RaymondC

Been there done that, lol. Learn from my mistakes.

I have 9 rolls of slide film and 9 rolls of Acros b/w film (120 format) and another 2 rolls of Delta 100 (120 also). Probably take me a year to finish this hopefully if not longer. My RB67 and H500 were both used last in April this year so been 5 months. I also have most of a bulk roll of HP5 with 35mm and maybe 1 individual roll of 35mm HP5 and 1 of Cinefilm (ISO 800). I am out of developer, still have some stop bath I think my fixer is starting to flake so need more of that also. How many rolls of film do you use generally on a year basis? For me it it is usually 10 or 15 rolls but a lot of the time I just go out in the afternoon for a casual wander under noon light, yes it is strong and harsh but then I think why did I do that. I could see how 35mm b/w film might be more ok for street style but a 120 system is a more deliberate style. Maybe it was an excuse to use up my film if nothing else hahah. If I was out of film I would most certainly not go and buy more film before I do those casual outings. Edit - I probably decided that for 35mm it's only b/w for street style now mostly and color stuff will be on the 120 system. At least for me I don't have multiple bodies of the same brand system. I do have a Nikon F100 and Fm2n the F100 does get the lesser use. I have used it more for color photography, with tripod since the meter goes up to 30" ie - low light photography cityscapes etc. but color for is probably 120 format now.

I've only got a older Nikon D70 and a D600, RB67 and a Hasselblad 500CM. Should get a batch of film back (from the lab) mostly 120 format and will see how it goes. All slides. Got some in the freezer and finish them off. Other than a road trip I did in April the 120 cameras have not been taken out once other than the 1 or 2 days. I also have a Nikon F100 and Fm2n. Maybe I would eventually just shoot b/w film. Yeah .. a lot of times locally here, it was so low key that I could had shot it with any camera but I just said to myself I have these 120 film stashed in my freezer that I mind as well use it even thou I couldn't care less which way I went with. If I adjust for that a lot the times I used film, I didn't needed to. It was just a 1hr walking along the local beach during lunch time (noon sun). Wasn't any special event or planning involved. Not in the USA. But here in NZ. A used Hasselblad digital back itself without a screen needs to be teethered could be had for $700US. A Hasselblad H3D with the normal lens together is $3,500US.

Various time I pause and think of what I am doing in my life and not just related to photog. In the shorter term we want gear and more gear but then the time comes and I reflect on what did I do and why did I do it and I struggle for an answer. Cameras etc are just tools, sure some are better, at the end of the day it produces images to be viewed on screen and on the print. Mirror-less wasn't avaiable then so I have a dSLR. I also have a RB67 and a Hassie 500 but I don't really use it that often and ok I got them very cheap used, so most of the time for me they just sit there and goes thru a couple of rolls a year when I have something planned so I go and spend an afternoon and slowly take some shots. Smartphones are just so convenient and can take images when you never thought about carrying your camera, hence I am interested in a large sensor compact. I guess like a classic car or a fountain pen, but I won't imagine many people would be using them all that often. I could be OK if I just had a digital body with 2 or 3 lenses and a premium compact.

Mine are 6 frames per strip :D Hama glassines.

Hi all, just wondering if there is something similar for a medium format sized film. The other thing is the ES-1 with 35mm film is to be used with a 55mm lens, can this be used with any other lenses? I have a Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro it would be crazy to assume to use on this right, it is a 55mm filter thread. What about a Nikon 40mm DX or a Nikon 60mm AF? Cheers.

Yes been there done that. I just be careful and spend a month or 2 months on a single roll. Re: the wastage at the start and end of the roll when using the bulk loader and also when you develop it a shorter roll in the same amount of chemistry and the film sleeves. I could do 7 strips to max out the sleeves.

I have a V700, not sure about the sharpness issue yet. I am gonna order my betterfilmholders soon. The issue I have with the Epson holders is that the film is difficult to put on so can take a couple of attempts, often the the top or the bottom side is not held in place, also the film sags in the center quite a bit. I used to have a Coolscan 4000, bought used off a pro but broke within a year ... You can see the grain with the Coolscan yup. To see the grain with the Epson I turn sharpening to 80 amount with Adobe Lightroom. First - is your actual negatives or slides sharp?

Just a curious question. The weather over here in the southern hemisphere is warming up and I have been a bit more active with photography. Most people at my camera club use labs and simply use the Fuji Archive Crystal paper or maybe a lab that uses a large format inkjet or they might have their own A3 Canon or Epson printer and use mainly premium semi-gloss paper. The prints are generally matted up and put behind a glass. Those are not fine art, museum / exhibition paper. For those of you that use these high end papers when do you use them? I obviously don't sell prints. Cheers.

The 2200 is a very good printer. Much better than labs and I used the Red River profiles for my Epson papers and they looked stunning. Not sure if by chance. They are better than my R2880 with Epson papers using Epson profiles. FWIW, I have some Inkpress paper and used their profile for my R2880 and it's better. I am not sure if Epson profiles are just not up to the same standard. I note Charles said he used Innova paper. What I learnt today actually is to use non Epson paper.

Not with Kodak but with Ilford bulk rolls yes. Kodak TriX bulk $120. Ilford HP5 bulk $65.

Ilford is still cheaper for bulk rolls, Kodak isn't. On a price issue, I limit myself to Ilford. For me I shoot 35mm around the clock so it's ASA 400. I shoot ASA 100 film with medium format when I know I will be mostly using a tripod. So to me that would be HP5 400. If you say you want more IQ, minimal grain with a classical look it would be Ilford Delta 100 or Kodak Tmax 100. I have tried Fuji Acros 100 very very smooth and fine grain but it look too digital, seems like what some reviewers have said also. If you want more grain or that film look, yes I know you said minimal grain but an option would be Ilford FP4.

I had a 2200 and now a 2880. The 2880 Epson profiles are better but still not that great. I have found that with the 2200 I used the Red River paper profile with my Epson paper - Epson Prem Semi Gloss and Epson Enhanced Matte. I think the ones I liked were the Polar Matte, and the Artic Polar Satin. Other than that. The real proper way IMO is to create your custom printer profiles. With my Dell Ultrasharp monitor I had to reduce the brightness from 50 to 30 before I calibrated it.

I have been with a local camera club for more than 10yrs now, and they tend to focus on competitions. Yeah .. equipment were never an issue, I think someone's smartphone image was a winner once. I've found it was the shot, and the post processing and even intentional blurring with the camera. For planned stuff I shoot medium format film now, no more 35mm film other than b/w film ie street style. I am also looking at getting a premium compact digital it does the spontaneous images so much eaiser. That still said, TriX and HP5+ are the more popular b/w film choices right. I wouldn't imagine them to be more IQ. And ... with cropping. At my club it's not unheard of that people discard 70% of their pixels because by cropping that is a better composition / stronger image.

Over time. dSLRs the 6MP was SLR form factor and that was what was available. I wasn't involved with photography in the film days, I got into film after getting my 6MP. After reading about, to me it's a bit like for my own walk and about stuff and I don't do action, sports or stage performances (where SLRs would be better or the likes of big group get togethers). For my own stuff and wandering around at home in weekends or travel, if it was in the past the film Ricoh GR, Contax G1 may had been attractive. These days it would be the digital equivalent.

I think myself included, I have read and read about gear for travel. Maybe our tolerances and expectations change over time. And now we have APC sensor mirrorless, in the past that wasn't an option. Just go with the flow and see where it leads you. At the end of the day if it is frustrating you can always leave the gear in the the hotel or in your boot of your car and use your phone. For me I have always been relatively light one time going with others I thought I could have an opportunity to bring more and shoot more - for me that didn't work out cos different people have different interest on the trip. And frankly walking around in the day time in the city, in the malls, for me the heavy equipment was kinda pointless. It also happened that, when we went for dinner etc .. I left everything in the hotel and went out with my phone, other times it was the Fm2n and the 50, or the D600 and the 50 and maybe the 18-35 (not all the time) and just took the 70-200 out at specific times (head back to hotel to pickup) like HKG Peak visit etc or the waterfront. If you just want a cheaper option of another lens when you want a lighter lens - oh sure just try it out. Esp at home when one is familiar with it, have your own car, have your own home, your own bed etc.

Yes, better definition on what "walk around" means I think. The 28-300mm isn't small. In about 2006'ish I had the Nikon 18-200mm DX lens and that also wasn't that small. YMMV. When I go on holiday with other people or a long weekend for a fun time together, have breakfast outside, dinner outside etc. Then all I want is a kit lens or a smallish prime lens maybe the older AF-D but yes that is not maxing out the potential of the D800. I have a D600 but that is also not maxing it out. I have a carried a D600 with a 70-200mm F4 VR and a 18-35mm and a 50mm I think. Too much stuff for me with 65+ parents along walking around in Hong Kong. I was also crazy enough to have with me a Nikon Fm2n film body as well. At times I just left the 70-200mm at the hotel and just used the Nikon D600 with just the 50 and the 18-35 or just the Fm2n with the 50mm and shot b/w film. The thing for me is that on a fun holiday or a weekend away, or a gentle stroll on a Saturday at home, it's just not fun, while at home on a Saturday I could muscle a D600, 18-35, 50, 70-200/4 and it's only for 2 or 3hrs before heading home again. But esp away to another town or overseas, pulling out that dSLR with the lens and the lens hood is quite big inside a train or inside the plane to take a few snaps thru the window or some casual pictures of family and friends sitting there alongside of you. Or sitting in the cafe and take a few shots of the people and the food you're having. Thru the mall etc. Nikon FX or DX that matter. Maybe a D3000 series could. When the Fuji XT3 comes out, since the XT1 was a 2014 release Jan, and the XT2 was a June 2016, maybe the XT3 is a 2018. I am looking for a preowned XT1 with a 23mm (eff. 35mm) f2 and maybe the wider zoom or the 14/2.8. In specific to your question, the 24-120 would be better from what i understand. I know someone who has this lens on the Canon and not the 24-70mm but he does have a 16-35 2.8 and a 70-200mm 2.8. He also shoots festival markets on the street with a Canon 1DX and now a Canon 5D so yeah ymmv for me ... it's a XT1. I favour lightness.

Just curious about this. For myself, over time I have started using more primes and also looking at the good quality kit lens esp with travel and my own hobby photography walkabout style. A no. of my friends have stayed with large zooms dSLR or if they went the mirrorless route after getting sick of the bulk they still went for the large aperture zoom lenses mainly. I of course like other hobbyist I knew at the start we all very liked the F2.8 zoom lenses all 3 of them, fortunately I only got 2 of them - a older 35-70mm 2.8 and a 80-200 2.8 but sold for a 70-200mm f4. How have you guys been on this regard ....

I am one of the 2 that prefers C so far. Maybe it's why I enjoy shooting slide film but the costs is getting to me and I look at sunset forecast and chase the saturated skies. So it's not just a camera / software setting to me.

Thanks for that. 1. With a 35mm FL lens at F11, that means I will be quite challenged. I am already at ISO 1600, 1/3, F8. So it means ISO 3200 at 1/3 F11. 2. Since I was using it as a fill light that was what I got. If I could climb up the lamp post and take the bulb out. The flash would be Key light right it could had been used to freeze the person and be more in detail? Or alternative if an area had no lights but ok that's difficult then.

I am looking at these. The white tents. Does the material have creases in them that show up in the photograph? Looking for a small one to photograph small things like a wine glass and things I intend to sell at an auction. Biscuits etc ... Cheers.

An image here Dropbox - 2017_07_30_0031.jpg ISO 1600, 1/3, F8, flash using Nikon's commander mode to the side at 1/32 manual power with just the dome. 1. The buildings in the back, the building logos's cannot be read. Is this possible? 2. On this image the person's eye is quite ok. But I suppose there was similar ambient light for the person compared to the background. In a studio or dark backyard setting - using max flash sync speed and the flash to fully light the person up the person would be in more detail right. Anyway when I took the shot without the flash the person was already visible.

Just a learning exercise. Yes cable release. 2 series Gitzo. Background not blur maybe dof but I suppose the best would be blend the two in photoshop. The person in front wasn't tack sharp. Then again not everywhere there is no street light so the flash could freeze the person.

Upon closer inspection. There is also ghosting or smoothing of the detail. The foreground was in a similar lighting to the background. In the foreground there is also a street light. So if I go from 1/3 to a higher shutter speed like 1/25 it means I need ISO 12,800. Or 6400 with F5.6.

First attempt at this. What FL and aperture do you use at night time to have the background in detail? I could see the background but I would like it more DOF. My attempt was ISO 1600, 1/3 and F8, shot on a tripod with the flash off camera at 1/32 manual power. Trying to balance this all out and not have body movement as well. Your thoughts?