photojim

"Film-era" lenses often don't perform well on digital sensors, even if they perform well on film. Most digital capture is much more sensitive than film is to chromatic aberration. This can cause lack of sharpness, especially in the corners, that wouldn't be particularly bothersome in a film capture.

 

The reason? Film is sensitive to all three capture colours throughout its area. In other words, a given spot of film can capture all colours in a vertical stack. Most digital sensors have the three different colour-sensitive pixels adjacent to one another, not stacked. It works very well for most purposes, but it magnifies chromatic aberration. (I understand there are a few sensors that are designed differently and aren't sensitive to this, but they are relatively uncommon.)

 

You can see the consequences of this in the rise of ED/LD glass in what were, in the film days, relatively simply designs. You can even find ED glass in 50mm full-frame lenses. And to be sure, this has some benefits for film photographers - the aberrations were there when shooting film, too; the effect was just smaller.

 

There was an interesting thread on Photrio recently about the opposite effect. Digital is, in effect, much less subject to issues from distortion than film is. It can be corrected in post-production in digital photography, but in straight film photography (without a hybrid workflow), there is no way to remove distortion. Some systems are now seeing very sharp, low-chromatic-aberration lenses where distortion is sacrificed to keep prices, size and construction reasonable, because on digital, it's not a problem. These lenses may not perform terribly well on film, though.

Yes, the door latch was the #1 issue with the N6006 from what I've read here on photo.net. When depth of field preview went away in the '90s the N8008/s held value - I remember seeing it listed for over $500 in the big KEH Camera ad in Shutterbug.

 

Interesting how much prices have changed. I paid $35 US for my F801s (the model # used for the N8008s everywhere outside the US). Looks like $57 for an EX-rated one from keh.com today.

 

The only issue with this body (and the F-601/N6006 has the same issue) is incompatibility with AF-S and VR. The F90/F90x (N90/N90s) support AF-S but not VR.

Try removing the battery, leaving the camera overnight, then reinstalling the battery. Also, how fresh is your battery? New old-stock batteries can often act strangely; even lithium batteries don't last forever in storage, and it's possible to get one that's over a decade old if you buy from a less reputable source.

 

Also, it's not at all obvious, but the battery kind of clicks into place more surely than you might think, and the camera manual clearly states that this will improve battery function. I'm guessing it makes a fuller electrical connection which allows better amperage to the camera. Make sure you've done this - check out the manual for clearer instructions, but once done it's fairly obvious.

The MC-30 is the common release, but if you want the fancy one with the built-in timer to run bulb mode, the MC-20 is the one to get.

 

I bought mine new in 1994 and it's still humming along fine.

By the way, to any potential buyers, that 200/4 is a sweet, sweet lens.

It's helpful, by the way, if you put things like "US only" in the thread topic so that non-Americans don't click on links that can't be of interest to them.

 

Good luck with your sale!

Everything about photography has changed in the last 15-20 years. Most of the good printed magazines have disappeared (Outdoor Photographer in the US and Photo Life in Canada still publish, but all the other ones I used to subscribe to have disappeared). I even used to hang out at my local camera store on Saturdays a lot of weekends. I spent quite a bit of money there buying film and photographic paper and chemistry, and dropping off and picking up colour film for processing. Digital changed a lot of that because once you got the gear, you really didn't need to go anywhere to do anything with the images.

 

But film is still here. And there are still darkrooms. And while I shot a lot of film there, my D800 got a lot of use on a trip to a national park week before last. Strangely, though, the camera I had the most fun with there wasn't my D800 or either of my F4 bodies - it was my Olympus Stylus Epic!

 

We've drifted dangerously off topic... this might warrant a new thread if people feel so inclined.

Has this forum suddenly become a branch of APUG?

Why are we discussing Nikon's ancient mistakes that are better forgotten?

 

This forum long predates mainstream digital photography. I don't see why talking about film bodies, gear, chemistry, processes, etc. is in the least bit off-topic.

It was the F-601M outside the US. Weird duck.

I can live with a sticky covering, but the delicate back latches on my F100 and N80 (F80) have made these cameras unusable. It's a real shame.

I would like to point out, additionally, that wash water is part of the process, so a wash at a temperature significantly different from the processing temperature can also cause reticulation, particularly if a non-hardening fixer is used.

Weirdly, I literally just pulled up a few rolls of this film from my basement freezer, planning to shoot it soon.

 

It's in Kodak-style film canisters, with the thick grey lids with a slight overhang (as most Kodak films are), which is another giveaway.

 

The fact that this is coded at EI 100 is handy since I have a camera (Olympus Stylus Epic) that only reads ISO 100, 200, 400, and 800.

I just use warmer tap water. I mix in some hot water to increase the temperature. If the stock solution is 13 degrees and I want a working solution of 20, and I'm diluting 1+1, I use water at 27 degrees (which results in an average temperature of 20 once stirred). It's slightly trickier if you're not diluting 1+1 but it can still be done with a bit of math.

I mixed up a 3.8-litre pack of D-76 yesterday that had expired in summer 2010. Tested it today, and it developed the film as I would have expected from in-date developer.

 

Plastic package; no evidence of tearing or breach. The powder was free-flowing and white, and there was no discernible brown in the resulting stock solution.

<p>Two other things come to mind:<br>

- how old was the film? Fast film tends to develop base fog with age. T-Max 3200 and Delta 3200 are among the worst offenders in this regard. It's not a defect in the film; it's the accumulation of damage from cosmic rays. No joke.<br>

- was the film heat-abused? Film hates heat and can degrade quickly if it gets hot. An afternoon inside a car in the hot summer sun can do noticeable damage.</p>

<p>I don't think either of these fully explains your issues, but they might have contributed. (I don't know how experienced a film shooter you are so don't know if these issues occurred to you.)</p>

<p>Two issues here, I think... maybe three.</p>

<p>1. Film deteriorates with age. If the film was old to begin with, then aged more, that would cause deterioration and a build-up of base fog.<br>

2. Film likes to be kept cool and processed promptly. Heat is particularly bad for film. Even a few days of extreme heat can seriously harm the latent image on unprocessed film (and does damage to unexposed film too).<br>

3. Film does not like to get wet until it's time for processing. Put exposed film into a sealed container if you are going to refrigerate it or freeze it. Simple zip-loc bags work for 120 film, and the plastic canisters that come with 35mm film work fine for it. Evacuate all the air you can from plastic bags you use, seal, and chill.<br>

<br />All things equal, freezing is better for film than refrigeration - it will keep longer. Still, even frozen, film slowly deteriorates from exposure to cosmic rays - the faster the film, the more significant the deterioration will be.<br>

And remember also, if you freeze film, give it adequate warm-up time before opening the sealed container. The colder the film, the longer a warm-up time it will require. A couple or three hours seems to be enough in most cases.</p>

<p>The ML 24/2.8 is generally reputed to be competitive with the Zeiss 25/2.8 in quality.<br>

I think in general, the Yashica lenses are a notch below the Zeisses but that doesn't mean the yashica ones are bad. They're well worth playing with.</p>

<p>The only ML I ever owned was the 50/1.9 and it was a terrific lens. Then again I was always very happy with my 135/2.8 DSB too.</p>

<p>What WiFi standard does the Eye-Fi support?<br>

802.11g is 54Mbps theoretical, about 40Mbps real world. That works out to be low 40s MB/s. 802.11n can do better. This assumes the camera is the only WiFi client and there is no significant interference with your wireless spectrum.<br>

Throughput will also depend on how polluted the WiFi is in your area (and bear in mind baby monitors, Bluetooth devices, microwave ovens and some cordless phones use the same spectrum). The more WiFi stuff there is, the slower your throughput is likely to be.</p>

<p>This is all about value for money. I own the 1.4D and 1.8D. Both are good and I find both to be decently sharp wide open, but better stopped down. I see no compelling reason to upgrade. (That example photo makes me wonder about sample variation though.)<br>

<br />One other thing - if your friend aspires to join the retro photographers and shoot film, the D (and older non-D) lenses have better compatibility with older cameras, since they have aperture rings.</p>

<p>Developers tend to benefit from better storage, but it depends on the developer. In general, keeping developers out of the light and avoiding exposure to oxygen will extend their life. However, some multi-part developers (PMK comes to mind) and some highly concentrated developers (HC-110 and Rodinal come to mind) are rather resistant to degradation and can last for many years in storage.<br>

<br />How long do you expect your developer stock solutions to be in their bottles before they're used up?<br>

As for your other chemicals, stop bath is just acetic or citric acid so seems rather immune to age effects within reason. Fixer will deteriorate slowly with age but again, it lasts a long time. The gospel is about six months but I have gotten a year and more if I store it in dark full bottles.<br>

<br />Cooler is better, to a point. 72 F is 22 C so that isn't too bad. My darkroom tends to hover in the mid-teens C except when in use.</p>

<p>Most of my black and white work is with medium speed films - primarily FP4 Plus but I do dabble with other films of this speed. I also shoot Pan-F Plus quite a bit. I use ISO 400 black and white film less than either of those films - I just tend to prefer slower films due to the finer grain.</p>

<p>Yes, a decent-sized order from Freestyle would be the best choice - either that or wait until B&H and Adorama are open again next week.<br>

<br />Keep a small stock of film around for this very purpose. :)</p>

<p>Another, less likely, possibility is that you reduced the amount of developer too much so there wasn't enough to fully cover the film. With good agitation, development would be more or less even, but it may not be full.<br>

<br />I suspect film age is your issue, but make sure you use enough developer. I use Paterson tanks and use 300 mL of working solution per 35mm roll (I think officially it's 290 but that's a pain to measure).</p>

<p>15-18 years in a chest freezer is about ideal. Chest freezers are usually at -10 to -18 C.</p>

<p>Rodinal will probably not be a good choice.<br>

<br />Want a wild suggestion? The best results I ever got with Tech Pan were with XTOL. I forget the time and dilution, but it was published in Kodak's publications back in the day. (If you're desperate, I have a copy of the publication in the darkroom - but since the darkroom is at my mother-in-law's house I don't have immediate access to it.)<br>

<br />The fun part? EI 6. The negatives also look this beautiful brownish colour, not that this matters.<br>

They're the best negs I ever got from Tech Pan, and if I could still buy it I'd definitely be shooting it today - but at EI 6 you'll need a tripod even in full sun, unless you want to use wide apertures. Even in full, bright sun you'd be about 1/100 sec. at f/4.</p>