baisao

<blockquote> <p>Case in point, I always loved (in addition to my wife who patiently posed for me) the often referred-to "swirly" bokeh of the Leitz Summitar. I'm sure there are other lenses that do this also; some may find it unpleasant but I've always found it unique and appealing.</p> </blockquote> <p>I also like the Summitar. It's a loved or hated lens. I like to use the swirly bokeh as a kind of optical vignette. Larger Flickr image <strong><a href=" <p> </p><div></div>

<blockquote> <p>"But what is important there is how much water and other fluids are also added. If you're making a decaliter of developer, then you would need a lot of Metol." - JDM</p> </blockquote> <p>Excellent point! It's 50g of Metol per liter of water. What I failed to compare were the dilutions of the Metol-based developers. This working solution is highly concentrated compared to others. With this in mind, 50g/liter makes sense. I guess Part A will be a slurry. ;-)</p> <blockquote> <p>"I use a reloading scale (grains) for my very small measures as when you get into amounts such as 0.2g and then perhaps less in partial, test batches, measuring in grains is much easier to be repeatable and accurate." - Craig</p> </blockquote> <p>I use a small digital scale that I purchased some time ago from a reloading supply outfit. I use mine for measuring loose leaf Japanese tea, specifically gyokuro. I can eyeball virtually every tea on the planet, but gyokuro is unforgiving to steep in the small volumes used. I'm using a Jennings scale. It's one of the pocketable clamshell models with a 50 gram capacity. I have another scale for larger weights. Do you reckon the Jennings is accurate enough for grains?</p>

<blockquote> <p>"Where did you get the formula?" - JDM</p> </blockquote> <p>I just picked it at random from this page: http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/Formulas/formulas.html</p> <p>It's good to know there is a standard abbreviation. I didn't know that.</p> <p>I found another formula for a Metol developer, noted by a Flickr member, that calls for 50g of Metol. That's quite a bit more than the 7.5g in D-23! I have emailed the Flickr member to clarify their measure.</p> <p>Grams/Grains... it doesn't take much to spell them out for the sake of clarity.</p>

<p>When reading formulas, I frequently see the abbreviation <strong>g</strong>. I can't tell if this is grains or grams. For example:</p> <blockquote> <p>Distilled Water (125 degrees F) . . . . . . . 750 ml<br />Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.5 <strong>g</strong><br /> Sodium Sulfite (Anhydrous) . . . . . . . . . . 100 <strong>g</strong><br />Cold Water to make . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ltr</p> </blockquote> <p>Is that 7.5 <em>grams</em> or <em>grains</em> of Metol?</p> <p><em>(note that my question is not limited to this recipe but to the notation frequently used in dark room formulas)</em><br> <em> </em><br> Thank you!<em><br /></em></p>

<p>There's a lot of great advice that's been provided. As you can tell, there's no such thing as a perfect camera. There are limitations to <em>every</em> system.</p> <p>Some medium format systems were designed, primarily, to be used on a tripod in a studio. Without naming names, these tend to be the heavier/larger cameras. The RB/RZ67 are great cameras with stellar lenses, but you can read between the lines. The Mamiya C330 has interchangeable lenses but is heavy. I've seen great photos from the Mamiya C330 but after playing with one I decided it would be too heavy to carry in the field (albeit, I typically carry 2-3 cameras at a time).</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>My concern besides weight is the 6x6 format I dont see the world square</p> </blockquote> <p>I thought the same thing but it's been a revelation to shoot square. It's also worth noting that 6x7 is virtually square. It kind of bugged me at first but allowed me to ease into 6x6. Here's a recent thread on how odd 6x7 is: <a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/00cnSx" rel="nofollow">6x7 is weird isn't it?</a>. Some folks disagree of course.</p> <p>Size matters: obviously, a larger negative matters but the size of the camera matters also. You're more likely to bring with you a camera of reasonable size and weight. This is why I advocate TLRs and the Mamiya 6/7. It's good to make sure you are comfortable with these camera sizes before going bigger. Well, that's always been by approach.</p> <p><em>[Note: I originally posted this in the wrong thread, though both apply.]</em></p>

<p>Champion photos, Charlie and Craig!</p>

<p>There's a lot of great advice that's been provided, especially from Gary and JDM. As you can tell, there's no such thing as a perfect camera. There are limitations to every system.</p> <p>Some medium format systems were designed, primarily, to be used on a tripod in a studio. Without naming names, these tend to be the heavier/larger cameras. The RB/RZ67 are great cameras with stellar lenses, but you can read between the lines. The Mamiya C330 has interchangeable lenses but is heavy. I've seen great photos from the Mamiya C330 but after playing with one I decided it would be too heavy to carry in the field (albeit, I typically carry 2-3 cameras at a time).</p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <p>Regarding aspect ratio, I think I would prefer to avoid square</p> </blockquote> <p>I thought the same thing but it's been a revelation to shoot square. It's also worth noting that 6x7 is virtually square. It kind of bugged me at first but allowed me to ease into 6x6. Here's a recent thread on how odd 6x7 is: <a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/00cnSx">6x7 is weird isn't it?</a>. Some folks disagree of course.</p> <p>Size matters: obviously, a larger negative matters but the size of the camera matters also. You're more likely to bring with you a camera of reasonable size and weight. This is why I advocate TLRs and the Mamiya 6/7. It's good to make sure you are comfortable with these camera sizes before going bigger. Well, that's always been by approach.</p>

<p><em>Leica M6 'Wetzlar' / 50mm Summicron v. IV / Eastman 5222 / Pyrocat-HD</em></p> <p>Better resolution image <strong><a href=" </div>

<p>If I were looking for a compact fixed lens medium format camera, I would give the GF670 a good look. The glass is impeccably sharp and it's virtually compact. However, I have noted that it feels delicate, almost fragile in the hands. My friend's camera needed to be repaired. It appeared to me there was a jammed interlock. The price is steep for what it is and I expect a large depreciation on these. Older 6x7 Fuji folder cameras like this can be bought for a fraction of the price, with little or no difference in optical performance.</p> <p>Slightly larger but still small for a medium format camera is a Rolleiflex. These are fixed lens 6x6, very rugged, fast glass (2.8/80mm), and hold their resale value. Lenses are by Zeiss or Schneider. The original screens are dark but provide excellent contrast for critical focus. I use mine for night photography without a problem. It's great for candid photos because most people don't realize you are looking through a camera. If you buy one from an auction site, only bid on auctions with a return policy. I went through three examples before finding one that worked as advertised. These are rugged, metal geared cameras with precision parts. A good example should last you a lifetime. There are only a few cameras that I am passionately enthusiastic about: Leica III-series, Leica M6 'Wetzlar', and the Rolleiflex 2.8c and 2.8d. <strong><a href=" examples</a></strong></p> <p>The Yashica Mat 124g (3.8/80mm) is a lighter, less robust, budget alternative to a Rolleiflex. These are so inexpensive they are almost disposable should it need repair. Mine has worked flawlessly. Don't let the low price or less-than-German workmanship put you off of this camera: the lens is incredibly sharp, it's light weight, and the screen is bright. The Bay I accessories are cheaper than the Bay III accessories of the 2.8 Rolleiflex line. This camera has an avid following, less because of collect-ability, but because it's such a bargain. <strong><a href=" examples</a></strong></p> <p>Both the Rolleiflex and Yashica Mat 124G will fit into a rangefinder bag with room to spare. Both have near-focus options that I use extensively.<strong><br /></strong></p> <p>Lastly, the Mamiya 7ii rangefinder has interchangeable lenses, slow but laser sharp optics, 6x7 negs, and a reasonable size. A bag with camera, two lenses, filters, and extra film will be about the size of a typical SLR/DSLR bag. This camera is ideal for going on a shoot with one lens as a bag makes this a haul, in my opinion. The rangefinder patch is bright, and while the rubber and plastic parts do not inspire confidence, it feels more rugged than the GF670. The optics are legendarily sharp. I personally care more about lens character than sharpness, but the Mamiya 7 glass made me take notice. I have been gobsmacked by what it can render. I've been able to read street numbers on signs a mile away from a photo taken with wide angle lens! People complain about difficulty focusing the 150mm lens but I have never experienced this. Resale on these has stabilized so you stand a good chance of recouping your expense. <strong><a href=" examples</a></strong></p> <p>All of these cameras use leaf shutters and are quiet. On timer, I frequently place my ear next to these cameras to make sure they have fired before moving them. I don't think you can go wrong with these cameras or even others I haven't mentioned. To me, the greatest consideration among these cameras is value. All of them have great optics and portability.</p> <p>HTH</p>

<p>Thank you, Charlie and Richard. Back at both of you: Richard, I love the colors and lines in your art deco photo; Charlie, I am impressed at the variety within your series and the richness of the tones.</p> <p>Eddie, charming self portrait. The composition reminds me of Ozu.</p>

<p>Thank you, Brad!</p> <p>Ben, the photo of St Paul's is 150mm? It looks wider than that.</p>

<p>Leica M6 'Wetzlar' / 90mm Tele-Elmarit M, Neopan Acros / Pyrocat-HD<br> The resolution is better on <a href=" <p> </p><div></div>

<p>Hopefully we can go night shooting when you're back in town, or at least meet up.</p> <p><em>Rolleiflex 2.8C Planar / Ilford FP4+ / Pyrocat-HD</em><br /><br /></p> <p>Please click <strong><a href=" for a larger version.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you, fellas. I've been shooting TLRs lately and it's taken a long time to get through a roll of 36 in either of my Leicas. </p> <p>Great photos here, as usual. Last week was super! </p>

<p>Leica M6 'Wetzlar' / 50mm Summicron v. IV, Neopan Acros / Pyrocat-HD</p> <p>The resolution is better on <strong><a href=" /><br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>Truly outstanding photos this week! <br /><br /></p> <blockquote> <p>Wonder why she was wearing a sweater in August. - Alex S.</p> </blockquote> <p>I don't mean to presume, but she appears to have an eating disorder or other health issue. Her hips appear far too lean and her cheeks look skeletal. If so, a sweater may be needed to stay warm or hide body issues. :(</p>

<p>I use this free service and LOVE it!<br> <a href="https://filmtrackr.com/">https://filmtrackr.com/</a></p>

<p>Thanks, E. I haven't been shooting rangefinders as much lately as I have been shooting TLRs. Love that medium format!</p>

<p>Thank you, Koray! You are too kind.</p>

<p>Rolleiflex 2.8C Planar / Acros / No Meter</p> <p>Please click <strong><a href=" to see the original image, which is much better.</p> <div></div>

<p>Rolleiflex 2.8C Planar / Acros / No Meter</p> <p>Please click <strong><a href=" </strong>to see the original image.</p><div></div>

<blockquote> <p>"For the first week, the meter was working great but because of my heavy use the battery died, at least that's what I assume."</p> </blockquote> <p>I've never had to change the battery on my M6 Classic after several years of heavy use.</p>

<p>Sounds like a battery problem. It doesn't matter so much about the plate or back. What's telling is that it takes a minute for the camera to have enough charge to meter.</p>

<p>Thank you very much, Arthur! You're very perceptive. My reaction to seeing this set was that it looks like they are photographs from several different photographers, but you saw a common thread.<br> <br />At the time I took the photo you mentioned I only had one wide lens, a 35mm FL lens for an old Canon. I have never used that camera for night photography and rarely use it for color. The photo with the <a href=" yellow building with a taller yellow building</a> was taken with the 50mm Summicron. I admit that it looks wider but I'm certain it was the 50mm. It was a fun Christmas Eve night in a small East Texas town. I remember it clearly.</p> <p>However, there are four photos in the set that I think were taken with a 35mm Nikkor lens, despite the notes on the film sleeve:<br> <a href=" <a href=" <a href=" <p>And lastly, the one that leads me to think it was a 35mm Nikkor. The ones above were on the same roll, but there's something odd about this last one that I haven't seen on the 50mm 'Cron. Have you ever seen spectral highlights with halos like this?</p> <p><a href=" <p>I you agree that these look like 35mm, I'll change my info. I've been on the fence about them since noticing the halos.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Yes, Bjarni, they are the 50mm version 4 (except for the digital photo of the M6).</p>