jeff_drew3

Colm: Nope! Rollfilms can have different "ingredients" compared to 35mm, and film thickness & bases etc are different among brands etc.

 

Paul: You may want to try more than one developer, too.

Gee whiz! This past holiday weekend . . . gasoline was $1.70 per US gallon and the local Holiday Inn was getting $94 for a single. Of course, remove all the taxes and the gas would have been about a $1.20 and the room would have been $75. Since I went broke as a pro many years ago, I've learned that you have to charge and collect "what the traffic will bear", but I found out that if the traffic won't pay it, then I should not do it! So I don't! You ever wonder why CEO's make big bucks? Many do it on the labors& skills of their workers - why would photography be different? I have to compete with amateurs in the computer field, too, and it's amazing how a little greed completely messes up a marketplace! Then add government wealth redistribution strategies and you can conclude that if your plan and management are weak, you will be on the ropes!

At the risk of confusing the issue, where was your tripod placed? Try wet grass with dirt underneath. Consider that metal tripods transmit vibrations to a greater degree than wood etc. Celestron makes anti-vibration "donuts or disks" that go under tripod feet and they work best on decks, concrete pads etc. Hanging vibration damping materials off the tripod may help. I don't know of many cameras that are completely vibration free, tho'. In Astrophotography, we battle this stuff all the time, but for short exposures, this should not be a big deal.

You may want to look at several issues of "Nature Photographer" and "Outdoor Photography" magazines. The photos that strike your interest can yield data on film used. You appear to be buying into Fuji, which is fine. Velvia is vibrant color, and Provia F is fantastic, and both are slide films. Kodak Royal Gold 100 is decent print film as is Fuji Reala. Personally, I think slide films are better for nature, and I tend to use Kodachrome, Agfa RSX 100, and Ektachrome VS for most of my outdoor shots. I've shot lots of Fujichromes too, and have been very pleased. I think you need to experiment and choose your own preferences.

A used TLR in 6x6cm is not a bad choice, either. Shots from the waist are less obvious and relatively quiet. You may as well get as modern a camera as possible. Inexpensive 35mm RF cameras are very common and not highly coveted at less than $50US. They are quiet, some with very good glass lenses and with a little practice with hyperfocal zone focusing, you can shoot from the hip. Heresy 101: I'll recommend Canon Elph APS cameras since they give you great automation, quality output in a tiny package. Put on the panorama mode you can fire away and get the whole crowd and not raise it to your eye! Try the chromogenic films for B&W. They work fine for many purposes.

Gadgets aside, comparing scenic photography with a 2x3 format vs. 35mm would seem to be 1 issue. Adding more expensive gadgets to the 2x3 would be a 2nd issue. I used an old Horseman meter with ground glass on my 380 and it worked fine. I used rollfilm backs and film holders etc. "Are they worth the extra cost and weight?" To me they were not. I sold all of the outfit for smaller & lighter weight technology in MF.

Rolland has been posted on these forums and you may want to contact him directly and ask him. Since jars of dirt and air from the space Elian Gonzalez occupied in Florida are being auctioned on Ebay, one needs to think before acting! During the perceived "Twinkie" shortage, boxes of "Twinkies" were auctioned off at outrageous prices. Reputable dealers may be safer havens for commerce, and I'm not implying anyone is not honest!

1/2cm? Sounds like the printer may have goofed?

Paul, make a couple small carry cards (1-6x6cm & 1-6x7cm) and for a few weeks frame a shot with each card. See if you like the square. Since you already have the M7II, work with it. The formats differ in seeing. Do try the positive film choices, and shoot a bunch. Both formats are fine systems.

Ray, make a couple small carry cards (1-6x6cm & 1-6x7cm) and for a few weeks frame a shot with each card. See if you like the square. Keep in mind that with 6x6, most shots need to be manipulated at the printer unless you print in squares. I use both formats. I would keep both. For example: landscape and scenics are better in rectangular format IMHO. People shots and portraits seem better in 6x6 for me. I do not use Pentax any more because of weight etc. but a 6x7 RF is my favorite. Personally, I like both formats very much and find they cover a multitude of applications. BTW: the Hassy fits my hands nicely, and carrying both is no problem, except financially.

Also try: www.spysite.com Have a variety of neat toys and security devices.

Lisa, your follow-up indicates that this will work out. 20 years from now, it will be a mere "pebble on the trail". Your lab cares, and that is a value. Wedding and special event photography is not for the faint hearted, as you are learning. I gave it up, because the risk to reward ratio did not fit my personality, and I did some weddings for friends essentially for free, yet there was still the nagging panic. Everyone is different including your clients, so more adventures await you.

I've been there, done that - re-staged the whole shoot for the formal stuff! It sucks, but can salvage the occasion and surprisingly, that couple is still married after 20+ years! If you have worked with this lab before and been satisfied, maybe stay with them, and they may try harder next time. You can offer to re-shoot, but if no-go, then eat the B&W and write it off. The bride & groom can have the failed negs? They will be disappointed but should understand. If color ones turn out great, they will be happy.

Electronic choices are available but may be tricky in some locations. You might try any security designed for laptop PC's, "Lo-jack" types for automotive use (12v etc.)or alarms that trigger when items are moved. Actually, dogs are not a bad choice in some locales. Professional security guards may be cheaper by the day, too.

If costs are not a consideration, then you should get both! :-) Robin's suggestions are valid. Also consider the "system" potential. I like 6x6 and on Hassy & Rollei one can add a "645" format back. I'm currently in the market for a new 6x6 system, having taken a break from it. For me, I like Hassy systems, but I think Rollei has some features that really kick butt! This is tough! How do the camera bodies fit your hands? Look in the threads for "Frank Ward". He recently got a Contax 645 system and has used the others. Frank will share some ideas.

Dittos on the Paterson choices. I also have used Unicolor, Nikkor steel, and find the Paterson easiest and a least expensive in the long run.

Or use a step-up ring and larger diameter filter?

To Robin: I was not comparing Premium MF manufacturers to the Seagull types in my previous post. I was answering Lev's assumptions that: entering into Medium Format may not necessarily be expensive. If you want to charge me with comparing Hassy vs. Seagull on a price issue, then I concur that Hassy is more expensive. My first MF camera was a Minolta Autocord TLR at less than $100 back in '72. Some of those B&W photos were published in local books. I can't say that my pictures "greatly" improved when I moved up to Hassy, but I certainly felt more confidence and commanded the respect of novices when they saw the Hassy nameplate. Seriously, premium lenses are better, but only you can decide if the differences are worth a tenfold (or more) increase in cost. My counter proposal stands that for less than a couple hundred dollars, somebody can start in MF. Lev asks if we are stupid for buying expensive MF gear. I've done stupid things, but investing in quality camera gear is a passion of mine and has been for decades. SAYLAHVEE! :-)

Well, you've given me some hope. The 110S I purchased seems in mint

condition except the shutter is irregular in firing. The batteries

are an issue. Ditto on the lack of parts. Minox declined to fix mine.

Time for me to study the camera more!

I have used the lead-lined bags with complete success in the US. My sons recently "did" Europe and had no trouble using lead-lined bags. All films were ISO400 or slower. I think if you pack the lead-lined bag on a carry on, the security staff probably see a rectangular shape and ignore it. When you come up to the checkpoint asking them to inspect something, you are asking for them to do you a favor and show some initiative? On one occasion, domestically, my carry-on was inspected; they inspected the lead bag; no problem. I was quiet; they reasoned it out. Just don't tell them I told you this. :-)

What? No lawyer jokes?

Amen! I prefer snow-shoes anyway.

We are worth it aren't we? :-) Okay, here comes "logic police". Seagull TLR (6x6cm = medium format)is extremely inexpensive, by most comparisons. Lubitel TLR costs even less. Is the format defined by the camera or by the film? MF films record much more information per frame etc. and are bigger frames etc. compared to 35mm. Compared to a 35mm frame, the MF frame costs more, due to size etc. Compare Minox 8x11mm format and that frame cost is much higher than 35mm! Comparing qualities of the film formats is a different argument than what you propose. Your premises above have many exceptions and compromises which is typical of photography. A beginner could shop wisely and get started in MF for less than $100 and for any hobby or art, that's not bad! Of course, when my wife sees me waltzing around with my Fuji 6x7, she may agree with your position.

Dittos - I've never seen a back for both lengths.

Since you want an "all-rounder", I would strongly recommend the 6x6cm square format! It's great for portraiture and interiors. Pick up a Hasselblad quarterly, or a book specializing in 6x6cm format pictures and you'll see my point. Yes, it's a compromise in many areas, but that is what you want. You can start for a relatively reasonable investment, too.