/film/

File: mm.jpg (117KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 960x960px

Added a Mamiya 6 to my kit.

Notes:
The meter appears to be pretty accurate (for automatic exposure).
It's very solid (doesn't feel plasticky at all).

File: mm2.jpg (564KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 1000x1000px

>>2882109
Shot a test roll with it (Portra 400)

1/3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:13 17:37:59
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000

File: mm4.jpg (310KB, 1000x999px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 1000x999px

>>2882113
2/3

Excuse the shitty scans (quick and dirty test roll).

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:13 17:39:05
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	999

File: mm3.jpg (286KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 1000x1000px

>>2882116
3/3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:13 17:38:31
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000

>>2882109
Nice man! I found the meter to be extremely accurate. Bear in mind the metering area is pretty close to where the 150mm framelines are in the viewfinder. If you remember that you should be able to even meter for E6 accurately with the camera. I recommend coping the 50mm if you get the chance. The 50mm/75mm make it a killer travel kit.

>>2882109
Now you can throw that hasselblad in the trash.
>>2882117
>>2882116
>>2882113
The same place where those snapshits belong.

>>2882129
Hmm, slide film seems risky but I'll definitely give it a try. The 50mm is next on the list. Have heard great things about it.

File: 0000206600100.jpg (131KB, 880x582px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 880x582px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	EZ Controller 6.50.007 (151023)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1565
Image Height	1037

File: 53.jpg (506KB, 920x603px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 920x603px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: DSC07169edit.jpg (663KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 1000x1000px

First roll of Portra 400. Finally (unfortunately) depleted my NC/VC stock.

[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	2016:07:12 19:41:15
Exposure Time	5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: Untitled.jpg (561KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 1000x750px

>>2881922
>>2882016

Thanks guys. Fujicas sure look like great bodies.

I have a hard time to focus with my Spotmatic's micro-prism especially with the Jupiters.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Nexus 5
Camera Software	Adobe® Photoshop® Touch
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2016:07:13 12:47:04
Image Width	1000
Image Height	750
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.4
Focal Length	3.97 mm
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Flash	No Flash
ISO Speed Rating	131
Exposure Time	1041923/125000000 sec

Do you guys have some sort of sticky for film or a beginner's guide on how to get started?

>>2882194
Buy a film camera, learn shutter speed, aperture and ISO, learn how to focus, you're good to go

File: DSC07207edit.jpg (505KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 1000x667px

>>2882194
Doesn't matter what camera you get at first. If you already have a digital camera with interchangeable lenses it'd be smart to buy into a 35mm that can use those lenses.

A big chunk of film photos looking good on the computer comes down to scanning techniques. Film labs generally don't do a good job at scanning (and are oftentimes expensive). Buying yourself a scanner or using a good quality DSLR is usually the more common route.

Unrelated, but I can't get these damn colors right at all.

[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	2016:07:13 21:51:24
Exposure Time	5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
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	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: DSC07137edit.jpg (526KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

526KB, 1000x750px

>>2882165
>>2882218
One more cause I'm a whore.

[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	2016:07:12 18:41:05
Exposure Time	5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	750
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

anyone scan prints? any advice on papers to use, techniques, etc

I have a flatbed scanner that can't handle transparent things e.g. negatives, but holds up pretty well when I scan drawings. I figure if I make an 8x10 print or larger, scan it high resolution, then downsize it in post, I can get "pretty close" to the actual detail of the negative right?

File: edit.jpg (797KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 1000x667px

>>2882218
better?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (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	2016:07:13 14:22:22
Exposure Time	5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
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	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2882180
microprisms are a bitch in optimal lighting, impossible in anything darker. I feel you man, split prism 4 life.

File: T70Superia30neg.jpg (319KB, 531x800px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 531x800px

>>2882109
>>2882158
>>2882165
>>2882218
thx for doing
>>PICTURE EDITION
right.
>M
>/fgt/
>G
>A

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:11 16:26:58
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	531
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Custom
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

File: Photo17_17.jpg (138KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 667x1000px

I'm looking for a scanner that does both 35mm and medium format well.
I realize I'll get what I pay for, but would prefer not to go bankrupt in buying it.
Any tips?
Not interested in DSLR scanning, but would like to get one which does a decent job.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:13 17:16:25

>>2882282
I've used a V700 but from what I'm seen and heard, it's a waste to use it on 35mm. You only really get the benefit from large MF and LF.

As usual upwards of 2000dpi isn't going to get much special. As it is, it'll miss much of the detail camera scanning or (well done) optical printing will give you.

>>2882234
Apologies for the double post

Don't count on it. Optical printing loses a lot of the detail from the negative, or so the theory goes (this is why theory testers will tell you that 5x4 will give you 400MP and tests consistently put it between 80 and 200) anyhow.

As an artistic choice it's not unheard of. Keep it flat (I hold the scanner roof down with something) and scan at a high DPI. If you make adjustments bear in mind that the border - should you include it - is taken into acct by the auto exposure "app".

Some people have talked about "wet scanning" but honestly Idk about it

This may sound like a stupid question, but can I use the same fixer for B&W and C41 or do I have to use separate ones?

>>2882304
separate ones

>>2882306
I see. As far as I understood it, I can reuse the Fixer for B&W, contrary to the developer which I mix when I need it right?

File: Olympus_Trip_35_2.jpg (721KB, 1856x1264px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 1856x1264px

Is the Olympus Trip 35 a good starting point for a pleb to get into film point and shoot?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D50
Camera Software	Ver.1.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	824
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	300 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2006:09:24 11:15:14
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Flash
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	200.00 mm
Comment	(c) lacosteim.fr tel.+33.240.506.381
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1856
Image Height	1264
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
ISO Speed Used	200
Image Quality	NORMAL
White Balance	FLASH
Image Sharpening	AUTO
Focus Mode	AF-A
Flash Setting	NORMAL
Flash Compensation	0.0 EV
ISO Speed Requested	200
Flash Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
AE Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
Tone Compensation	AUTO
Lens Type	Nikon D Series
Lens Range	28.0 - 200.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6
Auto Focus	Closest Subject, Center Selected, Top Focused
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Single Frame/Off
Color Mode	Landscape sRGB
Lighting Type	COLORED
Noise Reduction	OFF
Camera Actuations	9637
Image Optimization	NORMAL
Saturation 2	NORMAL

File: ilford-delta-100-120.jpg (20KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 400x400px

Stupid film question: Is is the case that all film of a specific type is the same across all formats of that film? For example, is Ilford Delta 100 the same in 35mm, 120, and 4x5?

I ask because I want to do my own push/pull testing and it would be easier to do it on a sheet by sheet basis (4x5) than wasting an entire roll of 120 even though I will use the results from the test to shoot 120 film.

>>2882356
yes, but you may as well just get an slr with a program/auto mode

File: comparison.jpg (514KB, 1271x1104px) Image search: [Google]

514KB, 1271x1104px

>mf vs 35mm tonality differences are a made-up meme
>the only difference is size of enlargements
>more grains per image surface don't change anything

>>2882396
top looks a lot better though

>>2882396
>>2882396
What comparison is being made in that image?

look at the direction of the shadows, the light is all different in both images.

>>2882401

uh, of course it does. That's the fucking point.

>>2882402
Also how is that scanned?

>>2882403
but i thought the point was there is no difference?

>>2882379
The emulsion will be the same but the film base substrate might differ. So yes, freely test development variations between formats.
>>2882356
Its selenium lightmeter is prone to deterioration and giving bad readings. Look for autofocus cameras with a CdS/silicon lightmetering element (small tiny window instead of a large area like the one around the oly trip's lens, always require batteries) If you want to have some control and room to improve and learn more I strongly suggest a p&s rangefinder like a yashica electro 35, ricoh 500g etc.
>>2882346
Fixer is reusable several times (until it visibly stops fixing, usually between 7-12 rolls), different developers behave differently - some are "one shot" and are discarded after you develop a roll, some can be replenished by adding a bit more after each roll (when developing several rolls in one session, not days between), some by extending developing time for each consecutive roll etc. It's down to your developer of choice.

>>2882405

then why would he use sarcastic meme arrows? are you new to 4chin?

>>2882408
oh, sorry im not as cool as you

>>2882402
solely comparison in resolving power by format and tonality, given different times of day and optical elements in either image.
>>2882404
shittily on a joke of a flatbed with horrible inconsistent post
>>2882405
the point is mf and 35mm are extremely different in many noticeable regards and people arguing otherwise are totally entitled to their opinion but also fucking retards.

Now please stop posting about this, we already had the last thread ruined by this argument. I wouldnt have posted this if I hadnt just finished scanning my halfframe iso400 negs with the same testshot scene as a 6x9 folder test I did earlier.

>>2882396
that's what tonality means you retard, god you're thick

>>2882410

You're demonstrably the least cool person on this board. Lurk more, learn the culture, then go fuck yourself.

>>2882411
>solely comparison in resolving power by format and tonality, given different times of day and optical elements in either image.

does this not rely on the resolving power of the scanner more than the photo negative?
I mean, I get your point
but also
on 35mm
the results I get from my flatbed and the scans I get back from a local photo lab scanner guy are totally different.

>>2882420
>does this not rely on the resolving power of the scanner more than the photo negative?

No, because the size of the film grains are the same for both formats. Whatever extra detail you would pull out of the 35mm frame, you would also pull out of the MF frame. Granted, the 35mm lens is probably sharper given the demands of the format, but it's not 2 or 3 times sharper (while MF film is 2 or 3 or 5 times biggeR), and it's probably outresolving the film anyway.

File: 2016-07-12 14.41.40.jpg (778KB, 1076x1119px) Image search: [Google]

778KB, 1076x1119px

>>2882416
>I honestly and seriously value and respect your opinion and you are a very intelligent and redeemable human being
>>2882420
not in this case, because the film grain's resolving power with this film ends before the scanner's resolving power does, as shit as it demonstrably is. Both these images are crops (to cover same scene as much as possible) of, respectively, a 6x9cm neg (105mm focal) and a halfframe 18x24mm neg (28mm focal) and they are really bad scans. I'm sure both you and the lab do a better job. The difference is still visible and relevant.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-P605
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2016:07:12 14:00:32
Focal Length	3.40 mm
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
ISO Speed Rating	80
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
F-Number	f/2.4
White Balance	Auto

>>2882396
I'm not convinced by your "comparison"

>supposedly comparing tonality
>taken at different times of day
completely idiotic. you might as well have not posted a picture

also
>using different enlargements
that pretty much ruins the point because the argument was never about the size of enlargements

File: image.png (946KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 750x1334px

How old is too old for

400tx
100tmax
Fijichrome 64

Assume it was stored in a basement

>>2882416
>>2882419

Sure is angry in here

>>2882438 #
there is no universal ballpark figure.
c41? anything older than 90' has a high chance of looking irredeemably bad (grain, colour shift, loss of speed)
e6 slides? you might as well go play the lottery, anything goes
bw film? depends on speed. high iso degrades faster, 400 probably passable up to 70', tmax ditto (was it even made back then), bracket first 3-4 testshots, meter accordingly afterwards. speed loss, pronounced grain and fogging to be expected. colour film gets it worst.
>>2882435 #
you enlargemented my peepee
>>2882442
fuck off to your hugbox echochamber leddit and kill yourself you retard etc~

File: 56.jpg (578KB, 999x662px) Image search: [Google]

578KB, 999x662px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	EZ Controller 5.70.047 (101013)
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2016:07:13 21:25:57
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3089
Image Height	2048

>>2882396
>only shots he ever posts are snapshit """"test"""" shots
lmao kys my man

File: red filter.jpg (143KB, 800x538px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 800x538px

>>2882463
dw girl I've got more where that came from, i.e. this red filter testshot :^)

File: uv-pass filter.jpg (138KB, 800x541px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 800x541px

or this uv-pass filter testshot

Don't know much about film but I am going to Tampa FL for a week and bought some Fuji 400 disposable cameras just for shits.
I've gotten film developed and scanned before at Walgreens and it was the worst quality I have ever seen, never again.
What would be the best option to develop a few rolls and get some good (not the absolute best) scans?

any reccomendations on what film to use when first starting out?

i got a bunch of gear just dno what film to get/use

>>2882522
You'll eventually learn what film to use and when but for now just get relatively cheap stuff like superia 200

If you want to go a little higher I'd recommend shooting portra 160 and ektar 100 as they're very forgiving for color

For black and white it's a little dicier but I'd recommend starting off with tmax 100 or tri-x 400

You can get quite a lot of those at around 5 dollars a roll and then once you're familiar with stuff and have a couple favorites try getting into slide film

>>2882526
aight, i'll have a look around, thanks

File: DSC07139edit.jpg (655KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 1000x750px

>>2882509
>bought some Fuji 400 disposable cameras
>I've gotten film developed and scanned before at Walgreens and it was the worst quality I have ever seen

Disposable cameras always give horrible quality. I developed my film at Walgreens for a few years and never had problems. Never got their scans though. You'll find most places that offer scans offer sub-par resolution for pretty high prices. People who get good lab scans for <$10/roll have found a needle in a haystack.

>>2882235
Looks like you peed on it. Think I just need to try rescanning that one. Something seems to have gotten messed up with it.

[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	2016:07:12 18:45:12
Exposure Time	5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	750
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2882526
tmax is kind of a bad choice for a beginner, its really responsive to overexposure and overdevelopment

tri-x and hp5 are good because you can literally be a monkey and still come out with decent negatives

>>2882454
Does "might as well play the lottery" mean that its a slim chance it will work? The lottery is a billion to one odd right?

>>2882539
>tfw tmax, delta and acros are easy to use for me
>tfw never, ever, ever gonna get HP5 to look good EVER
Just doesn't work at all m8,

>>2882563
That's because HP5 is a garbage fucking film. I love pretty much everything else Ilford makes, but HP5 is just Tri-X except with disgusting clumpy grain.

>>2882563
>>2882564
I agree, its ugly as sin, but for a beginner its very hard to shoot a roll of hp5 or tri-x and come out with black, radically overexposed, blown-out, etc., otherwise fucked up negatives

tmax and delta are much nicer but have steeper learning curves because you have to be careful with development

>>2882567

>tmax and delta are much nicer

Highly debatable if t-grain films are better than traditional emulsions.

>>2882584
I was saying they're nicer than hp5

and that's not debateable :-)

File: 27803960200_96ac81f16d_b.jpg (217KB, 1000x678px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1000x678px

>>2882564

HP5+ looks different than Tri-X. HP5+ has very smooth skin tones. Tri-X has that gritty documentary look. Both are great films. It comes down to what you want your photos to look like.

Ilford Pan 400 is also a great film. It's only sold in certain countries but looks excactly like HP5+.

It's my go to iso 400 film now. I buy it from ebay for 15 € three rolls

This picture is Pan 400 developed in Rodinal 1+50.

>>2882587

And Acros is much better than tmax or delta.

>>2882590
>Anonymous 07/14/16(Thu)01:16:05 No.2882588
And only available as ISO 100 now ;__;

>>2882588
>Tri-X has that gritty documentary look
>this meme again
this isn't 1970. emulsion is different

source: I've done side by side comparisons with hp5 and tri-x (I always shot tri-x but hp5 is cheaper here so I decided to compare). only discernible difference so far has been the grain structure. maybe a tiny tiny jump in contrast

it depends more on the developer than the film, anyway

>>2882593
You could always pick up some Neopan 400 off ebay

Question

If I am wanting to take a long exposure on 35mm using a 10stop ND filter, can I copy the desired settings from a DSLR that has just captured the shot I want? Or will the settings be different for film?

File: 30VHP519.jpg (169KB, 537x800px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 537x800px

>>2882564
>>2882563
>>2882567
>garbage film
Remember, this is the PICTURE EDITION kids.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:23 13:38:50
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	537
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

File: paris050.jpg (297KB, 1648x1059px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1648x1059px

>>2882601
>so I heard you like grain

it is fun being able to shoot handheld at night, tho

>>2882141
damn

File: 1-good-boy-point-film.jpg (637KB, 1440x532px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 1440x532px

>>2882601
Have a snapshit to make up for it fgt
>>2882598
Yeah, but I'm still sad to see it go since I'd still love to shoot it in 10 or 20 years.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SEIKO EPSON CORP.
Camera Model	EPSON scanner
Camera Software	EPSON Scan
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2400 dpi
Image Created	2016-07-09T00:19:12-23:00

File: 14201389530_b1502b28a6_h.jpg (536KB, 1067x1600px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1067x1600px

>>2882604
>fast color film
absolutely disgusting.

File: 14126391469_9c3da59dfd_h.jpg (723KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 1600x1067px

>>2882610
One more. Both are Fuji Acros pushed to 400, by the way.

File: paris064.jpg (1MB, 791x1242px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 791x1242px

>>2882610
>>2882611
like i said, its fun

still looks better than those overcooked turds tho :)

>>2882613
mm thats tasty

what setup/film?

>>2882594

Shoot people and compare the skin tones. HP5+ has really smooth skin tones. Tri-X shows blemisesh etc. better.

See my point?

>>2882610
>>2882611

This high contrast meme is terrible. Your pictures are awful.

Acros has so beautiful tonality and you rape it like this. Fuck you.

>>2882618
cinestill 800 (so kodak 500t cross-processed in c41)

I like it because its the cheapest and most easily available tungsten based film around anymore, but damn is it grainy

I would honestly expose it at 320 or lower

>>2882628
>Dictating how people shoot film
You don't like it it when your food touches, don't you

File: JapanBW028.jpg (207KB, 541x800px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 541x800px

>>2882601
>>2882564
>>2882563
>>2882567
>garbage film

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:02:28 16:32:04
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	541
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

File: JapanBW008.jpg (373KB, 1210x800px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 1210x800px

>>2882707
>garbage film

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: HDMHP525.jpg (254KB, 540x800px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 540x800px

>>2882708
>garbage film

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	540
Image Height	800

>>2882707
>>2882708
yeah, it is
the grain is unpleasant compared to other 400 speed films

File: 30VHP531.jpg (132KB, 541x800px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 541x800px

>>2882710
>garbage film

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	541
Image Height	800

>>2882711
also those tones are gross. flat and dull, man what are you doing?

File: F1HP5023.jpg (131KB, 535x800px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 535x800px

>>2882712
>>2882711
Sorry, can't hear you over the sound of all this
>garbage film

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:02:04 13:38:01
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	535
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

>>2882716
Don't forget the garbage image, too

File: 30VHP521.jpg (340KB, 1180x800px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1180x800px

>>2882721
>>2882713
>>2882711
All of YOUR pictures are really proving your point, aren't they?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:14 14:32:31
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1180
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

>>2882735
why would I post shitty hp5 pictures, when you're already doing that for me

>>2882716
>>2882710
>>2882735
>>2882712
hp5 always seems to have great texture

anyone shoot pan f 50?

File: PanF120001-2mini.jpg (1MB, 1500x1040px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x1040px

>>2882738
Just a roll of 120. For me it's ok. but really not fine grained enough to justify the slow speed.
Something like FP4 is just as sharp, but a whole stop faster, and gives you massive latitude.
For a slow film I prefer Rollei Retro 80S or Ortho 25.

>>2882741
I'm guessing the case is the same for 35mm?

>tfw no 120 yet

I'd shoot portra 160 all day if I had something that could shoot 120 though

File: 31.jpg (310KB, 1307x1053px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 1307x1053px

Found some old scans - I believe this is Portra NC 160

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Created	2016-07-14T01:13:18-04:00
Image Width	1307
Image Height	1053

>>2882599
no.
google reciprocity failure and look up data for your film. it might turn out you won't need such a strong nd filter for your desired exposure time, too.

I feel so happy cause I never knew how little 500/el's cost compared to regular 500s or even compared to the focal plane bodies

>>2882757
>static subject in daylight
>shoots wide open
>misses focus
4/10 for the on fleek 80's qt slut on hog meme

>>2882841
>>2882841
Wide open? Missed focus? What are you

>>2882842
All that softness and LoCA on the chrome. The focus appears to be on her top hand.
Sorry, if that's stopped down and still abberating like that, I feel bad for you son. I assumed it was some f/4.5 memeya prime. Maybe it has focus shift too. Shoot better lenses.

>>2882842
Drew, drew... it's like you don't know anyone online can tell everything about your camera, optics, settings, digitising method, postprocessing steps and diameter of your left thigh solely by looking at your web resize photo. It's like your new here. Sweet socks in that photo, shame about that parking ticket in your backpocket and that coffee stain on your jeans, tho.

>>2882864
Slav, slav, it's like you don't know that when optical defects are plainly visible in the web-resized photo you took with professional equipment in the context of a professional shoot, you probably just fucked up.

File: BusShadows.jpg (365KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 800x800px

>>2882610
>>2882611
Is that really what it looks like pushed, or is there some heavy editing involved too? What developer?

Acros in Rodinal is one of my favorite combos.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5015
Image Height	4984
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	2012:07:04 08:38:45
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	800

File: GoatMtnReflectoin.jpg (582KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 800x800px

>>2882871

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6687
Image Height	6645
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	2012:08:07 23:05:47
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	800

>>2882871
HC-110, and no there wasn't much processing there they were just high contrast scenes to begin with.

Personally I like the look sometimes, it's not for everything though and I haven't been pushing film as much anymore because I've been printing more and making decent prints from those negatives is hell. They scan fine, though.

Why film when you can get a Fuji XT-2?

>>2882940
This, with the filters provided within Fuji bodies and superior Leica-like lenses made by Fuji, there is literally no reason to shoot film in this day and age.

File: IMG_9274 - IMG_9277mini.jpg (344KB, 1063x800px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1063x800px

>>2882945
>>2882940
>samefagging this hard
>not posting pictures
Come back when Fuji can even come close to emulating ITS OWN FILM IN ITS OWN CAMERAS

>>2882954
We have light room for that, dummy. Get with the times.

INB4 "that's an extra step you have to take" well at least I don't have to wait hours to develop a single roll.

File: Fujifim Xtrans Comparison pic_01.jpg (73KB, 1097x393px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1097x393px

>>2882940
>Buys a digital camera that tries to look like a film camera, has ergonomics similar to a film camera, has a sensor design "inspired by the natural random arrangement of fine silver halide grains in film", and uses processing to try to imitate film
>Y-you don't need f-fucking film

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Photographer	Vladimir Koifman
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1097
Image Height	393

>>2882968
Well why not spend the money and get film quality, straight to digital, no fuzz or process, and lots post processing capabilities?

>>2882978
Because I don't want straight to digital, I want to hold negatives in my hands and spend long hours hunched over trays of smelly chemicals in a dimly red lighted room making wet prints from them because that's something that gives me satisfaction and results that I like. Before you came to this thread to shit on film and start proclaiming THERE'S LITERALLY NO REASON TO SHOOT FILM because it's not what you want, did it occur to you that other people may have their own reasons for liking it?

>>2882987
Wow, sniffing all those chemicals really messed you up. I'm glad I went Fuji

File: HDMHP527.jpg (170KB, 536x800px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 536x800px

>>2882988
See OP, I'm glad I went Fuji too.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	536
Image Height	800

I found a Canon Snappy S and a Pentax Espio 738 among my parent's old shit. Are these any good or just rubbish?

>>2883022
It's rubbish. buy a fuji instead.

>>2883025
I'm looking into a L35AF or Electro 35 or both.

Though I'd give them a whip before purchasing those.

>>2883028
Not what i meant, i meant get a fuji digital camera. don't bother with film.

File: img072.jpg (491KB, 1250x778px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 1250x778px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:13 14:31:54
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: img026.jpg (559KB, 1000x545px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 1000x545px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:14 11:29:58
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: img033.jpg (724KB, 1000x670px) Image search: [Google]

724KB, 1000x670px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:14 11:29:58
Color Space Information	sRGB

Best price on higher speed color film?

File: Screen Shot 2016-07-14 at 20.21.24.png (461KB, 604x551px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 604x551px

>>2882396
I know where you live, chuju jebany

File: lul.jpg (163KB, 800x604px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 800x604px

>>2883123
finally someone satisfyingly stalky to check the visible street address in google maps with the characteristic street/building layout in a couple major cities, good grief that took a while. Yeah, my secret's out, I live on the topmost flight of stairs by the window :c

Here's your prize rodaku

File: tooclose.jpg (293KB, 1000x684px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1000x684px

>>2883131
too bad the context of this photo is understandable only for a polak
since it's /fgt/ I'm posting a photo too, focusing with Rollei 35 is fun and shit at the same time

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6790
Image Height	4644
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	4800 dpi
Vertical Resolution	4800 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:14 21:10:33
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	684

File: 1459799636039.jpg (326KB, 1200x780px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1200x780px

>>2883146
>literal mysterious shadowy figure

Yeah, I sometimes regret some of the passable stuff I do isn't suitable for an international audience.

>>2882848
Given there is no region of great sharpness and camera shake wasn't in play, I would more likely assume defect in the (shitty, consumer grade) scan.

I am pretty certain this is f4-5.6, and it is a Bronica kit lens. Not surprised at the purple fringing.

>>2883179
>Bronica kit lens
ETRS?
The 80mm on the SQ is absolutely perfect. Not entirely sure how much worse a 6x4.5 would be, unless you were absolutely crazy and owned a GS

Bronica or Mamiya?

>>2883181
What negative size? What focal lengths? What features do you need?

Just buy a fucking Bronica.

Drying marks on my negatives are driving me insane.

I have no access to distilled water. Will battery water help?

>>2883181

Pentax 645.

>>2883182
120/220

The two I'd most need would be a short tele and something a bit wide like something with a 75 degree fov like a 24-28mm 35mm equivalent

>What features do you need?

I'd like it to have a built in meter but it's not completely necessary

>>2883183
add two drops of dishwashing liquid to final rinse. or any other non-viscous detergent. distilled water is sold everywhere people use steam irons, strange you've no access. Ice from your freezer smell aside is literally condensed moisture, without any groundwater ions - it's a poor man's distilled water in a pinch.

>>2883183
Deionised water works fine. Photoflo or tiny amount of dishwashing liquid (like dilute 1/10 and use 1 drop, if it foams its too much) may also help.

>>2883186
>120/220
Yeah, that was assumed. Are you wanting to shoot 6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7 or 135 pano?

You can get finders for some systems with a meter if you REALLY needed it.
Priority features on MF are things like what finder you can use, shutter speed, leaf/focal plane shutter, mirror lock up or different backs (like 135 pano).

As for a wide lens, you'll be able to get your hands on fairly wide lenses like the 35mm f3.5 for M645 or 40mm f4 for the Bronica SQ system which are about 22-24mm (135 eqv).

>>2883187
>>2883191

Dishwashing liquid doesn't help. I still get terrible drying marks.

Distilled water is only sold in pharmacies on my country and is very expensive.

I try deionized water. Battery water at least is cheap to try.

>>2883194
A really, really silly question. Have you tried your supermarket or a car store if you have one?
As for drying marks, I sometimes get them even with photoflo/washing up liquid. Usually depends on the temperature in my house and how humid it is.

During summer like now where the average temp inside is 22-24c it happens all the time. So much that I need to switch my dehumidifier off while drying film.

>>2883192
Thanks

I'd love a 6x4.5 and 6x7 back which it appears I can get along with an sq-a real cheap

Is there anywhere that I can read about the different models easily? Like what's the difference between the sq-a, sq-b, and etrs

>>2883196

Yep I've checked. They only sell deionized water and not distilled.

File: mökki.jpg (377KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1000x665px

I got skimpy and bought Fomapan 100 instead of Acros.

Terrible film. Unsharp, coarse grain for an iso 100 film and very gray tonality.

And I bough 5 rolls of that shit.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	PhotoSmart S20
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	17952
Image Height	2472
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2400 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2016:07:14 23:49:45
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	665

>>2883209
>bad workman, tools, blame, etc~
foma can only justify its emulsions with their price, and even then by a slim margin.

>>2883198
Places like camera wiki or camerapedia have some info, searching model numbers will give you sometimes older html pages with a wealth of info.

A note, Smaller bodies like the M645, ETRS, SQ etc will only shoot that format or smaller. For 6x7 you need to move up to something like the RB/RZ67 or GS-1.
Bronica SQ will shoot 6x6, 135 (36x24) and 135 pano all with different backs.
Mamiya 645 will shoot 6x4.5 and 135 (36x24)

Another thing I forgot to mention regarding features is the availability of a grip/motor drive. since MF SLR's are more of a box shape, if you prefer shooting like a 35mm/DSLR you may want to pick up a grip and prism finder, both of which will add a good bit of weight onto the rig.

Butkus.org has manuals for a variety of cameras and accessories. Don't be scared to read through 'em for a few days before settling for a camera.
If focal length multipliers confuse you then use this site: https://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/depth-of-field-and-equivalent-lens-calculator/

File: disgusting-emulsion.jpg (743KB, 1000x1008px) Image search: [Google]

743KB, 1000x1008px

>>2883209
I have a few untouched rolls of Foma 100 in my fridge.

I shoot F400 regularly though because it's cheap. It's my official snapshit emulsion.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SEIKO EPSON CORP.
Camera Model	EPSON scanner
Camera Software	EPSON Scan
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2400 dpi
Image Created	2016-07-14T22:22:55+01:00

>>2883180
My phrasing was bad. It's an ETRS. The lens is a fine design, but my scanning workflow has always been shit and shows all kinds of weird stuff.

Wide open at f2.8, this image would look very different, and given that the whole image is mushy, I guess I was wondering what would make someone conclude it was a focus issue. I might learn something.

>>2883238
m8, you're reading too far into it.
It is a focus issue. the plane of focus is sharp, it's just behind the front of the bike.
Look at the kickstand and the bitumen around it, you can see the plane of focus.
And like i said, her hand and face are sharp too.
And even then, it wouldn't have been AS much of an issue if it wasn't for the subject matter being 90% polished chrome, which is the absolute best way to show longitudinal chromabs. If you'd just rocked back on your heels 10cm, that pinkish glow on your highlights would be gone, and Kim Wilde would have still been plenty sharp.
Remember your DOF extends further behind the plane of focus than it does in front.

File: 30VHP528.jpg (187KB, 1204x800px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1204x800px

>>2883242
>breaking my own thread rules
PICTURE EDITION

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:15 07:56:18
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1204
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

>>2882161
lol

>>2882438
I dont think you can develop fujichrome anymore?

>>2883246
absolute ASS

File: ftteeth2.jpg (353KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1200x800px

>>2883248
I don't think you should post when you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:24 10:25:36
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1200
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Daylight
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

>>2883248
You can't develop kodachrome you dongus.

>>2883184
Ever thought of people wanting to be able to swap out viewfinders and backs and even shoot the camera without a grip attached?

I'm looking at getting a Bronica, in this case I'm eyeing up either the GS-1 and the S2a

File: DSC_0119.jpg (267KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 900x1200px

>>2883394
Fall for the square format meme instead.

How do all the different Bronica systems compare, anyway? I really like my SQ but I always wondered what the others are like, it seems like they just made a bunch of very similar square brick bodies but each with its own format and set of lenses.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	D6503
Camera Software	17.1.2.A.0.314_9_f300
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:14 21:58:00
Exposure Time	1/32 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	64
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.90 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	900
Image Height	1200
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: T70Superia10.jpg (291KB, 1234x800px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1234x800px

>>2883250
:^)
glad you like it then

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 550D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.8
Serial Number	1132529712
Lens Name	EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:15 13:07:00
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1234
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Partial
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Unknown
Focus Mode	One-Shot
Drive Mode	Timed
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Self-Timer Length	10 sec
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Custom
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	129

File: 1k-May 23_ 2016.jpg (626KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

626KB, 1000x1000px

>>2883399
I wouldn't mind a GS-1 tbqh with a 6x4.5 and 6x6 back or two. The only problem is the lack of 35mm pano back and wide lenses.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	84 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:22 22:23:24
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	-0.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	56.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2883399
I said S2, not SQ. The S2/S2a are older focal plane bodies, they're entirely mechanical as well.

The S2 focal plane also had interchangeable focusing helicoids and its lenses were mostly Nikkor glass

>>2883408
I want a GS-1 mainly because I want to shoot 6x7 but I want a body that's small and compact. And the GS-1 seems to be the smallest and most compact 6x7 slr out there

>>2883421
I was focusing on the GS-1 you mentioned. Why would you want an S2 over an SQ anyway though? Focal plane is inferior to leaf shutters, mechanical is inferior to electronic, the Nikkor lenses aren't really any better than the Bronica lenses. The SQ system is pretty much better in every way.

>>2883425
It's not that much better. sure it's got more electronics and leaf shutters but leaf shutters are only good for flash sync. the S2a goes up to 1/1000. As well because of the interchangeable helicoids you can make your own lenses and there was even adapter so that you could attach lenses designed for Nikon's reflex housing lenses. There is an electronic version, the EC-TL, which besides being electronic also has TTL metering built into the camera body. THe only benefit of leaf shutters besides the flash sync is them being quieter which with an SLR like the SQ or even a hasselblad isn't going to make much of a difference as it's still oging to be quite loud because of the sound of the mirror flipping up and down. As well with the S2a the mirror is in two pieces that both flip back when firing the shutter which allows for lenses that recess deeper into the body without the need for mirror lockup. And since the shutter isn't in the lens lenses were made by third party manufacturers as well

>>2883194
>>2883203
make your own distilled water

inb4
>it is very hard to find stove in my country

does film "self-correct"?

I developed my very first film and one thing that got me was how well exposed every single shot was. I am using an all-manual camera and I'm pretty sure I must've been off on some of my shots, especially some of the low-light indoor shots that I pretty much guessed the shutter speed at 3 seconds.

did I get really fucking lucky, or does film have some tendency to develop towards some normal exposure?

>>2883482
well if you had a lab develop it then they probably adjusted the scans/prints

but yeah film has an amazing exposure latitude when compared to digital, its the only reason i shoot is, well that and the cameras are cooler

why are you guys so obsessed with scanning and film emulsions, it's all the same shit.

no one cares how sharp your photos are, it's all about the content

using a fucking drum scanner isn't going to turn your mf photo of a tractor in the desert into gold

you guys are worse than pixel peeping digi fags

i love film tho

>>2883501
I developed and scanned it myself. It's quite impressive, very forgiving. Another reason not to miss the chimp

File: cms20.jpg (3MB, 3000x2005px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3000x2005px

>>2883504

>Not pixel peeping Adox to shame digifags.

>>2883474

>>2883504
I'm really concerned with your post. You don't seem to own a keyboard with a shift key. You do however have access to some punctuation.

Now this is where it gets really crazy. You just have no respect for fullstops at all. Used on the first sentence only after you used a comma. Then no more. It's all about the comma and apostrophe.

How the fuck are you still alive?

I don't give a fuck about scanning, I do care about properties of the film though. I care about lattitude, grain and ease of development. I care about content too much, to the point of not posting.

i love digital tho

>>2883523
>haha! a spelling error! now i don't have to respond to the argument!

also it's called a period you fucking bong .

>>2883537
I responded to your post. I really need to know how you're still alive as you seem to be legally blind too or have no reading comprehension. Tell me how you have not drunk a quart of bleach yet?

I'm not sure you're also aware of what an argument is; you certainly have issues with reading comprehension.

File: MeAlexHammocks.jpg (654KB, 999x999px) Image search: [Google]

654KB, 999x999px

>>2883430
One of the best parts about the leaf shutters in the SQ is the glorious T-mode. Makes long exposures an absolute joy to do. No stupid cable releases or anything needed.

>>2883504
>no one cares how sharp your photos are, it's all about the content

Agreed. But there is a certain quality benchmark that should be reached. Otherwise you're leaving out qualities that will make a great photo even better.

People talking about lines per mm are lame as fuck, but wanting to get decent scans of your images is totally reasonable.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 9000 ED
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1927
Image Height	1959
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
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	2008:12:01 19:02:24
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	999
Image Height	999