Jump to content

johncarvill

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    113

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by johncarvill

    F3 ASA Dial - stiffness?

    in Nikon

    Posted

    <p>Been running a few films through my F3, in preparation for an upcoming trip. Swithcing between 100, 200, and 1600 ASA films, I notice that the ASA dial on my beloved F3 is a bit fiddly (which I remember it being) and also very stiff (which I don't recall being a problem before). COuld it be dust or age that's affecting it? Or are they all like that?</p>

    <p>By stiff, I mean when you lift the dial up to turn it, the actual turning of the dial feels resistant and I would maybe say somehow 'grainy', not a nice feel to it at all. Hope this doesn't signify some sort of problem? Certainly switching ASA's does have the expected effect on exposure meterings.</p>

    <p>Cheers<br>

    JC</p>

     

    Film for New York: Velvia/Ektachrome/Fuji PRO 160C?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>SUch a great forum, this. Based on all teh advice I've received, I'm definitely rethinking my strategy. I'll still take some slide film but will also try quite a few rolls of B&W.</p>

    <p>BTW, when people say 'shoot TRI-X at 400', I assume they mean shoot rolls of ISO 400 TRI-X, rather than pushing rolls of 100.</p>

    <p>I will of course report back and post a few shots, if I manage to take any half-decent ones.</p>

     

    Film for New York: Velvia/Ektachrome/Fuji PRO 160C?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p> David H ,thanks f or your very helpful comments. Fantastic B&W shot of Chinatown by the way , where can we see more of your NY photos? <br>

    The more I think about it, the more I doubt I want to use slide film after all. Par ticulalry since I wi ll also have my digital SLR *an d* the Lumix LX3, ma ybe I should do most of my film photography in B&W . </p>

    <p>Your thoughts on tr ipods also strike a ahcord , I do n 't even think I 'll bring mine: hard to use in urban en v i ro nment , a bother to carry, and some doubts about whether the airline(s) wil l l e t me take it as carry-on luggage (n o way I 'm puttin g my Man frotto tripod in the hold!). </p>

    <p>Cheers<br>

    J</p>

    TTL Metering with Red Filter for B&W contrast?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>Meant to say: my current guess in this is:</p>

    <p>- When using Aperture Priority, with a red filter on, I don't need to adjust exposure compensation, because the TTL metering will do this for me, and the red filter will still have its effect (on certain colours).</p>

    <p>- When using Manual mode, I should set the exposure compensation to +3 to allow for the darkening effects of the red filter.</p>

    <p> </p>

    TTL Metering with Red Filter for B&W contrast?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>HI folks</p>

    <p>I've been reading around this subject, but only getting more confused. If I use a red filter when shooting black and white, this should help boost contrast, right? Particularly with blue skies, I should get an almost black effect, yeah? But even leaving nice blue sky/white cloud scenes out of the equation, shouldn't I get more contrast in general? (Will the red filter do any good at all indoors, by the way?)</p>

    <p>In any case, how do I meter this? I'm guessing that when I put the red filter on my camera (Nikon F3), and let's say I'm in Aperture Priority mode, well, I expect the camera will meter through the filter and therefore adjust the shutter speed downwards. So, do I meter with the filter off, then put it on and switch to manual, ie. retain the unfiltered metering? Or do I let the camera meter through the filter? Or do I just overexpose by a stop or so?</p>

    <p>And how does this relate to using a polariser? Won't a polariser give me a similar effect (in B&W)? When shooting colour, I don't think the general practice is to second-guess the TTL metering, is it? I don't set exposure compensation when using a polariser in colour. Same goes for B&W?</p>

    <p>Cheers<br>

    John</p>

    <p> </p>

    Film for New York: Velvia/Ektachrome/Fuji PRO 160C?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>Thanks for the replies, folks.</p>

    <p>Good point about the contrasty light; certainly I have come to grief before with Velvia's unforgiving tonal range. But I don't think city canyon shadows will look as bad as, say, pitch black swathes of ocean.</p>

    <p>Anyway, here's what I've gone for, film-wise:</p>

    <p>3 x Fuji Velvia 50 (which I plan to rate 40)<br>

    1 x Fuji Neopan 1600 <br />2 x Kodak Ektachrome Elite Chrome EBX 100 <br>

    1 x Kodak TRI-X 400 <br />2 x Fuji Professional PRO160C<br>

    <br /><br>

    Interesting that I've received advice to avoid slide film, <em>and</em> to avoid print film! I look forward to experimenting with both.<br>

    <br /><br>

    Cheers<br>

    John<br>

    <br /></p>

    Film for New York: Velvia/Ektachrome/Fuji PRO 160C?

    in The Wet Darkroom: Film, Paper & Chemistry

    Posted

    <p>

    <p>Hi folks</p>

    <p>I'm all set for a long-awaited trip to New York at the end of this month. I'll be bringing my trusty Nikon D70, and my new Panasonic Lumix LX3, but also want to use my beloved Nikon F3 as much as possible. I'm looking for general advice on films.</p>

    <p>I had ordered some rolls of Fuji Velvia 100, but the supplier here in the UK is out of stock and my order has been cancelled. Now, since I already have a few rolls of Velvia 50 in the fridge, and have been reviewing some of my old Velvia 100 slides and cringing at the underexposure caused by wide dynamic ranges, I'm re-thinking my stragegy.</p>

    <p>I'm thinking, bring the Velvia 50, but also try some other films I've seen recommended. One of these is Kodak Ektachrome Elite 100 EBX, which I gather is Kodak's (sort-of) Velvia equivalent, i.e. vivid and contrasty. Plus it should provide a bit more dynamic range? The other film I have seen recommended, a print film, is Fuji PRO 160C. I have seen people refer to it as (sort of) the print film equivalent to Velvia. ANy truth in that? Or any recommendations for a print film which will give me more 'punch' than general print films such as Superia etc?</p>

    <p>All advice welcome....</p>

    <p>Cheers<br>

    John</p>

     

    </p>

    How does Lumix LX3 do this in-camera HDR?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>Bill - yes I meant I used the in-camera HDR mode. I know it's no substitute for 'proper' HDR, I was just amazed that it worked so well.</p>

    <p>On reflection, I guess there was a light behind me when I took this photo (evident form the shadow behind the gravestone) but even so I still find the results impressive. I will go back and take a few shots in the same location, and compare.</p>

    How does Lumix LX3 do this in-camera HDR?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>>I get a remark to the effect that I don't know what HDR is, </p>

    <p>I made no such remark. Actually, you came over kind of aggressive.</p>

    <p>>or that I'm plugging my camera. </p>

    <p>Well, you do seem very keen on it</p>

    <p>> No wonder I stayed off of Photo.net for 7 years.</p>

    <p>My natural response to this comment has been self-censored.<br>

    <br /></p>

    How does Lumix LX3 do this in-camera HDR?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>Hmm some confusion setting in - first off, 'Fielding Mellish' on flickr is me, just a silly pseundym I registered under and never got round to changing.</p>

    <p>I took the photo, and the ISO is 400, HDR mode was used to take the photo. I have a nuber of similar shots taken, in HDR mode, in the dark with only ambient light, where the grass is green. Yes I see the shadow behind the gravestone so maybe there was another light and I am mis-remembering. BUt look at the strip of grass (or bushes) in front of the church - green.</p>

    <p> </p>

    How does Lumix LX3 do this in-camera HDR?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>Hmmmm dunno about 'low quality', the original looks pretty good for 400 ISO HDR shot taken at midnight. <br>

    I see the shadow behind the gravestone by that light (wherever it came from) was not apparent when I was there!<br>

    Makes me wonder, did I use a dab of flash on this one after all? But the EXIF says no. Anyway, I hate the fact that I left in a slice of kerb at bottom left so will go back and re-shoot this one.</p>

    <p> </p>

    How does Lumix LX3 do this in-camera HDR?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>Have a look at this:</p>

    <p>

    <p>Now, this photo was an 8 second exposure. I just don't get how the camera can have exposed that grass like that in just 8 seconds, no matter how many photos it took and combined using whatever algorithm. Hw long would a conventional exposure have to be to see that grass so clearly? Could it even be done? Just wondering how the Lumix LX3 achieves this effect in just 8 seconds?</p>

    <p> </p><div>00WFa7-236935684.jpg.33dedffd11de8c1f787fc048d99b0947.jpg</div>

    Which quality compact camera?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>Folks</p>

    <p>Thanks for all the thoughtful replies. I'm still leaning towards the LUmix LX3.</p>

    <p>:Steve: you're right, the GF1 looks great, but yes, price is an issue. As is my marriage! If I spent £700 on another camera I think my wife your commence divorce proceedings.</p>

    <p>One factor I forgot to mention: I had a quick play with a Canon S90 in a shop at the weekend. Can you *believe* where they put the shutter button? What were they smoking?</p>

    <p> </p>

    Which quality compact camera?

    in Mirrorless Digital Cameras

    Posted

    <p>Hi Folks</p>

    <p>Looking for some advice on compact digital cameras, for general use but also specifically for a trip to Nw York.</p>

    <p>I have a Nikon D70 which is still going strong, if getting a bit long in the tooth now. I also have a Nikon F3, which I will take to New York with me, to shoot some Velvia slide film. I am wondering whether or not to also take the D70, and/or a new compact which will replace my old, barely functioning Canon IXUS 410.</p>

    <p>I've been considering the Panasonic Lumix LX3, which I like for its rangefinder-ish looks, build quality, wide angle, quality lens, and teh ability to switch between aspect ratios. I'm also looking at the Canon S90, but I worry about image quality (although it's said to have the same sensor as the well-regarded G11). The other candidate is the Sony DSCH 5VB, which has lots of fancy features but again I worry about image quality, and I hear the software and processing is problematic. I would probably just go for the Lumix, it's by far the likeliest candidate, but it does have drawbacks: having to faff with a lens cap, and the limited zoom range (only 2.5x).</p>

    <p>The other factor is price. These cameras are all around £300, which is a chunk. Maybe I would be better paying a bit more and upgrading my D70 for, say, a D300? </p>

    <p>Or, another idea might be to get a real rangefinder. What could I get for around £300? HOw would it compare with my F3? Sharper pictures?</p>

    <p>Well, I'm open to any and all advice. Ideally, I want a compact that fits in my pocket but takes photos which can compete with my D70, is that unrealistic?</p>

    <p>Cheers<br>

    JOhn</p>

     

×
×
  • Create New...