Thank you everyone for helping me out! I really like the price point of the RB/RZ, but the weight might be of concern. I don't have a "studio" at home perse, as I do most of my portrait work outside when I'm with friends and family on day trips and vacation. The Mamiya 6/7 might just be the magic bullet for me. I think what I really need is to get my hands on a camera and see how it feels in hand. I'm a fan of rangefinders and the usual (D)SLR ergonomics, which makes me think I should have a look at Pentax's offerings as well.
A few people have suggested the Bronica as a great bang for the buck MF camera. I seriously might consider a SQ(?) or GS as an affordable alternative to entry into the MF system and go from there. From what I've read about the Bronica's is that they don't have a stellar track record for sturdy film backs. I guess that since they are "cheap" enough, I could always get a spare or two.
The only roadblock I have at the moment is no means to scan 120 film. I have a Plustek 8200i scanner that only does 35mm negs/slides. The wife has a hokey all in one printer/copier/scanner that I might try scanning with, but I'm afraid it won't match the likes of a true 120 film scanner.
MF film is what is going to get me to invest in an in-house film development. Personal film development is one of my 2016 New Years Resolutions that I think I shouldn't have a problem fullfiling.
Jon Buffington wrote:
Chris, what dilutions/times are you using on your kentmere 100? Just picked up a bulk roll of the k100 and use dilution h most of the time. By the way, nice work.
Tom, nice work as usual. You are really trying to get me to get some acros with all those nice captures.
Thanks John. I use dilution B and normal development time is 5.5min at 75F. These rolls were 9min at 75F because I shot them at 400.
Alpha_Geist wrote:
The only roadblock I have at the moment is no means to scan 120 film. I have a Plustek 8200i scanner that only does 35mm negs/slides. The wife has a hokey all in one printer/copier/scanner that I might try scanning with, but I'm afraid it won't match the likes of a true 120 film scanner.
MF film is what is going to get me to invest in an in-house film development. Personal film development is one of my 2016 New Years Resolutions that I think I shouldn't have a problem fullfiling.
I found a workaround to all this scanning thing which never led to satisfying results with my "normal" HP scanner which even has a negative scanner unit inside the scanner lid. My advice is the following: Use your digital camera with macro lens attached and point it vertically down on a tripod/tripod head onto a flat LED light panel. Just tape the strip of negative(s) onto the LED light panel with adhesive tape and photograph at 1:1 magnification with f/11 in Av mode. You get an excellent RAW file of your negative which you can easily invert and post process if needed. Photographing my 35 mm negatives (it would work the same for larger ones) is much faster and in better quality than scanning - of course, if you have a professional negative/photo scanner with ultra high resolution, the story might be different. The photography negative method as outlined here works best for B&W negatives IMO.
Went for a hike yesterday to test a roll of kentmere 100. I like the 400 a lot but took a gamble on the a bulk roll of 100. Guessed the development times and came out a bit dense. I can adjust back from that. Used dil h with light agitation every 2 or so minutes at 15m30sec. Think I can back down a minute or so. Anyways, two quick frames I scanned and lightly adjust in LR5. Lens was canon chrome nosed fd35/2 with a yellowed lens from radiation so no filter used. Camera was the canon A-1.
Pleased with this film overall. Grain is almost non existent though certainly no TMAX. Have heard mixed reviews online but like what I got on the first roll. May try some Rodinal next as I have an unopened bottle.
Chris_Churchil wrote:
Thanks John. I use dilution B and normal development time is 5.5min at 75F. These rolls were 9min at 75F because I shot them at 400.
Alpha_Geist wrote:
From what I've read about the Bronica's is that they don't have a stellar track record for sturdy film backs. I guess that since they are "cheap" enough, I could always get a spare or two.
They're fine. Treat them well and they'll treat you well. You don't need to baby them. Now if you want fussy, try some of the earlier 'Blad backs.
retrofocus wrote:
I found a workaround to all this scanning thing which never led to satisfying results with my "normal" HP scanner which even has a negative scanner unit inside the scanner lid. My advice is the following: Use your digital camera with macro lens attached and point it vertically down on a tripod/tripod head onto a flat LED light panel. Just tape the strip of negative(s) onto the LED light panel with adhesive tape and photograph at 1:1 magnification with f/11 in Av mode. You get an excellent RAW file of your negative which you can easily invert and post process if needed. Photographing my 35 mm negatives (it would work the same for larger ones) is much faster and in better quality than scanning - of course, if you have a professional negative/photo scanner with ultra high resolution, the story might be different. The photography negative method as outlined here works best for B&W negatives IMO....Show more →
That's what I do now, since my ancient 2450 got retired several years ago, though one of these days I need to get a proper scanner again. Downsides of this technique (I shoot at 5.6, ensuring negs are taped down flat) is that at >35mm formats, either the magnification goes way down or you need to rig up a contraption to ensure that the sensor is parallel to the neg at all times and the number of frames to stitch gets unmanageable for the formats I tend to use (6x7 and 4x5). Very quick for 35mm though. I guess if you're picky you also have a Bayer sensor to deal with. Ah well, 1st world problems ...
Jon Buffington wrote:
Went for a hike yesterday to test a roll of kentmere 100. I like the 400 a lot but took a gamble on the a bulk roll of 100. Guessed the development times and came out a bit dense. I can adjust back from that. Used dil h with light agitation every 2 or so minutes at 15m30sec. Think I can back down a minute or so. Anyways, two quick frames I scanned and lightly adjust in LR5. Lens was canon chrome nosed fd35/2 with a yellowed lens from radiation so no filter used. Camera was the canon A-1.
Pleased with this film overall. Grain is almost non existent though certainly no TMAX. Have heard mixed reviews online but like what I got on the first roll. May try some Rodinal next as I have an unopened bottle....Show more →
Those are great shots Jon and your processing came out well. But why guess on times? Why not either consult the Kentmere web site or the massive development chart?
Funny about her name...in Shanghai, there's a section of the city called Jing An and that's how I read her name, immediately switching first and last names.
wfektar wrote:
That's what I do now, since my ancient 2450 got retired several years ago, though one of these days I need to get a proper scanner again. Downsides of this technique (I shoot at 5.6, ensuring negs are taped down flat) is that at >35mm formats, either the magnification goes way down or you need to rig up a contraption to ensure that the sensor is parallel to the neg at all times and the number of frames to stitch gets unmanageable for the formats I tend to use (6x7 and 4x5). Very quick for 35mm though. I guess if you're picky you also have a Bayer sensor to deal with. Ah well, 1st world problems ... ...Show more →
Yes, you need to stich single photos if you photograph a larger negative. Since I am currently only using 35 mm film format, I don't have this issue. Also I make sure that the sensor is as parallel as possible to the negative - that is one reason why I shoot at f/11 to allow for a tiny bit of play here. Since the 35 mm negatives are never fully flat even when taped down, a smaller aperture is better IMO. But I agree, my method described above works best for 35 mm format and is more limited for medium or large format negatives.
Great film IR shots! I am a lot into infrared shooting but so far only digital. I want to try it at some point soon with my 35 mm film camera, too. How did you manage to get the details so sharp on film when adjusting for the correct focus in IR is a bit of a gamble (the red distance marks on the focus scale of the lens are sometimes not accurate enough). Did you simply use a small enough aperture and still avoiding hot spot formation?
Funny about her name...in Shanghai, there's a section of the city called Jing An and that's how I read her name, immediately switching first and last names.
