Buying a medium format camera

You could clip it to the edge of the toilet bowl like one of those blue or green toilet cleaners. Your film would get washed with every flush!

Steve.
 
CT said:
LOL. That's about it. You just can't over-wash film or prints at all. Many many years after the event with insufficient washing, mysterious yellow or brown stains can start appearing on prints. I see it all the time with old prints I get for restoration.
Click to expand...

You can overwash prints, but it takes a good few hours rather than a few minutes too long. I have the luxury of a camera club, so I tend to use the archival washing gear there and leave it in for an hour or so before drying.
 
I left my 120 in the wash for half an hour today and my photography teacher laughed and said "Why? It only needs 5 minutes?!" and I was like "Oh :("

Ah well!

So I developed my first roll of 120 film today. An Ilford HP5.
Exciting, exciting stuff. It looked pretty well exposed and super detailed. Can't wait to scan them in :)
 
Fuji 160S is my favourite of the moment. Kodak Portra is also nice. both the fuji 160 and potra come in saturated or "normal" flavours so you can choose.
 
Strangely enough no, 160S is more muted, they describe 160C as normal but it seems a bit saturated for me, I like 160S personally, this is a recent example.

04-160S012.jpg


Thats pretty much how i remember the colours so "muted" seems normal to me. There may be a bit of a red cast on that one, dont blame the film, my monitor isn't calibrated so I cant really tell:bang:
 
And if you like saturated, Kodak recently announced that Ektar 100 would be available in 120 size soon.


Steve.
 
I've not had chance to play with my 35mm Ektar yet, is it really that saturated?
 
For portraiture my favourite 120 colour film was Fuji Reala, but for weddings I nearly always used Fuji NSP160.

Not sure if either are still available though!

Quick update:

Reala is still available in 120 size and NSP160 was improved and changed to NPS160 six years ago with more exposure lattitude and a better grain structure. Christ that must be good then, because the original was a fantastic film.
 
Oh for god's sake.

So, get my first set of medium format negatives dev'd and dried. Bring them home.
Guess what, the scanner I have doesn't scan medium format.

I wish my dad would do some bloody research before making impulse purchases on such random things.
 
I have to say, Don't rule out the Hassy! I found a 501 on ebay for £70! With a film back!, although the lens was £150! All works perfectly! I suggest spending the leftover £30 on a decent lightmeter or a CLA! (the decent lightmeter is a MUST, as I found out. damn, I still need one, mine died on me the other day lol!
 
AleksanderLoesch said:
I have to say, Don't rule out the Hassy! I found a 501 on ebay for £70! With a film back!, although the lens was £150! All works perfectly! I suggest spending the leftover £30 on a decent lightmeter or a CLA! (the decent lightmeter is a MUST, as I found out. damn, I still need one, mine died on me the other day lol!
Click to expand...

Thing with a lightmeter is that most of my exposures aren't 'correct' exposures as the lightmeter would want me to do. I use my 40d to check exposures correctly.
But that's pretty bargains! nice find!
 
my exposures aren't 'correct' exposures as the lightmeter would want me to do
Click to expand...

tut tut tut young man. The lightmeter doesn't "want" you to do anything, it just tells you what it sees. ;)

Now why don't put those films on a lightbox and photograph them, if you cant scan. :D
 
Haha sorry!

Basically, I'm not clever enough to work out what settings to use using the lightmeter as context!

Lightbox?!
Yeah right!

(by that I mean I don't have a lightbox :p I'll wait until Dad gets home and borrow his laptop - makeshift lightbox as seen on here :D)
 
I thought you were saying you had a lightmeter but didn't use it cos you couldn't figure it out and you were using a dslr to meter.
It coulda come with the Mamiya....I dunno.....:shrug:


:)


dazzi's got it, slide copy that stuffs.....or it never happened :LOL:
 
nope, it has to be lit from behind, the light would have to be in the lid.
a normal document scanner lights the surface it is recording.
you can Heath Robinson something together, but....its a faff.
soon as you drop out of the 35mm comfort zone, stuff conspires to thwart in one way or another.
Best chance of a half decent result is to slide copy, you just need a flat light source and a square hole cut in some thick card or something.
 
Its how they used to do it in the olden days if they wanted a copy of a slide or neg.

zoom-copierreview.jpg



light it from behind, and photograph it
 
that's about the size of it..

you'll have to do it in the dark obviously, the card is really just to mask off stray light.
a proper slide copier like the one attached to that fuji, is tubed so no light except for what comes through the neg, is captured.
 
Easiest way is to buy an epson 3170 or 3200 scanner as they have transparancy adapters and daylight lamps fitted in their lids.

ebay one
 
1. put neg on light box
2. put card over lightbox with the neg in the hole you cut, so the only light you see is what's coming through the neg.
3. turn all the light off in the room.
4. shoot
5. end

Using a 50 will put you further away from the neg than if you used a macro lens, but you don't need one for this exercise.


capiche ??
 
1. put neg on flatbed scanner
2, put card mask over top to stop flare
3. put lightbox or diffused light source on top of neg
4. scan

you can leave the light on as it will not affect the image, after doing a quick prescan you can crop to scan just around the image and really increase the dpi
 
joxby said:
1. put neg on light box
2. put card over lightbox with the neg in the hole you cut, so the only light you see is what's coming through the neg.
3. turn all the light off in the room.
4. shoot
5. end

Using a 50 will put you further away from the neg than if you used a macro lens, but you don't need one for this exercise.


capiche ??
Click to expand...

Capiche :)
I don't have a 50 anyway.
Just use the 55-250, aye? or the 24-60?

is this just for the purpose of showing you the images?
 
is this just for the purpose of showing you the images?
Click to expand...
(y) the least we deserve don't you think?
 
Food, this thread is delivering so often its nuts. All I'm saying is ya'd better post those pics :) I'd love to know how using the digital camera to testthe ground for your pictures worked out.

Damn this is exciting :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top