a.RodriguezPix wrote:
how does everyone know how to shoot film! I don't understand what to do! I feel as if it is not going to appear, unless I can see instantly! The agonizing torture! Ok, so, I will load the 120, use my external light meter, cock it, and shoot, until it is no longer, so then, sfter that, the film gets sent off, developed, and the images will appear, or, the negative will, until they scan my image to whatever size i choose!? why do i feel like nothing is going to happen, that no image will appear?! my sole reason to not load 6x6 120, and now my new system soon, 6x7, is that i use the Polaroid for instant gratification, and actually seeing the results! I guess I should know that the image is there, but just cant be digital instant, as I am used too! its so weird, and hard to get the idea down!? ...Show more →
part of the joy is anticipation. having to wait makes the payoff bigger (and the disappointment).
redisburning wrote:
buy an M2 instead.
2c.
I'd still recommend the 40 m-rokkor though.
Jon Buffington wrote:
I would like to, however, film does not earn me money so I have to go cheap (as opposed to digital, which earns me money. Film is for pleasure). CL appears to be the cheapest jump into Leica.
why not a minolta CLE? it's generally a better camera and easier to maintain/repair i believe. the only major weakness of the CLE compared to film m's (my opinion of course) is shorter rangefinder base (only an issue if you're going to use long fast lenses) and not as heavy a build (actually an advantage for carrying). i also recommend the 40 cron/m-rokkor.
i cant click the link, due to my own rules, sorry! i dont watch movies, television, or most media, as a way to free my mind, i do watch toons with the kids ever so often, some news,rarely, and aside from camera searches, i read online books, or mostly listen to audiooks, lately! im boring!
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
don't you enjoy surprises? why not use the film back after you get your polaroid shot?
Its just that I never shot and developed film. I shot some but only before I was taught by a fellow FM er how to properly load film and to store it immediately! I had it upside down and I pointed it to the light because ugh big laugh I thought I could see the film ugh, I am not bright. Therefore I discovered how cool Polaroid is and decided to shoot it instead rather than to learn the whole processes of film, film, and not just instant! I have bought a 6x7 mamiya rb something and therefore I want to try again in memory of my sold Rollei 6008 pro.! I also see the examples and they are really cool! I have just bought a Polaroid Back as well so I guess I'll think how it is processed and use it as a guide for 220/120
Note that Polaroid processing is nothing like roll film!
Film stays light-sensitive until it has been developed and fixed, the first two steps of the processing (possibly with a rinse in between). To process your own film, you need a light-tight place, could be a special bag with two holes for your hands, or a completely darkened room, where you transfer the film to the light-tight development canister. Then you pour in and out the chemicals (at the correct temperatures) at regular intervals until done (this can be done in a kitchen with some care), and then you hang the film to dry in a dust-free place. A shower can work well for this, with some care.
It isn't trivially easy, but it also isn't rocket science, and the feeling of developing your own film is very special, like nothing in the digital world.
sebboh wrote:
why not a minolta CLE? it's generally a better camera and easier to maintain/repair i believe. the only major weakness of the CLE compared to film m's (my opinion of course) is shorter rangefinder base (only an issue if you're going to use long fast lenses) and not as heavy a build (actually an advantage for carrying). i also recommend the 40 cron/m-rokkor.
I have considered this as well. Part of the appeal (for me) with the cl/cle is the 40mm frame lines. I prefer a 40 over a 50 or 35.
It's not about a need, it's about a want. I can justify in my mind (and to my wife) a 2k camera when it pays for it self after a couple weddings. Different when it is for pleasure and pleasure is what it is all about shooting manual focus lenses on old cameras with film as the image capture system. Now 6-800 on a body and lens combo, I can justify for pleasure (hence CL or even CLE).
Jon Buffington wrote:
I have considered this as well. Part of the appeal (for me) with the cl/cle is the 40mm frame lines. I prefer a 40 over a 50 or 35.
It's not about a need, it's about a want. I can justify in my mind (and to my wife) a 2k camera when it pays for it self after a couple weddings. Different when it is for pleasure and pleasure is what it is all about shooting manual focus lenses on old cameras with film as the image capture system. Now 6-800 on a body and lens combo, I can justify for pleasure (hence CL or even CLE). ...Show more →
40mm FOV and weddings? Sounds like you should get a Hasselblad and shoot a roll or two at your next wedding.
I'm a big Bessa R2A/3A/4A fan... I believe the 3 had the 40mm framelines (I just sold mine or I would go look). Partner that with the Rokkor or CV lens, and you're done. Meter and AE included.
corposant wrote:
40mm FOV and weddings? Sounds like you should get a Hasselblad and shoot a roll or two at your next wedding.
I have been using my 40stm pancake on my 5dII at the last 2 receptions. My back is usually aching by then and a light lens/cam combo is nice. I do have a yashica mat that I like to run portra through occasionally (80mm on a 6x6), though yet to use outside of portraits of my family.
Very nice shot by the way!
KatieInTexas wrote:
I'm a big Bessa R2A/3A/4A fan... I believe the 3 had the 40mm framelines (I just sold mine or I would go look). Partner that with the Rokkor or CV lens, and you're done. Meter and AE included.
Thank you Katie, I may have to give that a look see.
