OK, Ive been doing a lot of yapping but have been remiss is posting any new photos. Last couple of rolls were kind of o struggle and I wasn't sure what todays batch would bring. Most of these are straight conversions with NLP and no manipulation. M4-2, Voigtlander 35 1.4 Nokton Classic SC V2, Tri-X @ ISO 400, Adox XT-3 1:1
In deference to a frequent poster who's motto should be, "Less talkin', more pictures." here's part of the first roll:
Grey filling balloons for the graduation party, Gunnison, Colorado
The graduates, Ryan & Addie, Gunnison Colorado:
Bee Sclupture, Gunnison, Colorado:
Bakery, Gunnison, Colorado:
Street Tree, Gunnison, Colorado:
Detail, Welcome to Gunnison Plaza:
Concrete Rocks, Plaza, Gunnison, Colorado:
My niece (Addies' mom) and her dad, Gunnison, Colorado:
Now for the, "I should have known better" series. Switching up some gear. Unloaded several lenses and added some replacements. This is a recent acquisition, a Zeiss 28 2.8 Biogon. It feels like it's never been used and shipping from Japan was a week faster than the filter I ordered from KEH.
On to the should have known better. I was finishing up the roll from Gunnison and wanted to try out a new ND-4 neutral density filter and thought I had adjusted the meter to compensate for the two stops. When I developed the film today, the negatives were really thin. I looked at my meter and realized it was still set for 400. These have a bit of digital magic but an important lesson learned.
M4-2, Zeiss 28 2.8 Biogon, ND-4 filter, Tri-X @ ISO 400, Adox XT-3:
madNbad wrote:
OK, Ive been doing a lot of yapping but have been remiss is posting any new photos. Last couple of rolls were kind of o struggle and I wasn't sure what todays batch would bring. Most of these are straight conversions with NLP and no manipulation. M4-2, Voigtlander 35 1.4 Nokton Classic SC V2, Tri-X @ ISO 400, Adox XT-3 1:1
In deference to a frequent poster who's motto should be, "Less talkin', more pictures." here's part of the first roll:
Grey filling balloons for the graduation party, Gunnison, Colorado
My first (and maybe last) outing with Rollei Retro 400s on Mamiya C330. I used a yellow filter on these for the added drama; I also took some IR shots with an R72 filter but they didn't come out so well so I didn't post them (edited: I did post one, see the last photo here); I tried EI 6 and EI 25 based on conflicting recommendations I found online, and the ones at EI 6 were the best.
madNbad wrote:
Now for the, "I should have known better" series. Switching up some gear. Unloaded several lenses and added some replacements. This is a recent acquisition, a Zeiss 28 2.8 Biogon. It feels like it's never been used and shipping from Japan was a week faster than the filter I ordered from KEH.
On to the should have known better. I was finishing up the roll from Gunnison and wanted to try out a new ND-4 neutral density filter and thought I had adjusted the meter to compensate for the two stops. When I developed the film today, the negatives were really thin. I looked at my meter and realized it was still set for 400. These have a bit of digital magic but an important lesson learned.
M4-2, Zeiss 28 2.8 Biogon, ND-4 filter, Tri-X @ ISO 400, Adox XT-3:
You did a great job saving them. I hate it when I see thin negatives - but that is usually because of my weird propensity to shoot ancient film. No more I say! No more! Just fresh-ish stuff from now on.
Check out the coma in the top left corner. This was shot at 1.4 and shows clearly with bright light sources and/or backlighting as in this image.
I'm willing to put up with it as a trade off for the tiny size and speed, and knowing when and how it will appear.
My FLE or ZM Distagon 1.4 does not do this. Haven't paid attention with my LLL 35 8E or other 35s.
Check out the coma in the top left corner. This was shot at 1.4 and shows clearly with bright light sources and/or backlighting as in this image.
I'm willing to put up with it as a trade off for the tiny size and speed, and knowing when and how it will appear.
My FLE or ZM Distagon 1.4 does not do this. Haven't paid attention with my LLL 35 8E or other 35s.
It’s a little like comparing my Honda CR-V to my neighbor’s Porsche Macan. They’re both compact SUV’s but there’s a big difference in fit and finish.
I saved the thin negatives with just a big boost in the exposure setting in NLP.
madNbad wrote:
It’s a little like comparing my Honda CR-V to my neighbor’s Porsche Macan. They’re both compact SUV’s but there’s a big difference in fit and finish.
I saved the thin negatives with just a big boost in the exposure setting in NLP.
Wellllll, from f4 I can't tell the difference between your CR-V and the Macan.
Also - repost - both these were shot at 1.4 w the CV 35 1.4 II so that coma only is obvious in specific situations.
I love this lens and this is just a good to know thing - it's a keeper.
