IF film sat undeveloped for 20 or more years, image will be degraded.
At least colours.
I remember buying 120 roll film for my 6x6 cameras back in the 80s and it was kept in fridges by sellers.
At least colours.
I remember buying 120 roll film for my 6x6 cameras back in the 80s and it was kept in fridges by sellers.
Living in a cold climate, I've taken pictures in some extremely cold temps plus wind-chill. I didn't trust my digital cameras, and given I wanted b&w images anyway, I used an old Pentax Spotmatic with a couple of their incredible Takumar lenses, metered with an incident meter.
For anyone who appreciates mechanical, and optical excellence (given the era) just work the focus and aperture rings on an old Takumar lens - gorgeous.
For anyone who appreciates mechanical, and optical excellence (given the era) just work the focus and aperture rings on an old Takumar lens - gorgeous.
Still using my M6 30 yrs after i bought it. My M2R has been retired.
A few months ago, my wife bought me a second hand film camera at a thrift store, that got me interested in film again.
I had a bunch of exposed but undeveloped film that escaped being stolen or thrown in the trash, and out of those, all the Tri-X developed fine, maybe a bit grainer than I recall, but not bad at all for two to three decades old. The color negative film was a disaster - out of a dozen rolls, I only got usable (meaning my PlusTek film scanner could scan them) negatives from one. I used CineStill DF96 for the Tri-X, and CineStill CS41 chemistry for the color.
Win W5JAG
I had a bunch of exposed but undeveloped film that escaped being stolen or thrown in the trash, and out of those, all the Tri-X developed fine, maybe a bit grainer than I recall, but not bad at all for two to three decades old. The color negative film was a disaster - out of a dozen rolls, I only got usable (meaning my PlusTek film scanner could scan them) negatives from one. I used CineStill DF96 for the Tri-X, and CineStill CS41 chemistry for the color.
Win W5JAG
I am fortunate to have B&H Photo Video right next to Penn Station in NY!
In my youth, I used to do Cibachrome printing.
In my youth, I used to do Cibachrome printing.
Someday when I retire I'd like to do a few film shots again, 4x5 or 120 TLR. Modern digital has completely ruined 35mm for me, and it wasn't that great to begin with. Phone cameras have eliminated the low end of digital cameras and what's left is darn good at this point.
Never been to B&H, but have a friend who visited and marvelled about how it operated. I have purchased gear from them and they were great. They were likely one of the first companies to ship prepaid to Canada AND cover UPS's ridiculous brokerage fees. Wish Parts Express would do that as it's why I avoid them if it is at all possible.
I was heavy into landscape photography when I was in grad school. I've owned and used many cameras. The only one I truly miss is the Hasselblad 501CM I used to have. I love the square format. Love the waist-level finder with an accurate focusing aid. Love it. The 60 mm wide angle on the square format was perfect. Not too wide. Not too tele. Juuuust right. But there's no realistic digital option. All digital backs have 40x40 mm sensors so gone are the wide angles.
I don't miss the drives to the lab. When I lived in Seattle, I used to swing by Ivey Seright in the evening to avoid traffic. They had a night drop slot.
I tried digital SLRs (Canon 10D, 5D, 1D) but found the viewfinders sucked compared to the Contax 35mm I was used to. So I eventually transitioned to mirror-less. These days I rock a Fuji X-T4 and love it. Though, I do vastly more product photography than landscape photography these days.
That said. The best camera is always the one that you have with you. 99.99999 % of the time, that's my phone. Nothing stops you from making good pictures with a phone camera. They won't hold for a 120x120 cm enlargement, but they're fine for sharing online, which is what most do anyway. I do miss the creative control with a phone camera, though. Sorry. "Portrait Mode" is not a substitute for the bokeh of an 135 mm f/2 at f/2.
Tom
I don't miss the drives to the lab. When I lived in Seattle, I used to swing by Ivey Seright in the evening to avoid traffic. They had a night drop slot.
I tried digital SLRs (Canon 10D, 5D, 1D) but found the viewfinders sucked compared to the Contax 35mm I was used to. So I eventually transitioned to mirror-less. These days I rock a Fuji X-T4 and love it. Though, I do vastly more product photography than landscape photography these days.
That said. The best camera is always the one that you have with you. 99.99999 % of the time, that's my phone. Nothing stops you from making good pictures with a phone camera. They won't hold for a 120x120 cm enlargement, but they're fine for sharing online, which is what most do anyway. I do miss the creative control with a phone camera, though. Sorry. "Portrait Mode" is not a substitute for the bokeh of an 135 mm f/2 at f/2.
Tom
I love bokeh. Too many people are obsessed with lens resolution. Control of the focus plane and depth of field are great creativity tools.
I've still got my collection of film cameras (up to 8x10 large format) and lenses, and this reminds me that I, too, have some rolls of 120 black and white film that I need to develop.
I've still got my collection of film cameras (up to 8x10 large format) and lenses, and this reminds me that I, too, have some rolls of 120 black and white film that I need to develop.
The one I miss was the Pentax 6x7, with the mirror lock up. My favourite lens for it was the 75mn shift.
I won't bother with mirrorless as that would mean a whole new cycle of lenses, and I'm too old to bother. I can use virtually every Nikon, or Sigma Art, lens I own on my digital bodies or on my film cameras. As long as my Nikon scanners keep working, or as long as I have a FireWire equipped Mac, I'll keep shooting film, too.
I won't bother with mirrorless as that would mean a whole new cycle of lenses, and I'm too old to bother. I can use virtually every Nikon, or Sigma Art, lens I own on my digital bodies or on my film cameras. As long as my Nikon scanners keep working, or as long as I have a FireWire equipped Mac, I'll keep shooting film, too.
TLDR, but I was amazed by the low light performance of my friend's Samsung Galaxy S8. If anyone dismisses the quality of camera phones compared to film, remember how many disposable film cameras were sold, and such film formats as the 110 and Disc cartridge films.
Old Compact Sony DSC-HX9V ( released in 2011 ) , I still own it , got it as a gift. Still does good photos, advatage being 16x optical zoom.
Here are a few pics ( im an amateur photographer ).
Here are a few pics ( im an amateur photographer ).
Attachments
Aw... Kitteh...
I never liked how Canon rendered blue sky or colours in general. Yes, I know that can be changed in Photoshop, but landscape photography - to me - is about connecting with the landscape; not connecting with the computer. Also, I'm not 25 years old anymore, so I don't really enjoy lugging heavy camera gear up the mountains anymore either. I noticed that the awesome 70-200/2.8 L IS lens would always stay in the car and be wanted along the hike. So I started looking around for lighter options. By then mirror-less cameras had come far enough along that I took the plunge.
Tom
That's the thing. If what you have works for you, why replace it?
I never liked how Canon rendered blue sky or colours in general. Yes, I know that can be changed in Photoshop, but landscape photography - to me - is about connecting with the landscape; not connecting with the computer. Also, I'm not 25 years old anymore, so I don't really enjoy lugging heavy camera gear up the mountains anymore either. I noticed that the awesome 70-200/2.8 L IS lens would always stay in the car and be wanted along the hike. So I started looking around for lighter options. By then mirror-less cameras had come far enough along that I took the plunge.
Tom
are the definitions of "bokeh" just "blurring". I think that the attraction of Leica was that contrast at the "focus locus" was greater than the range-defined "blurred" regions. Eisenstadt anyone?
Nikons and Cannon range finders just left me disappointed with B&W, but Leica and Contax were fulfilling as were Mamiyaflex and Rolleiflex TLR's.
I much prefer BW to color so am laying my prejudice as bare as a blonde on a rug.
See Merklinger "The Ins and Outs of Focus"
I have six Spotmatics and 7 SMC Takumars. Silver and black bodies, and SP-F as well, and a few original accessories like extension tubes. Lovely bits of machinery. Very hard to work on though! I also work on mechanical watches as one of my many hobbies and find them easier than a Spotmatic to pull apart and reassemble.
Bokeh can vary greatly depending on the lens. I find the differences most noticeable where the out-of-focus areas are quite contrasty. Some lenses produce sharp edges instead of soft transistions. This can detract from the in-focus areas and destroy the 3-dimensional effect of the image. Then, there are the Petzval lenses which produce swirly out-of-focus areas.
I love my Rolleicord TLR. It was my first 120 film camera.
I love my Rolleicord TLR. It was my first 120 film camera.