The F6 doesn’t really have any light seals except around the film cartridge window. Does the foam look good there? If not you could probably temporarily tape over the window to block light. It does have the shiny spring that holds the cartridge in that might reflect a leak over to the film?
If it is the foam there it can be replaced for a lot less than $150.
deang001 wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
I had these rolls developed at the same lab over different days. Not sure it would be the chemicals. It’s only from this camera too so I don’t think it has anything to do with my scanning... although the colour of the Strip looks a lot like the colour of the orange neg mask.
As mentioned, it’s only ever on the left hand side and most of the time you can not tell it’s there. When I crop the scan for 3:2 ratio, It basically all cropped as well.
I did inform the seller whose offered me a $150 refund (it’s mint and cost me $950)... not sure what to do
Bad luck on the roll of Rollei RPX 25 btw. TRI-X is a great film and I developed loads of it, but always found the curling of the negs to be a PITA to scan.
saph wrote:
$150 when advertised as mint? Dean hope you have better luck negotiating with the seller. A mint F6 should do way better than that.
Come to think of it, the 8X10 Tri-X sheet did start to curl while drying on the fridge door yesterday
George now that you mention coffee, I am thinking did I get the short edge and long edge mixed up this morning
I thought $950 for a mint F6 was not a bad price judging from what I’ve seen on eBay. It looks like it’s hardly been used. Maybe this is why! I should sell it for 2K to some hipster as a naturally occurring light leaking camera ... no filters required
jpelt78 wrote:
The F6 doesn’t really have any light seals except around the film cartridge window. Does the foam look good there? If not you could probably temporarily tape over the window to block light. It does have the shiny spring that holds the cartridge in that might reflect a leak over to the film?
If it is the foam there it can be replaced for a lot less than $150.
Very interesting info. Thanks.
I left the camera in my office today but I’ll take a look tomorrow.
rafaelcasd wrote:
The 135 f/2.8 has a beautiful rendition, glad you like it as well.
Yeah, I was just so surprised at how good it is. And between the FE's viewfinder and this lens's longer, slower focus throw, the ease of use is out of this world.
deang001 wrote:
Quick question if that's Ok
I've noticed this stripe on the side of many of the scans from my F6. This is a really pronounced example, but many of the shots have this on the same side to varying degrees. Some dont have it all ... not that I can see anyway.
I see this on three seperate rolls. 2 x Ektar and 1 x Portra 400.
It looks a lot like some sort of development issue to me. Light leaks don't tend to have hard edges visible, at least from what I've seen. The hard edges almost make it seem like something was touching the film during development.
Whatever the case, I'd show the lab and maybe try another lab (if that's an option) for a couple rolls, just to help rule out any potential camera issues.
Maybe this is a good sign from the Lord, the first picture was the smoke sunset a few weeks back, the other two are just wispy clouds today and it cooled down as well. The 20mm 2.8 ais was on the camera so it went to work.
OffTrail wrote:
Yeah, I was just so surprised at how good it is. And between the FE's viewfinder and this lens's longer, slower focus throw, the ease of use is out of this world.
It looks a lot like some sort of development issue to me. Light leaks don't tend to have hard edges visible, at least from what I've seen. The hard edges almost make it seem like something was touching the film during development.
Whatever the case, I'd show the lab and maybe try another lab (if that's an option) for a couple rolls, just to help rule out any potential camera issues. ...Show more →
You could be right but it does seem like something with the F6 to me.
We had a 4-day long weekend here last week and I shot 7 rolls of film. I had them all developed at the same place.
Thursday I shot a Contax N1 with Ultramax 400 - no issues.
Friday I shot 2 x Ektar in the F6 and the issue was there with both rolls.
Saturday I shot a Minolta Maxxum 7 with 2 x Portra 400 - no issues.
Sunday I shot 2 x Portra 400 with the F6 - the issue was there again with both rolls.
I think I might just ask for a refund. This will be the second F6 I return. The first had a fully bent hotshoe and a crack in the rubber connector part that covers the sync port ... neither of which were disclosed.
Maybe I'm just not meant to have an F6 and should stick to shooting my F3
I just bought a F4s with data back.
Being a toddler again to learn abc: what kind of film, iso to start, scanner and proper size with each sensitivity etc
Do hope to share you st soon.
Phong.nh wrote:
I just bought a F4s with data back.
Being a toddler again to learn abc: what kind of film, iso to start, scanner and proper size with each sensitivity etc
Do hope to share you st soon.
Phong
Awesome Phong!! Conrats on the F4s
Looking forward to seeing your analogue shots with these fine lenses.
Films are all a personal choice I guess. At least where you are you don’t have to worry much about running out of light and can shoot a lot of the lower ISO stuff. Although the higher ISO grain is really nice on a lot of the films. After trying so many films I’m most happy with some of the Kodak stocks ... Portra 400 & 800 and also Ultramax 400. Ive tried many of the Fuji films but don’t really like them much. Other people love them. CineStill 800T is a great stock for night shots. I’m too lazy to develop B&W again so I’ve been shooting Ilford XP2 400 which can be developed normally like colour. It’s pretty decent.
Regarding the scanner, maybe you already have one. Your DSLR. Many people are just using their cameras to shoot the negs with good results. You could also check out the Nikon ES-2 but I dont know much about it really.
Lots of photographers who use this program https://www.negativelabpro.com/ are scanning via their DSLR. There’s a good associated form and FB group as well. Great software.
If you want a conventional scanner and can find a used Nikon V-ED in good condition, I can thoroughly recommend it. True 4000dpi. Any of the Nikon scanners are great. There’s some decent ones available on eBay.
Failing that, I hear good things regarding the “ Pacific Image Prime Film XAs super edition” or even it’s little brother the “ Pacific Image Prime Film XEs super edition”. Many use Plustek scanners, but I think they are a bit hit and miss. Ive owned two of them in the past. The files are very bloated and their scratch removal is a bit substandard I reckon. Look at https://www.hamrick.com/ for a good program to scan with. Affordable and easy to use. Works with basically any scanner.
Read this site for reliable info/reviews on scanners ...
deang001 wrote:
Awesome Phong!! Conrats on the F4s
Looking forward to seeing your analogue shots with these fine lenses.
Films are all a personal choice I guess. At least where you are you don’t have to worry much about running out of light and can shoot a lot of the lower ISO stuff. Although the higher ISO grain is really nice on a lot of the films. After trying so many films I’m most happy with some of the Kodak stocks ... Portra 400 & 800 and also Ultramax 400. Ive tried many of the Fuji films but don’t really like them much. Other people love them. CineStill 800T is a great stock for night shots. I’m too lazy to develop B&W again so I’ve been shooting Ilford XP2 400 which can be developed normally like colour. It’s pretty decent.
Regarding the scanner, maybe you already have one. Your DSLR. Many people are just using their cameras to shoot the negs with good results. You could also check out the Nikon ES-2 but I dont know much about it really.
Lots of photographers who use this program https://www.negativelabpro.com/ are scanning via their DSLR. There’s a good associated form and FB group as well. Great software.
If you want a conventional scanner and can find a used Nikon V-ED in good condition, I can thoroughly recommend it. True 4000dpi. Any of the Nikon scanners are great. There’s some decent ones available on eBay.
Failing that, I hear good things regarding the “ Pacific Image Prime Film XAs super edition” or even it’s little brother the “ Pacific Image Prime Film XEs super edition”. Many use Plustek scanners, but I think they are a bit hit and miss. Ive owned two of them in the past. The files are very bloated and their scratch removal is a bit substandard I reckon. Look at https://www.hamrick.com/ for a good program to scan with. Affordable and easy to use. Works with basically any scanner.
Read this site for reliable info/reviews on scanners ...
Many thanks Dean! A lot, lots of knowledge to me. I've to spend sometime to chew it over.
Acquired some rolls of Kodak gold 200 to start. But right now I'm too busy to go around for some shots. Next week will be my film week with F4s+35mmf/1.4 thorium.
Finally back here and its good to be back! We've been to 15 of these United States since March and glad to report all is well every where we went.
Took some photos off course but was surprised to see some on the card from August's trip to Michigan. I've taken other lenses on these trips (Valuable space in a Corvette) and only used the NOCT. So here are a few from Michigan's U.P. These are from the working lighthouse on Big Bay. The roof is being painted because the Coast Guard ordered the tender to make it red.
deang001 wrote:
You could be right but it does seem like something with the F6 to me.
We had a 4-day long weekend here last week and I shot 7 rolls of film. I had them all developed at the same place.
Thursday I shot a Contax N1 with Ultramax 400 - no issues.
Friday I shot 2 x Ektar in the F6 and the issue was there with both rolls.
Saturday I shot a Minolta Maxxum 7 with 2 x Portra 400 - no issues.
Sunday I shot 2 x Portra 400 with the F6 - the issue was there again with both rolls.
I think I might just ask for a refund. This will be the second F6 I return. The first had a fully bent hotshoe and a crack in the rubber connector part that covers the sync port ... neither of which were disclosed.
Maybe I'm just not meant to have an F6 and should stick to shooting my F3
This bellows lens can be mounted using the S mount to F mount BR1 adapter or using its rear Leica thread mount. On my PB-6 bellows it reaches infinity mounted on the Leica thread.
You guessed it? More from the Salcombe seaside and the 105/2.5
This is a sea tractor - basically a moveable platform to take you out to a water taxi. We didn't ride it but watched it in operation from the comfort of a pub's terrace overlooking the bay.
Too many choices for film, but for colour, Ektar and Provia for your lotuses and lilies come to mind. Ektachrome 100 is a good neutral choice for slide film. Portra 160 if you want to tone it down a bit. Kodak Ultramax is a good inexpensive option.
For B&W, the Ilford Delta films - ISO 100 or 400 - are good depending on how much light you are shooting. HP4+ is versatile but can sometimes look less contrasty. From Kodak, Tri-X is my recent fave, but TMax 400 or 100 are excellent too.
A lot to experiment with.
F4s is an ergonomic delight, despite being bulky and on the heavy side.
Phong.nh wrote:
I just bought a F4s with data back.
Being a toddler again to learn abc: what kind of film, iso to start, scanner and proper size with each sensitivity etc
Do hope to share you st soon.
