chromatik

<p>Allan, I think you'll be pleased for a good while with your decision. Contact printing 8x10 should be a lot of fun.</p>

<p>Ricardo has the right idea, I think. Just imagine yourself in your subject's place. Every reasonable person wants to be treated with respect and dignity. And most of us can appreciate a beer now and then.</p>

<p>50/1.2 Nikkor Ai-S and exhale slowly . . .</p>

<p>FM2n.</p>

<p>I'm taking an Autocord and some Tri-X and Ektar 100 to Malaysia in three weeks. ;)<br>

KL --> Kuching --> Singapore --> Kota Bharu --> Perhentians --> Penang --> KL</p>

<p>Four Corners itself might be boring, but c'mon, that part of the country is a photographer's paradise, so much so that you have to get creative not to take a bunch of cliche-ridden pictures.</p>

<p>Addendum, Shash:<br>

E6 is relatively unforgiving with regards to temperature deviations (it's been ages since I developed E6 in a lab, so I can't give you hard facts here), while you can be off by a couple of degrees with C-41. Now, five degrees off can be a problem! I fill a good-sized sink with hot water and let it come down to the range I want to work with, occasionally turning on the hot water tap to bring it up a bit. I use a digital ohmmeter with a temp gauge to monitor the water bath. It's easy.</p>

<p>"Alan, thanks, I have looked into that. Some posts say not getting a Kodak or Fuji chemical kit might result in improper processing, I read one post mentioning green casts. Which kit are you using and looks like you haven't had any problems?"<br>

I use the Tetanal or Jobo C-41 press kits. I think the results are fantastic, especially when I don't try to process more than about ten rolls per kit (135 and 120 film). I've only had one bad result, and that was when I got cocky and didn't pay close attention to time/temperature. But you have to really mess up to have bad results, based on my experience so far. My bad rolls still looked pretty good to most people, just a little washed-out looking. I had processed at 106F or so instead of 102F. But I've processed dozens of rolls for me and my girlfriend that look great.</p>

<p>"You have a Leica M6 - one of the best cameras ever made for street photography. Why do you want to change to medium format?"<br>

The OP can answer for himself, but I'd like to pipe up here. I sold my M6 because I have come to realize that I really hate handling 35mm film--it is such a pain in the ass. I'm much happier handling 4x5 sheets and 120, especially 120. So it's not just resolution and tonality, but simply loading the film, hanging it and scanning it. 135 is too fiddly for me.</p>

<p>I don't think 1:2:100 versus 1+2+100 matters much in the real world. When I want to mix up a batch of PMK Pyro for a single roll of 120, it comes out to 6.5 ml + 13 ml + 650ml in my single tank. I think temperature compensation, agitation, the original exposure's "accuracy," time devloped, time pouring in and out, and perhaps other factors, trump a 1 or 2 percent volume discrepancy in the soup solution.</p>

<p>Use this lens with film (and a film SLR's superior viewfinder), the HS-12 lens shade, and in low light. At f/2, it's a stunning lens.</p>

<p>I get great results doing C41 in the sink with the "press kit". Just keep the water in the sink around 105F. Put developer and blix bottles in the water when it's still about 110F. Let the temperature drop to 105--turn on hot faucet as needed. The third bottle, the stabilizer solution, stays at room temperature. Works great for me, easy too.</p>

<p>I hope this person gets to experience the thrill of developing her own negatives. I still get goosebumps when a roll or sheet proves unexpectedly beautiful.</p>

<p>Use a larger tank.</p>

<p>Get a <em>real </em> college education and do photography on the side. A friend of mine is getting a degree and doing weddings and other shoots as they become available. Makes a lot more sense to me.</p>

<p>The Dave Edmunds song "Bad is Bad" says it well: "Sometimes, sometimes bad is bad / I said cool is a rule but sometimes bad is bad."</p>

<p>Quality processing? DIY. C41 is easy to process at home.</p>

<p>I agree with the answer that it has only happened when wrestling with reels. I've had my 120 film creased lengthwise by a pro lab. Talk to the manager, and just be forthright and honest and not defensive. You might get something for your trouble like some free development in the future. It can't hurt.</p>

Ouch!

 

I used a roll of Rollei Pan 25 on a recent trip out west. I look forward to seeing how it turned out sometime next week.

"Stick to the Rolleis that are largely electronics-free. Their 'powered' cameras are notorious for failure."

 

What a great example of an ignorant comment stated with chest-thumping authority! My "failure"-prone 6006 is twenty-years-old and it has never let me down. Metering is as good as any camera I've ever owned, too. It amazes me how rumors become "fact".

Inclusion of a full frame sensor seems to be the feature most serious photographers pay attention to, especially if they covet serious wide angle capability (who doesn't?). I would have a hard time resisting an FX-sensored Nikon if it was less than two grand. But that's a big if. I don't really care about blazingly fast fps or focusing speed, though it's certainly nice to have those features. Image quality and the ability to continue using old Nikkor glass is of paramount importance to me, along with a top-quality, intuitive user interface, which Nikon does very well already.

"Built like a rock" is a good description. I had a pair of F2AS's as a teen. I also had a potato masher flash and that horrible 500mm catadioptric with the rear screw-in lenses that gave lovely "donut bokeh". I found hauling that stuff plus the more typical retinue of lenses a royal PITA and eventually sold the whole lot. Now I use a "lightweight" Rollei MF SLR with just one lens, the standard 80/2.8. Anyway, I vote for the FM2(N). I like my friend's F3 also, but it's mostly battery dependent, but so what? Batteries can be useful. They're certainly portable.

I dunno Jean-Louis, I admire your purist standpoint, but as a 50-year-old, my eyesight has gotten considerably worse, so I appreciate AF on my humble D40, whether I can exert control over DOF or not. I also happen to own and love my Rolleiflex 6006 with the standard 80/2.8 lens, but there have been occasions where I wished someone (or thing) could step in to do the critical focusing for me. But I agree with you in principle.

 

As far as the OP's question is concerned, debates over formats, brands, etc., tend to go in meaningless circles. One thing that a lot of people *seem* to do is spend beyond their means. That's never good, and you can often find real satisfaction buying a less expensive alternative. If you can afford the 6008AF, then it's not "stupid", necessarily, but you might do just as well spending less.

 

For me, thinking about the image and playing with developer and film combinations is more interesting to me than hardware debates. Right now I'm planning a photo trip to Big Bend and Marfa, Texas. Thinking about the how and why of doing that is a real pleasure. But still, like I said, I love my Rollei.

Thanks for sharing that scary slice of nuclear age Americana. Frame something right and it might be art.

 

I have three dogs and one cat. My experience is just the opposite: the cat is the funniest one in my menagerie. The dogs can be funny and have some bizarre--and occasionally--endearing personality traits, but the cat is the clown. I would never have guessed that would be the case until I had first-hand experience.

 

Can you imagine how funny/horrifying found digital photos will be? Lurking on old disk drives, forgotten servers, partially destroyed CDs. Yikes.

 

I have an old roll of PX135 and Verichrome Pan 120 that a coworker is letting me develop for him, taken by his grandfather, perhaps in the '50s. I doubt I will be posting those pics!

Staying marginally within the original poster's topic, I absolutely love my humble 6006 + Zeiss 80/2.8 combo. I've never taken better photos. Call me delighted. I also take childish delight in its thwock-zing-quack shutter release/film advance, too. But getting my Velvia 100s back is what REALLY makes me love this camera and lens.

 

Now, about that Maha charger: is it obvious how one charges the Rollei NiCad battery, or would I need a pin-out diagram? I just dropped $130 on a new battery from B&H, and now I think I might wait and buy the Maha before charging it with the my old Rollei battery charger. Is that advisable?

 

Let me say that I really appreciate all of your ("you" in the plural sense) first-hand advice, and that it's nice to read feedback from photographers who are happy with their 600x systems. There seems to be so much uninformed Rollei-bashing from people who I suspect are regurgitating ill-founded rumors.