, so it makes little sense to buy.

Pic related, it's my workhorse.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-M10
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.18
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Color Filter Array Pattern	1308
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:15 19:14:40
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	640
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1280
Image Height	958
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3086149
they say x700 using some low quality material inside it and breaks quite easy

>>3086149

Is the 50 f1.7 better than the 50 f2?

Both seem pretty solid, but I haven't done a side by side comparison or anything.

I hear the f2 is a tad bit sharper.

>>3086150
It uses more plastic parts and a cloth shutter opposed to a metallic one, but this is the first time I've heard anyone say X-700 was unreliable. I've used mine for three years and it has seen nearly all sorts of conditions from pouring rain to -24C and burning sun on mountain summit trails, and has never failed me. I'm a heavy-handed guy and bad at looking after my gear, so I can assure you if this was an easy to break camera, it would have failed long ago.

If you want absolutely tank-like build, then you're going to want to look into the XD-series, but those tend to be rather expensive.

What if you film has black on the edges? Not all pictures have it. Agitation? My first film was perfect but my second I fucked up. Well, the exposure seems right. I did 1:9 Rodinal on accident because I had the fixer in my head, which is 1:9. So I kinda panicked and really fucked up the timing with agitation.

>>3086151
I don't have the 2/50, so I can't say for sure. 1.7/50 has pretty heavy edge blur when wide open and spiraling Helios-bokeh, but the center sharpness is decent. The 2/45 pancake is a little sharper, has less edge blur and no swirl when wide open, but comes at the cost of minimum focus distance.

Of the other lenses that I have, 2.8/35 is rather soft even at f/8, but the 2.8/28 is fucking A, which is why I mostly use it for my wide angle needs. The 28mm Rokkor is also great for M4/3 on adapter, it doesn't fuck up the corners and edges like many other adapted 28mm's do. The 50mm Macro Rokkor is sharp as tack and works great as a normal lens as well if you don't mind the slowness. For long range work I strongly recommend the 3.5/70-210 Tamron SP 19AH, I've pretty much retired my 135mm and 200mm teles after getting it.

>>3086159
Got an example? Are the frame numbers readable?

File: DSC_0283[1].jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

>>3086164

Yea, the 28mm f.2.8 is great. I used the hell out of it on my old NEX-3. It is how I got into this whole photography thing. The NEX-3 was little more than a point and shoot before I discovered the joys of old manual lenses.

I have been using the 50mm and my 35-70mm f 3.5 Macro the most on mine though. The 35-70 is actually a quite nice lens, even when mounted on a modern camera.

Pic related is mine.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	402SO
Camera Software	32.1.D.0.419_0_f900
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:30 22:40:08
Exposure Time	0 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.60 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3840
Image Height	2160
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Digital Zoom Ratio	1.3
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Shot film with a Canon ae-1 last night for the first time shooting film in my life. I really liked it. Is that a good film camera? It's my buddies not mine

>>3086238
Yeah, Canon SLRs from that range and era are super solid.

File: JM_Kaarre.jpg (1MB, 1417x869px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1417x869px

>>3086124
Thanks, I have no interest in breaking into the industry though. I don't have a decent digishitter to use as a workhorse anyway, and I'm not social enough to play popularity games. I did notice that I only saw one other tog the whole time, in the part of the track that ran close to the parking lot. I walked off along the trackside for a few kilometers, and came across exactly two people who were hikers that just randomly stumbled upon the track. Looks like the assigned togs were just hanging around the starting area. Also I found the Facebook page and most shots were the usual telezoom stuff, some nice ones but mostly pretty bland if I say so myself. I'm guessing people are wary of risking their gear and would rather not get too close to the track. I was shooting mostly with a 50mm due to only having slow film along, but in hindsight it forced me to be close enough to catch some dynamic scenes.

I'm hoping to catch a folk race later this summer, that shit looks fun as hell.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K200D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	225 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3872
Image Height	2592
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:03 21:57:10
Exposure Time	1/350 sec
F-Number	f/6.7
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.7
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	150.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1417
Image Height	869
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>3086242
If I wanted to shoot film myself is buying one of those from eBay a smart choice ? They seem super cheap

>>3086244
Most cameras that are that old have some kind of foibles you might have to deal with - some point of failure, old seals, old lubricants, meters/electronics failing. Lots may have no problems at all. I don't know the details of the AE-1 in that regard, but somebody else here might.

>>3086238
In its time it was considered a "good camera", contrast with compact and disposable cameras that ordinary people would use. Probably has its limitations compared to pro-tier bodies of the time, but definitely the pictures will not be bad because of the lens, or body.

>>3086248
>Probably has its limitations compared to pro-tier bodies of the time,
Goddamn why do people like you feel the need to weigh in on shit that you know literally nothing about?

>>3084462

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Minolta-X-370-Manual-Film-Camera-With-7-lens-2-Flashes-Multiple-Filters-More-/262976282275?_trksid=p2349526.m2548.l4275

should i?

>>3086318
No. Untested cheap budget model, a few garbage tier 3rd party zooms and some basic Minolta primes. 3rd party flashes and UV filters plus some other junk that is essentially worthless. All for a complete rip-off price. Use that money to buy X-570 or X-700 and some good accessories, lenses and film. Why buy a bag full of junk that's mostly useless.

File: DSCF3126_2400x.jpg (284KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1600x900px

So what do you dudes think of the SQ10? It looks like they went the Polaroid Zink route and changed it to a digital camera with a built in printer since there's no longer a viewfinder and instead there's a screen on the back, and the lens doesn't protrude out anymore.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Photographer	Take Kayo
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	900

File: DSC03857.jpg (282KB, 1080x744px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1080x744px

>>3086017
>>3086020
Retro 80S

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:04 17:10:31
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-5.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	744
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3086449
>So what do you dudes think of the SQ10
Cucked garbage. It's a digital camera.

Okay guys, help me diagnose the problem with this 110 film I got back from a developer.

It came back clear, and not only clear but the film markings, numbers and type of film stock, are also absent.

That's a development error, no? if the camera didn't produce photos you would still see the numbers right? And if it were completely exposed due to light leaks then it would all be black, right?

The film was some Kodak Gold 200 from the mid 80s.

>>3086473
Yeah it sounds like it was a development error if there's no film markings and it's totally clear. That pretty much sounds like it wasn't developed at all and went straight into the bleach/fix. If it were completely exposed to light and then developed it would be completely black. If it was developed properly but there were no exposures on it it would be clear but have the frame markings.

I'd go back and ask em what happened. Don't be immediately accusatory but it sounds like an error in development

>>3086473
It'll be non-development, yeah. The C41 first bath will have been duff. The side markings should develop regardless of film age or underexposure, and some bar codes possibly as well.

They fucked up, not you; don't use them anymore. Testing their chemistry with customer rolls is unforgivable.

>>3084413
I'm sorry, pal, but you can freely delete all of them except for the last
Aside from shooting, study some aesthetic theory and composition for paintings, then go up to XXs aesthetic shifts

>>3086475
>>3086476
Thanks, guys. That's what I thought. I don't think it will be as simple as me not using them again though. My options are kind of limited around here as I'm not in a major city.

They've never fucked up any of my 35mm, 120 or 220 film for what it's worth.

I could send it out though, I guess.

Was wondering...

I've got a 2 reel tank. What do you guys recommend for developing 1 film?

Should I follow the numbers on the bottom of the tank and add the empty reel on top?

>>3086516
just put the reel youre using. 400ml solution for 1 roll, 600ml for 2.

>>3086516
You should use at least 320 ml of working-dilution developer for a single roll. For two, use 640 ml. The tank will say 270 ml per, but that's fanciful -- go over, it's safer. (also hc-110 is easier to dilute for 320, 640, and 960.)

File: XRAY 1b.jpg (1MB, 2000x2066px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2066px

finally tried the xray i was given. im liking a lot the look of it, rated it like it was Pan-F, then D-76 1+3.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EPSON
Camera Model	GT-X770
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	7484
Image Height	7607
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:05:30 20:12:20
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2000
Image Height	2066

How fucked up would 6 year expired Velvia be?

File: BOTE.jpg (670KB, 1000x778px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 1000x778px

>>3086553
this is 16 year expired velvia. youll be fine.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EPSON
Camera Model	GT-X770
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4676
Image Height	3633
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	1600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	1600 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:05:30 20:55:16
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	778

>>3086556
Good to know.

>>3084644

I found fomapan 100 to be pretty good, but the 400 was far too grainy. I shot a portrait on fomapan 400 with a 6x9 frame size (fuji gw690), enlarged to an 8x10 and it was quite grainy. grainy-er than Ilford Delta 3200 (shot at iso 3200) shot on the same camera and enlarged to 11x14. Also the film base is curly as fuck

File: 5Ilfordhp5plus - 2 (2016_11_23 06_42_43 UTC).jpg (4MB, 4479x2971px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4479x2971px

>>3084618
I do that sometimes to add depth. Picture related.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Epson
Camera Model	PerfectionV550
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3016
Image Height	4547
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2016:10:08 22:24:48
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	4479
Image Height	2971

File: IMG_8637-Edit.jpg (157KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1000x667px

First attempt at "scanning" with a dslr.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3086449
Fucking trash, I hate everything about it apart from the square format it produces. Looks god awful and I guarantee the ergos are as bad as they look. People that like polaroids/instax don't want a digital camera with an lcd screen and other dumb shit

File: man looking at noose.jpg (141KB, 543x405px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 543x405px

>>3086644
>yfw it lands in Amazon's top 5 sold items for the holidays

Not strictly on films but as I shoot mainly digital I had a question for you guys.

Let's say I want to go on a trip with one film camera (would never happen but it's just for the sake of argument). If I want to shoot both during the daytime and the nighttime I would need two different films with two different iso ?

>>3086717
most medium speed black and white film can be pushed or pulled with great success so no need to have different films. Iflord HP5+ is what I use and I've gotten really good results even at nighttime.

For color, Kodak Portra 800 is amazing in daylight with pretty smooth grain and is very capable of being pushed for nighttime.

File: caparica 1.jpg (2MB, 1559x1190px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1559x1190px

shot with Agfamatic 1008 and lomo peacock

>>3086556
love it
>>3086017
great

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1559
Image Height	1190
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:05:30 23:18:55
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1559
Image Height	1190