Desmolicious wrote:
Love to hear that! I think someone here was shipped a broken one - that sucked. But not the camera's fault.
The Samsung takes awesome pics, super easy to use and super responsive.
It would be way more expensive if it had a fancy name on it. It actually does - it is also badged as a Rollei! And the Rollei version is like $100 more expensive!
I had the broken one but I fixed it, I think. My second one, yes I have a backup, is in better condition with a lot less dust under the display. I love them both.
Ineound wrote:
Read that the Espio has a DX Reader - how do you change the ISO of the film then? Thx!
If there is no DX on the film canister it defaults to iso 25. So I put piece of black tape over the DX code to get 25.
It is unusual though, as most cameras w DX readers will default to 100.
Also the Espio 24EW has an exposure compensation setting where you can set +- up to three stops.
Almost every shot on my previous roll of HP5+ was perfectly exposed, but every shot on this latest one was underexposed even though I used the same lens, same filter, and same meter. Maybe my lab goofed on development time. I did manage to salvage a few shots.
bjhurley wrote:
Almost every shot on my previous roll of HP5+ was perfectly exposed, but every shot on this latest one was underexposed even though I used the same lens, same filter, and same meter. Maybe my lab goofed on development time. I did manage to salvage a few shots.
I recently made the change to Adox XT-3 which is similar to Xtol. I followed the agitation schedule in the Adox material for HP5+ and my negatives had too much contrast, not enough mid-tones and took more digital magic than I prefer to get usable images. Another member suggested looking at the agitation schedule from Ilford and there is a huge difference. For a small tank, Adox recommends five to seven inversion to start then five seconds every thirty seconds. Ilfords' data sheet for HP5+ states four inversions in the first ten seconds then four every minute for the remaining development time. I haven't had a chance to try it yet, every time I think the sun is going to stay out, another band of rain moves through but hopefully before the end of the week I'll post some examples. Ask your lab about their process and what developer they're using.
Here's one from my first roll of HP5 in XT-3. M4-2, Voigtlander 35 1.4 Nokton Classic SD V2, 022 yellow filter, HP5+, ISO 200 for filter factor, Adox XT-3 1+1 13 minutes at 20C. Scanned with a Sony A72, FE90 2.8 Macro
The negative was fairly dense and scanning was a bit of a challenge.
madNbad wrote:
Ask your lab about their process and what developer they're using.
I will...what's weird is that my last roll of HP5+ came out perfectly and this one didn't despite everything being exactly the same on my end. I know they've had some staff turnover and maybe a different person developed this roll; they certainly did a sloppy job with the scans as there was a ton of dust, especially on the last few shots of the roll.
bjhurley wrote:
I will...what's weird is that my last roll of HP5+ came out perfectly and this one didn't despite everything being exactly the same on my end. I know they've had some staff turnover and maybe a different person developed this roll; they certainly did a sloppy job with the scans as there was a ton of dust, especially on the last few shots of the roll.
At least I know who to blame when my film is screwed up.
madNbad wrote:
At least I know who to blame when my film is screwed up.
Haha! I would love to start developing my own film again (it's been about 45 years since I developed my last roll, when I switched from Tri-X to Kodachrome and Agfachrome), but let's just say it would upset the state of domestic tranquility in my house.
