yann1

<p>Very similar to my Foca Pf3</p>

<p>They are very similar and excellent films, also very forgiving. The pan 400 is a film we find in Asia, it's also very good and a cheaper alternative. Now i prefer ilford but I should say you should stick to what you know best especially if the photos are important. If you want a slower film, FP4125 is really great.</p>

<p>I can't fully answer your question about these photos but it's possible to achieve this effect with black and white prints in a darkroom by waving a woman stocking in front of the lens while exposing, it gives exactly this effect. I guess it's possible to to do the same for colour analog prints too. I wonder if we could also do it by rubbing a little vaseline on a filter to put on a lens. With photoshop I guess gaussian blur, but I'm not sure. Hope someoe else will answer your question, I'm curious myself. Best regards Chiara.</p>

<p>The Bessa R is very good with probably the best viewing finder you can find and you can use it with almost all L39 mount lenses. It's not too expensive and you can use it with a cheap Russian lens first if you are on a budget. If you don't like this camera then rangefinders aren't for you.</p>

<p>Your photos are always excellent, great light and composition with any cameras. No exception here. I feel ashamed i haven't done so well for months with my Rolleiflex... This Kodak is lucky to be in your hands. Thanks for sharing</p>

<p>Nikon FM10 was made by Cosina, the company that makes the Voigtlander Bessa. It was my first camera, I still use it sometimes, it's very reliable more than what people say. Still i wouldn't bother to buy one for such a high price, and yes, the kit lens isn't very good. For $400 you can have Nikon's best camera ever made , the F3, and a nice lens.</p>

<p>If you can write such a long question it means you are still alive.<br> The fixer could be very dangerous if ingested and i even avoid to touch it to much, but you washed your hands very carefully so i can't imagine anything wrong will happen to you, just make sure to look for cars before you cross the street. The chemicals aren't that dangerous on your skin, there's no need to worry.</p>

<p>the 18-55 you mention is the lens I used for 85% of my shots in the last 8 years with my d90. Some pictures I have enlarged 16x20. It's a very nice lens. Now that I have a fx camera, I have a cheap $50 24-80 lens. I'm not a nutcase, I work with the tools I know. For low light, studio or critical shots, my 50mm 1.8d. All the comments above make sense, but try a prime like this one, you\ll see things differently, compose differently and take your time.<br> Keep shooting</p>

<p>Hi Paul;<br> You are very lucky indeed. A Xenotar is a Planar type lens designed by Schneider, yes it's Sharper at the edges than the xenar. The lightmeter on this jewel is made of selenium and it's impossible to charge it just dies away slowly. You should definitely have a CLA and try a roll . You should also send a picture of your new Rollei.</p>

<p>The software provided by Epson should allow you to scan manually, i's the only way. Sorry I don't remember how I used it a few years ago before it died. MyEpson d600 does the same thing and most negatives are scanned manually.</p>

<p>By the way, try to post a photo of your camera too when you post your photos. Thanks for sharing</p>

<p>A Xenar is a Tessar design made by Schneider, it's a very good lens (as you can see on your photos). I have a Rollei F with a Planar lens, and yes they are very sharp, sharper than Tessar at the corners, excellent for architecture, but for portraits the Tessasr are very beautiful. Keep shooting</p>

<p>Excellent. I particularly like those trains. Never used an Exacta before, they are really gorgeous. it's good to see you and a few members are active on this forum.</p>

<p>The d90 is a very nice camera, and I used it a lot with very good results even with a cheap 18=55 plastic lens. It was however frustrating not to be able to get bigger prints (but only once for an exhibition), also I am so used to film cameras that I wanted a camera with a 50mm lens that really looks a like a 50mm. I wanted a fx camera and I bought the Nikon d610. To my surprise, even the auto focus was better. Certainly not as good as the d750 in dim light, but good enough for me and also very nice pictures at iso 3200. The Nikon Photographers i knpw all have a d750 or a df, and if they are better than me it's not because of their camera. I'd recommand the d750 for its great autofocus but a d610 would save some money for a good prime.</p>

<p>Saliva will leave marks on the coating that aren't easy to clean, so I would certainly not lick it (excepted if you have a pancake lens...)</p>