donald_davis2

This may be the most bizarre question I have ever asked, but has anybody ever cut 220 film in half and respooled it onto 120 backing for use in a 120 only camera?

 

Here's the situation. I have 8 220 rolls of Plus-X that has been stored in a 0F/-18C freezer. It was for my Bronica GS-1 which experienced a mechanical failure with the body that renders the camera useless with ANY back attached. I’ve thought about selling the lenses, backs, and prisms and purchasing a refurbished or lightly used RB67. But I’m putting together a darkroom as I was given an Omega B66 enlarger with a dichroic head. Obviously I cannot use 6x7!in this enlarger but I have a working Minolta Autocord that is a 120 only model.

 

Simply put, I love Plus-X and had great results with it in my Autocord. I see no reason to continue with 6x7 if I do not plan to print larger than 11x14. And I’d love to have a chance to use Plus-X again. I know the film is in good shape as I shot a roll at box speed before the camera malfunctioned. The results were very good.

I’ve used my 16-35 f/4 L IS lens on my 620 on a cold winter morning with a temperature of 9F/-13C. I could tell no appreciable drain on the battery at all.

I always felt the 630 was a bit “unfinished.” Oh the 5fps advance and the slightly faster AF were improvements over the 650/620. The custom functions can be useful especially leader out rewind. And the predictive AF could be a benefit to sports and action photographers. But I still am scratching my head as to why the 1/4000 (1/250 x-sync) shutter was left out? The 630 was quite impressive otherwise for its time.

 

In 1990, I chose the 620 on clearance over the 630 for the faster shutter. It was more suited to what I wanted to do.

EOS 6D, Sigma 100-400 @400mm, 1/1000 @ f/8, ISO 12,800 as it was under heavy overcast at 8am

EOS 620, 50mm f/1.8, program mode. Ektar 100. I had owned this camera for exactly 30 years as I bought it new in April 1990 when I took it out last month for a 30th anniversary celebration. It was my first 35mm SLR I owned.

 

Goodyear Polymer Science Center. University of Akron, Akron Ohio.

East Park, Akron Ohio. Minolta X-370, Ilford FP4+. The smokestacks from the former BF Goodrich tire plant in the background set this photo off for me.

 

 

Furnace Run Metropark, Richfield Twp, Ohio. Also taken with an X-370 and Ilford FP4+. There's a faint remainder of some mist rising off the lake towards the right.

From my FTb. I only have one lens for the FTb, a 50mm 1.4

 

Rock formation along a local hiking trail. Ilford Delta 400. Exposure unrecorded but I'm guessing 1/15 or 1/30 at f/4

 

 

Early morning sun through light fog. Tri-X at box speed, exposure most likely 1/60 @ f/8

 

Peninsula, Ohio. Ilford PanF 50 w/yellow #12 filter. Exposure likely 1/125 @ f/8

Cannot believe i've been away for nearly 15 years... :eek: Anyway, from a T80 I bought used a year ago... Lens used for all three was the 35-70 AC at 35mm. Standard program was used on the first two and the bottom one used the deep focus program. Film used was Ilford PanF 50 at box speed.

 

St Paul's Cathedral, Pittsburgh PA. Reflecting off the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering institute building

 

 

Soldiers and Sailors Museum, Pittsburgh PA

 

 

Stack'd Burgers & Beer, Pittsburgh PA

Does anybody have any sample photographs taken with Fuji Pro 160S?

I am going to be doing some semi-serious portraiture here soon and

plan to use Pro 160S. This will be a mix of outdoors and indoors.

I really do not want to use Pro 160C as getting skin tones correct

is my number one priority. I also know that Pro 160S is not going

to give high color saturation outdoors. But in this case, that is

not required. Skin tones are the paramount issue.

 

So if anybody has any samples taken with Pro 160S, especially

outdoor shots, I would be greatly appreciative of seeing them. I

have shot with NPC and Reala and wish to know how Pro 160S compares.

HaS anybody shot much Maco TP64c? When I deplete my stocks of

TechPan, I am looking to try either ORT25 or TP64c. I found a

wealth of information about ORT25 on a thread I posted. But I am

really up in the air as to which one to use. Does TP64c have the

same resolving power as TechPan? How is TP64c's tonal range compare

to TechPan?

 

Granted, I do not shoot much techpan anyway and I have a sizeable

stockpile. But I would like to try TP64c in the near future as well

as ORT25. I am just curious as to what to expect from TP64c.

Jon Hill Writes:<br>

<i>Personally I find he level of grain in most of the faster films overbearing in (most) landscape shots</i>

<BR>

<BR>

Jon, I have used the old Kodak VR1000 in landscapes! If I can tolerate grain from that, then I know I can live with Natura's and Konica's grain. Shoot, I can even tolerate High Speed Infrared's grain!! :)

<br>

<br>

I too just ordered mine from Dirk Rösler's Megaperls shop. I got the expedited shipment so it should be in my hands before August 7, the day of the hike.

Jon, when I go on my hike, I will ask the guide if tripods are permitted. If so, I will make a return trip in September or even October with the Bronica. Fall colors in this gorge with Ultra Color 100 is sure to be nice! And...if the colors at the time of an October hike are vivid enough, I will use my very last 120 roll of Ektar 25! It has been frozen for a few years now at 0 degrees Farenheit and still performs great!

R.T. Dowling Writes

<br>

<i>If you are able to get some Natura, I'd be very interested to see your results if you'd be willing to post a few scans or e-mail them to me. I'd love to try it myself, but haven't yet found a way to get it here in the U.S.</i>

<br>

<br>

If you do not mind ordering from overseas, it can be shipped to the US. The <a href=http://www.unicircuits.com/shop/>Megapearls Webshop</a> carries it, as well as other Japan-only Fuji films. They also have Konica Pan 100 and Konica Pan 400. I also ordered a five pack of Fujichrome Fortia in 120 size rolls. That is like super Velvia. More contrast and saturation than even the dearly departed Velvia 50. For my fall colors, that stuff will be fun even if it is not exactly lifelike! :)

<br>

<br>

<i>I've shot a lot of Konica 1600 and I've been quite pleased with it (compared to Fuji Superia 1600/Press 1600). Its grain isn't as fine as films such as NPZ or Superia 800, but it's pretty close, and it's no worse than Kodak MAX 800. It certainly has better (more accurate) colors than MAX.</i>

<br>

<br>

I like my Konica 1600. But when I found out I can import Natura, I had to get some and give it a shot. Besides, I only have 1, not 2 rolls as I thought I did. So either way, I would have to order more Konica 1600.

<br>

<br>

Kodak's Gold and MAX lineups are just yucky to me. I have always preferred their high end offerings such as Ektar/Royal Gold 25, Ektar/Royal Gold 100, Supra 100, and Ultra Color 100 and 400. Kodak's Ektar/Royal Gold 1000 was very good when I needed high speeds and liked it better than Superia Xtra 800. But all but the Ultra Color films are still around. And Superia Xtra 800 is a great film in its own right. I really think it does a great job for higher speed films. But there are a few times when only 1600 will do for me. And sadly, Superia 1600 does not cut it for me.

Jon and Fazal,

 

I do have a tripod, a Velbon Victory 550, that I can take. It is not the weight that is a factor. This is a group hike and I do not feel like taking the time to unfold and collapse the tripod. This is a situation in which I just want to take the picture and go. If I want to use a tripod, I will carry my Bronica GS-1 and load it with Ultra Color 100 or Reala. I almost always use a tripod when I shoot most of my subjects. I shoot ISO 100 most of the time anyway. So under most circumstances, I would grab the pod, throw in some of my Reala or my frozen stock of Supra 100, and make the long exposures. Indeed when I am hiking in very hilly terrain at my usual pace, I NEED a tripod! :-) But this is a slower paced hike in less demanding terrain. Also, I can handhold steady enough to 1/15 with said lens. When I looked at some slides I remember being shot wide open, I found the DoF to be sufficient for my needs.

 

Lastly, there are two other things to consider. One, I do NOT wish to become a slave to my tripod. Rather than have to worry about getting everything level in uneven terrain and thus taking the time to do so, I want to look through the finder and shoot. Two, this hike is a group hike in an area that is restricted. Due to the park district's desire to have the area remain as pristine as possible nobody is permitted in this ravine without a park district guide. Maybe I am being overly sensitive, but I just do not want to jab a tripod into the ground in this area.

 

In conclusion, while I would use a tripod and ISO 100 film with either my 35mm Canons or my Bronica on a hike, this is a situation where I do not wish to use a tripod. With the slide film, I did tend to give the shadows a bit more exposure and blowing out the highlights a bit. But with even 1600 speed negative film, I can give more exposure to the highlights if I need. And while I will always be happier with ISO 100 vs 1600, we must give fast films credit. They have came a long way since VR 1000 came out over 20 years ago and are probably close to ISO 400 films of 15-20 years ago.

I am going to be hiking in an area with a very dense forest canopy

in about 3 weeks. I have shot this area before with ISO 400 speed

reversal film pushed on stop to 800. In some areas, I was getting

readings of 1/8 at f/2.8 (the widest on my Canon EF 28mm lens)and

that is a bit too slow for my level of steadiness. However, I am

going to use negative film for this hike and am going to consider

the 1600 speed offerings. My question is how well is Natura 1600

for landscapes? I am well aware that 1600 films will not be as

saturated as my standby ISO 100 films. But would I be well served

by ordering Natura 1600 or is my 2 remaining rolls of Konica 1600

going to be sufficient? By "sufficient," I mean how close to an ISO

800 color negative film will I come to with regards to color, grain,

saturation, and contrast by using Natura 1600 or Konica 1600?

<i>Donald, you were carrying too much gear!</i>

<br><br>

Yaron, but then how was I supposed to shoot color slides, color prints AND black and white in the same day? :)

<BR><BR>

Anyway, after a week of careful drying out, here is the verdict. The EOS-1n body lives but the main shutter release will not work. I must either use the vertical shutter release on the PB-E1 or use the cable release. That is not a big deal as I shoot 99% of my stuff on a tripod anyway. I use a cable release with that and the cable release still works. In fact, the roll of E100G still inside the 1n was dry. So I reloaded it and tested it around the house. Exposures are dead on. The EF 50mm f/1.8, 28mm F/2.8, and Sigma 75-300 f/4.5-5.6 APO lenses function just fine as does my 430EZ flash. My Bronica 100mm f/3.5 and 150mm f/4 lenses work fine. Shutter trips perfectly and the diaphragm blades open and close w/o any binding or grittiness.

<BR><BR>

Now for the losses and damages. The EOS 620 body is dead as is my GS-1 body. Will not power up or do anything. My Sigma 600mm f/8 mirror has standing water in it that I cannot remove. So that will have to go back to Sigma for repair. My Bronica 65mm f/4 lens has a sticky diaphragm and the aperture ring rotates with abnormal difficulty. I have not tried to fire that lens on my replacement GS-1 body but I have tripped the shutter pin with the lens off the body. Shutter is fairly smooth with less resistance than the issues common to Bronica lens shutters. Sorry for Bronica talk in an EOS forum!

<br><br>

As mentioned above, I have already received a used GS-1 body to replace my old one. I have coming to me next week a mint condition (or so the seller says) 620 body. It is still in the original packaging and was said to have only been fired a couple times. Being stored in a dry closet should mean, but not guarantee, that it will not suffer from the shutter bumper decay issues of the first EOS bodies. The 620 was my first SLR so I guess there is a little emotional attachment to it. Plus, it is safe to use with High Speed Infrared film as well as having the 1/250 X-sync that I have come to appreciate.

<br><br>

All in all, I am lucky to have suffered such a small loss considering that everything I carried got dunked. The current inability to use my 600mm mirror is not a big concern as I only use it for specialized shots. But I will miss the Bronica 65mm (equal to a 33 in the 35mm format) as that is my usual landscape lens.

It looks as if my 620 is going to that great camera shop in the sky. No signs of life. However, I left both bodies sitting next to a heater. The 1n is probably going to live...albeit crippled. The main shutter release will not work yet the shutter release on the PB-E1 works fine. AF is functional and the diaphragm is functional. So I am going to remove the PB-E1 and let air get under the body that way.

 

Now what kinda sucks is I had a Bronica GS-1 system with me too! It got dunked. I suspect the body is dead but the glass may live.

 

However, if the 1n body returns to functionality, I will pick up a used 620 off eBay or some other source. Why a 620? I do appreciate the 1/250 flash sync when shooting fill flash with slide films.

Chris, I have thought of the oven idea. Since I have a gas oven, the pilot light alone provides some heat to the inside. But I have a low heat setting of around 175F to 200F.

 

I did a search for submersions prior to posting but, I found no such help. In a way, I guess that is a good thing. If there are lots of threads dealing with submersions, then that means more people lost their gear...

Rob, the cameras were both powered on at the time of submersion. So I hope I can still salvage them. Right now, I got them against a furnace duct so that it gets some warm air to help the air drying. Heh, too bad I cannot take them into where I work, a plastic injection molding facility. Setting them right on the press about 6" away from the barrel is sure to provide extra heat! :)

 

Gary, no I have never shot the Nikon system, but if all my lenses and bodies fail to work, I am considering the F5 along with an EOS 1v. How well do both cameras resist a quick submerging in only a couple feet of water for no more than, say, 30-60 seconds?

Today, I fell on a slippery path and rolled into a canal. While

there was ice on the canal, it was unable to hold my weight so I

broke through it. And needless to say, my EOS gear consisting of a

620 body, 1n body, 50 f/1.8, 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 75-300 APO zoom and

430EZ flash was submerged. As to be expected, the bodies are not

functioning worth a darn right now. Total time of submersion was

probably 10-30 seconds. Not sure exactly because I was trying to

get out of the canal to prevent hypothermia! :)

 

Right now, I am just letting them sit out in a warm room and let air

dry. But based on any submersion experiences and what I described,

does my gear have hope? FWIW, the flash still works.

I am currently chatting with a friend from New Brunswick, Canada

about black and white photography. Specifically, he is trying to

find a good lab within Canada that accepts mail order work. Are

there any mail order Canadian labs here that photo.net members have

used with great results? If so, I would be grateful. If they have

websites, that would be a big plus. Also, costs involved (in CDN $

of course) would also be greatly appreciated.

 

Being as to how I live in the USA, I would recommend Images Photo

(www.mylab.com) to him but I have no idea if they accept Canadian

orders. Nothing is said about it on their website.

I recently picked up a used Canon S50 from eBay to use as a

snapshooting camera that would offer me more than simple program

AE. In other words, I wanted a feature set comparable to my EOS 620

and EOS 1n bodies. Plus I wanted a camera capable of making photo

quality 8x10s and a very good 11x14. Plus, I wanted a camera that

was small enough to go anywhere so I would have NO excuse to say "I

wish I brought my camera with me!" I also wanted RAW mode.

 

Now I have a question about the RAW mode in the S50. Just how many

bits per channel does it record? Does it do 12bit, 10bit or just

8bit? I ask because I want to know if I should even bother using a

16bit/channel depth when Adobe Camera RAW asks for 8 or 16bit

depth. Ok, I know that if it is 12 or 10, then work in the 16 bit

depth to preserve all info. But if I only get 8bit depth in RAW, I

am wasting disk space with 16bit images.

 

So does anybody know for sure what the bit/channel depth is when

shooting the S50 in RAW mode? Thanks.

<i>The MACO UP25+ is the regular panchromatic version. It still doesn't have the same spectral sensitivity as TP but it is easier to use for regular continuous tome work</i>

<br>

<br>

Jeff, How is UP25's enlargeability? I mean, if I take a TP 6x7 neg and an UP25 6x7 neg shot thru the same GS-1 body, lens and lens apeerture, and back of the same scene and have both enlarged to 16x20, will the UP25 be as sharp as the TP neg?

<br>

<br>

As stated before, Plus-X is my favorite B&W film but for when I want GOBS of detail and want to make big prints, I use TechPan. A previous thread had a survey of how many rolls of TechPan a person used in the last year. Well, I used 4 rolls of 120 and 2 rolls of 35mm TechPan over the last 12 months. I am a person that always shoots at the sharpest three apertures, uses a tripod for 90% of my photos, and uses the mirror lockup on my GS-1 as well as my 35mm EOS-1n. So I am doing everything to get the most from TechPan. And for that reason, it has been my 2nd favorite B&W film. I have a selenium-toned 11x14 on fibre-based paper that is just gorgeous.

 

Oh well, I guess I will just have to enjoy my remaining stock of TechPan and listen to the recommendations of photo.net members for TechPan replacements. It is just too bad that Bluefire Police, Copex, and Imagelink films are not available in 120.

Have any of our photo.net members had much experience with Macophot

ORT 25c? From the looks of the film, it has the same specs as

TechPan. But...is it an acceptable alternative to TechPan? I still

have a small stockpile of 4 35mm rolls and 15 120-size rolls of

Techpan, but they will not last forever. Does ORT 25c have the same

sharpness and detail when enlarged compared to TechPan? Does it

have the same tonal appearance as TechPan? While Plus-X is my all

time favorite B&W film, TechPan is my 2nd favorite. I love the

looks of a nice 16x20 TechPan enlargement from my Bronica GS-1 and

would like to know if Macophot ORT 25c will give me equivalent or

nearly equivalent results.

Before the last of the Technical Pan is shipped, I am considering

getting myself a bulk roll. However, I am aware that techpan comes

in 150' lengths compared to the traditional 100' length for

everything else. While I am mostly certain of the answer, I want to

be sure before I run out and buy a bulk roll of techpan plus a

loader.

 

Even though techpan has a thinner base, will it still fit in a

loader that accepts up to 100' rolls of traditional film, such as

Tri-X in 100' rolls? Thanks!

 

 

Don