corposant wrote:
Which lenses did you get? There are some really excellent ones out there for not a lot of money...
I got the 105/2.4, the latest version 55/4, and a set of the OEM extension tubes. This kit is really one of the best bargains going, with the caveat that they're older cameras and because they were so popular with fashion photographers, lot of the ones on the used market have seen significant professional use.
By the way, KEH really came through for this purchase. I bought the camera kit in BGN condition, but the metering prism didn't meter and my first roll of film jammed. I sent it back for repair, but they ended up just replacing the camera and meter with units in EX condition for no additional charge. For buying an older camera like this, I can't imagine ever again rolling the dice on Ebay.
alwang wrote:
I got the 105/2.4, the latest version 55/4, and a set of the OEM extension tubes. This kit is really one of the best bargains going, with the caveat that they're older cameras and because they were so popular with fashion photographers, lot of the ones on the used market have seen significant professional use.
By the way, KEH really came through for this purchase. I bought the camera kit in BGN condition, but the metering prism didn't meter and my first roll of film jammed. I sent it back for repair, but they ended up just replacing the camera and meter with units in EX condition for no additional charge. For buying an older camera like this, I can't imagine ever again rolling the dice on Ebay....Show more →
Check out the latest versions of the SMC 45mm, 75mm, 200mm and 300mm. All of them are great lenses, with the longer lenses being especially nuts.
Never understood the appeal of this camera for fashion work - the flash sync is miserably slow (and is a little weird even with the LS lenses). For lots of other things, this system is really awesome.
alwang -- looks like you are doing great! Nice shot.
Don't be afraid of eBay -- I got much of my Pentax collection there! Prices are amazing. Repairs for all Pentax 67 and lenses are still being done (by Pentax USA, or sanctioned by Pentax) in Arizona.
corposant -- I agree about the 75/2.8 ASPH for the Pentax 67 -- one of my favorite lenses. The 135/4 Macro (only close-up with out tubes, but alwang already has the tubes!) and 165/2.8 are also very impressive.
Regarding fashion use -- I don't think the Pentax had much problem with sync. Outdoors would usually use reflectors or translucent panels, often shot wide open, no flash. ISO 160-800 makes the camera an awesome handheld unit in daylight -- much more spontaneous than RB/RZ cameras.
In controlled light studio, as long as ambient light was fairly dim, 1/30 is no problem for flash. In fact, for any focal plane shutter, studio flash has a lower sync than on-camera flash. Usually 1/125 is the highest you can go with powerpacks, and 1/30 and 1/60 are pretty common with the lens stopped down to f/8 or so, at low ISO like Velvia 50 or Provia 100.
1/30 is a problem for "run and gun" event work -- too slow and causes blurring, unless flash over-powers the ambient light.
But it is a shift in thinking and technique compared to our 35mm and DSLR way of shooting flash.
Gunzorro wrote:
In controlled light studio, as long as ambient light was fairly dim, 1/30 is no problem for flash. In fact, for any focal plane shutter, studio flash has a lower sync than on-camera flash. Usually 1/125 is the highest you can go with powerpacks, and 1/30 and 1/60 are pretty common with the lens stopped down to f/8 or so, at low ISO like Velvia 50 or Provia 100.
1/30 is a problem for "run and gun" event work -- too slow and causes blurring, unless flash over-powers the ambient light.
But it is a shift in thinking and technique compared to our 35mm and DSLR way of shooting flash.
wfrank wrote:
Great shots alwang and c00kiem0nster.
And lots of other inspiration here too! Could some of you guys that dont develop yourself enlighten me on your workflow?
I just go myself a Contax camera and put in a TMax400 film. I wont develop myself - what is there to think about, do different labs develop differently? And how do you get your films scanned? I do not intend to buy a scanner - and I am sure my initial results will look pretty bad exposed etc. And after scanning, what kind of PP (if any) do you do?
Really could use some advice here, thanks in advance! ...Show more →
Wilhelm, not an expert here and only do occasional film shot. So I can only answer as much as I can. For most of type of film, the develop time is fixed, and develop formula also is the same. (unless, you do push/pull, basically over/under exposure and use develop time/lighter foluma compensate it) So I guess there is no much difference in terms of quality of development for lab unless you do it yourself. At least, what i got from Costco(US wholesale chain store) match local pro-lab for C-41 process. But I can't use Costco develop BW film. Most people here in US send out film to be developed and have it scan much higher resolution with decent price. But i havn't done that.
Since I am not that serious yet, I haven't got myself a scanner, which is not that expensive for a 35mm scan. Costco's scan about 6M file. It is decent for my need. as for PP, you are a master yourself, since the file is only 6M, for me, there is not much room to do it unless you do expensive drum scan. I usually just play with sharpen and curve for contrast, maybe some hue/color tweak.
For film, I am not seek fidelity. My priority is the feeling and experience. so I can only speak myself here. hope it helps a little.
Nicely captured wedding essense, and you made good use of that generous light. Last Jewish wedding I covered was held in a large cave with impossibly dim light: ambient exposure in the chuppah was EV 2 (1/15sec, f/1.4, ISO 800). With 50mm handheld, the results of that important moment were not good.
Once you get your film scanned outside, there is very little to nothing that can be done in terms of PP, because the files will be in 8bit. Of course, if you scan at home, the possibilities are limitless with negative film.
For color, it doesn't really matter where you develop the film as long as the lab is clean and consistent, because the process is standardized, but with b&w there are hundreds of possibilites in developers, and each developer at different concentrations will give you different results. It doesn't hurt to ask what developer does your lab use.
I would recommend that you PM Kosmoskatten. He has worked for many years with a pro color lab, and should be able to advise you on the best place to take your film.
wfrank wrote:
Great shots alwang and c00kiem0nster.
And lots of other inspiration here too! Could some of you guys that dont develop yourself enlighten me on your workflow?
I just go myself a Contax camera and put in a TMax400 film. I wont develop myself - what is there to think about, do different labs develop differently? And how do you get your films scanned? I do not intend to buy a scanner - and I am sure my initial results will look pretty bad exposed etc. And after scanning, what kind of PP (if any) do you do?
Really could use some advice here, thanks in advance! ...Show more →
Once you get your film scanned outside, there is very little to nothing that can be done in terms of PP, because the files will be in 8bit. Of course, if you scan at home, the possibilities are limitless with negative film.
there are places that scan to 16 bit tif. whether that is really useful for film and what is available by you, i'm not sure.
sebboh wrote:
there are places that scan to 16 bit tif. whether that is really useful for film and what is available by you, i'm not sure.
My lab charges 1$ per mb for 16bit, which translates to over 100$ per scan. Compared to 10$ roll scan, I would rather not do that except for really important shots.
edwardkaraa wrote:
My lab charges 1$ per mb for 16bit, which translates to over 100$ per scan. Compared to 10$ roll scan, I would rather not do that except for really important shots.
wow! especially not worth it given how they seem to periodically destroy your film.
my local lab will develop and scan a 36 exposure roll producing 17mb tifs for $15. the scans aren't as good in terms of detail and processability as the higher res jpegs i get from precision camera though.
edwardkaraa wrote:
My lab charges 1$ per mb for 16bit, which translates to over 100$ per scan. Compared to 10$ roll scan, I would rather not do that except for really important shots.
No problem, just charge them $10 per scratch. With a little luck, you'll come out ahead.
sebboh wrote:
wow! especially not worth it given how they seem to periodically destroy your film.
my local lab will develop and scan a 36 exposure roll producing 17mb tifs for $15. the scans aren't as good in terms of detail and processability as the higher res jpegs i get from precision camera though.
Well, I have to say their pro scans are pretty good. That IR channel works wonders on scratches.
The way I see it, there is so much info in a negative, color or b&w, that it really is worth it to get a bland 16 bit scan, low contrast, low saturation, no sharpening, and adjusting everything oneself like a raw file. The scans from labs like precision or NCPS are already cooked and even if they were 16 bit there is no point in doing any PP because the highlights are already burned and the shadows clipped beyond saving.
i've actually been pretty surprised how much i've been able to get out of the shadows and highlights of my scans, but it isn't like a raw file obviously.
anyway here's another portra 160 shot with the rokkor 24/2.8:
Those colors are pure sebboh! That and the previous one are great.
I find my properly exposed and developed black and white negatives give me a lot to work with in post processing, 4x5 helps too. Portra 400 I find quite amazing. Developing and scanning myself allows me to control everything, which I like. The files don't push like a raw file but that is why I try and 'overexpose' most of the time. Latitude into the highlights in both c41 and b&w is amazing.
2 for 2 today! Backed up a tad compared to last time which I think makes the Aero Ektar a bit less effective in this scenario. Need to take it out into the field with the dogs.
Developed in Pyrocat HD @71° 1:1:100 in HP Combiplan tank for 10 minutes with normal agitation. Negative looks better than stand development. The over exposure and reduced development time easily kept the highlights with good shadow detail in her face.
wfrank wrote:
Great shots alwang and c00kiem0nster.
And lots of other inspiration here too! Could some of you guys that dont develop yourself enlighten me on your workflow?
I just go myself a Contax camera and put in a TMax400 film. I wont develop myself - what is there to think about, do different labs develop differently? And how do you get your films scanned? I do not intend to buy a scanner - and I am sure my initial results will look pretty bad exposed etc. And after scanning, what kind of PP (if any) do you do?
Really could use some advice here, thanks in advance! ...Show more →
I have the guys over at Bluemoon develop and scan my film. $3 to develop and you have several options for scanning. I usually dont have the whole roll scanned - but rather look them over and choose which ones to scan. Scanning in highest resolution (41MB i think) is .50 a scan - or if you do choose to get the whole roll scanned at time of developing, i think it is $15 or $20 develope/scan.
As far as PP, i work mine in Nik - and it works great. I will see about getting mine done in 16bit files..
rico wrote:
Nicely captured wedding essense, and you made good use of that generous light. Last Jewish wedding I covered was held in a large cave with impossibly dim light: ambient exposure in the chuppah was EV 2 (1/15sec, f/1.4, ISO 800). With 50mm handheld, the results of that important moment were not good.
Thanks. Yeah, we had a lot of light, though it was overcast. I was wishing for some sun, would have made the lighting a bit more interesting.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Mazal Tov!
Don't tell me you had the 2 Mamiyas and 1 Contax MF bodies hanging from your neck!
Ha! No, the RZ was for the portraits, the c645 and C330 for the rest. Though I'm thinking a mamiya 7 might be a better choice (the 80mm for group shots, and slap on a 50 or even a 43 for wide angles during ceremony and such).
Here a few recent shots when Zevi was sick...
RZ67, 110mm and 65mm, delta 3200 shot around 2000 (developed normally).
