The Official Head-Case Photography Thread.

[EdipisReks1]

15 hours ago, dsavitsk said:

https://bluemooncamera.com/shop/product/AAA0823|14810/rollei-rolleiflex-penta-prism

If I’m spending Rolleiflex money I’m just going to save up and get a Mamiya 6!  Minolta Autocord with meter is likely my next purchase, and I’ll just get more practice with composing. I really do think the incredibly dim viewfinder on the Yashica is the biggest problem for me.

I picked up a variable diopter for the FM2. Cheaper than getting new glasses; I find critical focus very hard to get if I’m even a little bit off, of course, so it’s great being able to dial in with my imperfect corrected vision.

Oatmeal Johnny was made for the camera. A combination of methods and equipment, but the same cat. 

 

Edited May 10 by EdipisReks1

[dsavitsk]

@EdipisReks1 Mamiya 6 is a super cool camera.

You might consider a split circle focusing screen

[EdipisReks1]

25 minutes ago, dsavitsk said:

@EdipisReks1 Mamiya 6 is a super cool camera.

You might consider a split circle focusing screen

For the Yashica? Split focusing would be great on any TRL; I dunno how many have one. I guess that’s what you mean: consider a third party screen. Probably not for the Yashica, it isn’t very good, but I could see it on an Autocord or Mamiya C3!

I see myself with either a Mamiya 6 or 7, in 2025. I haven’t shot 6x7 yet, but I like 6x6 a lot.

[Knuckledragger]

I've been attempting to take meaningful photos at 300mm.  It's been a nontrivial task.  First up is some carefully edited photos taken with my (never not crap) Canon 75-300mm.

A heron stepping around the pond.  75-300 @ 300mm, F/10, 1/800, ISO1600.  I took advantage of the 5D4's high ISO performance to use a small aperture (the 75-300 sucks ass at anything else) and maintain a decent shutter speed. 

 

First day with the 300mm F/4 Nikkor.  The subject is more native MV wildlife.  This time, the wheelbarrow belonging to my (sainted, octogenarian) mother.   It was holding still and well lit.  The 300mm Nikkor works on a Canon body with an adapter, but it's nontrivial to use.  First off, it doesn't have a hard stop at infinity focus.  Many (most) old manual focus lenses have one and I find it super useful at any focal length.  At 300mm, lacking a hard stop is a serious handicap.  I eventually learned to deal with it.

 

Not terribly interesting shot of Sweetened Water Farm, from my driveway.  The main point of this shot (besides capturing some golden hour sun on some trees) was to demonstrate just how far back infinity focus starts with a 300mm.

 

Bonus: (Nearly) the same view last summer, taken with my second Orestegor 300mm (which is significantly bigger and heavier than the 300mm Nikkor.)  Again, not the wacky depth of field the 300mm provides.  Both of these shots were taken wide open, which is to say F/4.

 

Late afternoon sun on Jernegan pond.  The 300mm Nikkor does produce a tiny bit of CA wide open.  You both have to work to make it in a shot and then look for it afterward.

 

A small plane flew overhead and I managed to capture it.  Not as easy as one might imagine.

 

There's shooting the moon, then there's shooting the moon.  F/4, 1/160 with my hand on the front of the lens (steadies it a bit), ISO3200. 

 

Moments later, F/4 (I *think*), 1/160, ISO6400.  More use of the 5D4's ISO performance.

 

When I took this shot, I was very proud that I captured two herons and a duck.  Upon editing I realized it was actually three herons.  TBH I haven't picked up the 300mm Nikkor in a few weeks.  I've been too busy editing photos from 2013 and 2023.  More on that later.

[EdipisReks1]

This is my favorite candid portrait taken with the Yashica: it looks like it should be 1994 (even has an ashtray!). Critical focus isn’t bad if you nail it, but it’s a bit of a chore with the waist level. I wish the darkroom scanned medium format at 36 like the 35mm, instead of 20 (it’s probably 24 or something at 6x7): I feel like I’m focusing a lot more resolution than the scans give. 

Edited May 12 by EdipisReks1

[EdipisReks1]

I wish I had EXIF: I wanna go back and shoot this whole cemetery with the same setup. I know I was shooting HP-5 in a Nikon; maybe my 35mm f/2?

[jpelg]

I'm thinking about getting a decent inkjet printer to print my own digital images. Mostly black & white, occasionally color. primarily smaller prints, probably as large as 8.5x11, at least for now. Not sure of quantities, or frequencies at this point yet. 

I do have a local shop that still develops film & has digital printing capability, but my few recent dealings with them have not been too favorable. Looking for quality a few notches above Walgreens, as well as having more control over the process. Also looking to jumpstart my digital darkroom skills (very hobbyist-level, mind you) & see where it goes. I like giving prints as gifts too. 

Epson seems to have the pro edge (I am particularly drawn to their models with "Advanced Black and White Photo Mode" tech), with Canon running second, I think. But even within each of their lineups, each model has different ink tech & the numbers of cartridges they use, so the best stuff doesn't really trickle directly downstream.

Does anyone here print their photos? If so, what's your setup & flow?

[Knuckledragger]

Since some time 2008, when I shoot film I use the voice recorder app on my phone to record the time, date, exposure settings, lens, filters, zoom in mm (if applicable) on every shot I take.  It's a PITA, but it saves my sanity.  I learned a long time ago I am incapable of guessing what lens I used.  Take this not very interesting shot taken with Kodak Gold 200 in 2008:

When I got the scans back in '08, I didn't really like it so I ignored it for 15 years.  Revisiting it in 2023, I guess it was taken with my 35mm F/2, which I used a lot with film bodies at the time.  I checked my notes and .... "Hadley, 7/02/08 - 8:07PM - 135mm Orestor @ F/8."  I can't reliably tell the difference between a 35mm and 135mm on a full frame, in a location I know and have visited for almost five decades.  Write your shit down.  Future you will be very thankful.

[EdipisReks1]

That is way too organized for me! I guess I need a digital back on my F100. Or a moleskine. That’s a good pic, BTW!
 

Got the indoor portrait setup set up.  I have a bunch of AI lenses, but I find the 50 f/1.4 to be great indoors. 

On 5/12/2024 at 7:40 AM, jpelg said:

I'm thinking about getting a decent inkjet printer to print my own digital images. Mostly black & white, occasionally color. primarily smaller prints, probably as large as 8.5x11, at least for now. Not sure of quantities, or frequencies at this point yet. 

I do have a local shop that still develops film & has digital printing capability, but my few recent dealings with them have not been too favorable. Looking for quality a few notches above Walgreens, as well as having more control over the process. Also looking to jumpstart my digital darkroom skills (very hobbyist-level, mind you) & see where it goes. I like giving prints as gifts too. 

Epson seems to have the pro edge (I am particularly drawn to their models with "Advanced Black and White Photo Mode" tech), with Canon running second, I think. But even within each of their lineups, each model has different ink tech & the numbers of cartridges they use, so the best stuff doesn't really trickle directly downstream.

Does anyone here print their photos? If so, what's your setup & flow?

I’m in the same boat. It looks like any of the 14” capable printers are good, but they are pricey and take up a lot of room. Why I haven’t gotten one yet. 

Edited May 13 by EdipisReks1

[Knuckledragger]

If you're insistent on shooting film and want EXIF, you could search for a Canon EOS-1V or Nikon F6.  The 1V can store exposure info for "100 rolls of 36 exposure film" and the F6 can save information for <mumble> exposures to CF with the MV-1 card reader. 

 

All of these things are 20 or so years old now and don't grow on trees.  In 2009 or so, I had a chance to get a clean EOS-1V, 85mm F/1.8 and 200mm F/2.8L (the "L" no one remembers) for like $1100 shipped.  I didn't buy it and have been kicking myself ever since.  Of course, given what I've done in the last 15 years, I'd probably have spent $30 on batteries for the 1V and put 2 rolls of film through it.  Such is life.

[blessingx]

14 hours ago, jpelg said:

I'm thinking about getting a decent inkjet printer to print my own digital images. Mostly black & white, occasionally color. primarily smaller prints, probably as large as 8.5x11, at least for now. Not sure of quantities, or frequencies at this point yet. 

...

Does anyone here print their photos? If so, what's your setup & flow?

Curious also. 

 

For those in Bay Area or passing through before July 21st, the comprehensive Irving Penn exhibit at the de Young is outstanding. Saw yesterday. Couple snaps with M9M & LLL 35 8-element. Accompanying book. 

 

There's also a related Fashioning San Francisco: A Century of Style show one floor up. 

Edited May 13 by blessingx

[EdipisReks1]

Picked up a Yashicaflex LM with working light meter. And a Bronica 645 ETRSi body and metering finder. Will be a while before I have Bronica shots, as I don’t have lenses yet, but I think that will work. The LM has a much brighter finder, supposedly, than my Yashicaflex C, with better optics on the taking, and a ground glass with a grid. It was $100, so I’m not to worried if it’s no better than what I have. 

Edited May 13 by EdipisReks1

[dsavitsk]

1 hour ago, EdipisReks1 said:

And a Bronica

Very nice underappreciated cameras.

[EdipisReks1]

I’m looking forward to it! Everything I’ve read suggests it’s perfect for my needs, and the prices are right. Just need to figure out what lenses I want.

[EdipisReks1]

Accidental double exposure and accidental cat. 

[EdipisReks1]

Not terrible for a camera with focus issues (that was the N8008; half my shots are super soft; F100 hopefully doesn’t have a similar issue). HP-5 definitely wants more exposure: this shot was taken in bright sunlight at the box ISO, and I would have gone at least a stop faster in hindsight.

Edited May 16 by EdipisReks1

[EdipisReks1]

For it only being half a stop brighter, the finder on the Yashicamat LM is a lot more usable than the Yashicaflex C, especially since it has a grid and a focus circle. Surprisingly the light meter seems to be about right, which I’m happy for as it doesn’t have a cold shoe for my little Reflx Labs light meter (I would otherwise just use my phone, but it’s less fun to have to pull something out of my pocket to use). I’m looking forward to running some Portra 400 through this. 

[Knuckledragger]

I've owned a bunch of film bodies over the years, including two Canon SLRs.  I had a Rebel G in the mid 00s and put a number of rolls of film through it.  I got rid of it, but I no longer remember the circumstances.  I have to this day a Rebel K2, which is very consumer grade, but it works.  Paradoxically, I exposed fewer total frames with the K2, but I worked much harder with it.   Last summer I blew the metaphorical and physical dust off the K2 and ran some slide and print film through it.  I still haven't developed any of the above, but that's another matter.  The first task the Rebel presented me with was cleaning the ...gunk that the soft touch plastic grips had become. 

 

I had to do the same thing with the Lecia P&S I stumbled upon as well as my IR-modified PowerShot G2.  Soft grips are the devil.  When I got rid of the Rebel G, I kept its kit lens, which is a boring 35-80mm zoom.  I also still have the K2's kit lens, which is an absolutely abysmal 28-90mm.  The 28-90 is so fantastically bad it's kind of amazing.  It's not "silly lo-fi lens" bad like the Holga 60mm F/8:

 

The 28-90 is both boring and bad: not very sharp at any aperture, wretched color transmission and very poor contrast.  It also has impressive amounts of barrel distortion throughout its zoom range.  I'm not one who complains about distortion under normal circumstances.  I shot with the infamous EF-S 17-85mm for years, which is a goddamn fisheye at the wide end. 

Last week I had the bright idea to clean up both the 35-80 and 28-90 and strap them to my 30MP 5D4.  I actually haven't shot with the former, but I gave the latter quite a workout and it returned were a frothy mix of bad and boring.  Fool that I am, I spent considerable time editing some of the better shots.

Morning Glory Farm.  F/13 at the wide end.  The unedited photo lacked color, most sharpness and contrast.  The distortion is present here but largely irrelevant.

 

My back yard.  Zoomed almost all the way in (88mm) and wide open (F/5.6).  Were I shooting seriously, I'd have bumped up the ISO considerably and stopped way down.  I also used a LUT, which helped add some color.

 

Hilariously artificial skies above Sweetened Water Farm.  F/14 at the wide end.

 

The most famous little shack on MV.  35mm and F/11.  As was true for all of the above images, I spent ages editing this one in Luminar 4 (including applying a LUT to it) and then Photoshop.  For this one in particular I went as far as comparing this shot to other photos I'd taken of the same building to correct the barrel distortion as much as I could. 

I will never shoot with the 28-90 again.  I'm thinking about donating it to the local charity shop.  I'm going to try out the 35-80 this weekend.  It can't be any worse ...can it?  I'm going back to my trusty 50mm F/1.8 Mark I once this little experiment finishes.

[EdipisReks1]

I’m glad all of my cameras have firm leatherette: the soft stuff definitely is the devil. How did you clean it up? I know there are products for it specifically, but I’ve always used isopropyl alcohol, with mixed results. 

[EdipisReks1]

Does anybody have any film projects in the works? I’ll be moving to small town Kentucky, to Danville, specifically, within the next six months, and will be visiting a lot before I move. It’s an historic town surrounded by sprawl. I want to document the storefronts and signs of the historic downtown with those of the sprawl that has grown around it. I envision having a few books made and sold at the local historical society gift shop (they sell lots of boutique local things, so I think it’ll be no issue having some Printique books there, just to share).

Edited May 18 by EdipisReks1

[EdipisReks1]

If anybody with photoshop skills is willing, would you take a look at this photo? It's shot number one of the project.  I can't retake it because they have subsequently fixed the sign. The photo was taken before I know there was crap on the sensor, so there is... crap on the sensor. I have Photoshopped it out as best I can, but I'm out of my depth. It's sort of worst case scenario: round junk over linear patterns. Attached is a zip with my .psp file after I touched it up and the DNG out of camera. I'll give you an acknowledgement in the book, if it ever gets made, if you were willing.

Archive.zip

[padam]

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ol8lUMPigsDow7JJKE9NR0FnBjheBc89?usp=sharing

Once you import this DNG into Lightroom, it should already contain the changes I've made embedded into the file.
You can still edit further in PS, but this looks good to me.
There is no scientific way to use the content-aware remove healing tool, just a lot of trial and error with the sizing and positioning.

[EdipisReks1]

That looks great! I did the same thing, using content aware healing and then fiddling with it, but I couldn't keep the lines nearly as straight. Thank you! If the book ever gets made (keep in mind I might have 5 made), you'll get an acknowledgment.

Straight out of camera: I really love how the 28mm Summilux looks, wide open. Some people complain about the bokeh, but I think it's rather nice. Maybe not as dramatic as some lenses, but very sightly on reflections and light sources. The Leica jpeg processing is also pretty decent. I really love this little camera.

Edited May 18 by EdipisReks1

[blessingx]

Battles are just starting...

https://petapixel.com/2024/05/20/asmp-calls-out-adobe-for-its-shocking-dismissal-of-photography/

 

[EdipisReks1]