Some shots from my AE-1 and Fuji Superia

foodpoison

foodpoison

Messages
6,253
Name
Sean
Edit My Images
Yes
New camera I bought from huanjia :)

Canon AE-1 and Canon 50mm f/1.8 FD.

Me :)
3672821051_9d446cd470_o.jpg


Denby
3673630344_dfa3f647e5_o.jpg


Ford Focus
3672820709_92cc1efa51_o.jpg


Heaven Perhaps?
3672820577_fd8d075bc4_o.jpg


1st obviously not taken by me :p

Number 4 more of a snap but I still like it :)
 
I know!

It's only ISO200 so I was surprised at the grain, but I'll tell you what I'm not complaining :p

the 50mm helps a lot on these.

The only thing is, film is more expensive than digital. Thankfully because of where I work I can put c-41, e-6 or B+W film pretty much for free, and then just scan them myself.
 
Yes yes I know that, and in all honesty, my 40d and 24-60 were in total £450, so considering my AE-1 was £35 I could get an absolute sheeeeet-load of processing done for the price my 40d cost.

So in effect it's not more expensive. however it is expensive for me since I don't have much disposable income to spend on processing, since the bits of spare money i do have need to be spent on other things.

i just resent the fact that i have to spend £5 getting 24 images processed when my 4gb memory card cost me £9.

It is well worth it, it's just a cringey moment when i hand over the dough.
 
foodpoison said:
So in effect it's not more expensive. however it is expensive for me since I don't have much disposable income to spend on processing, since the bits of spare money i do have need to be spent on other things.

i just resent the fact that i have to spend £5 getting 24 images processed when my 4gb memory card cost me £9.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough.

I just answered a post on Photo.Net where someone moaned that as he was just a hobbyist, he couldn't afford the cost of film processing. I pointed out that before digital was heard of, that's all hobbyists had and we all managed to afford it somehow.

I think a lot of the problem is that digital has taught people to take loads of shots then find the one which worked.

If you are going to use film, you need to un-learn that and get to know your equipment well enough that you know you got the shot.

It's just another way of thinking really. I'm quite happy to go out at the weekend and shoot two rolls of film. That could be 72 shots for 35mm or 18 - 30 with medium format depending on which camera I take. The first time I took my 5x4 camera out I could only take four shots as I only had two film holders!


Steve.
 
With digital the cost is effectively one off.
I love film but it's the recurring costs that get me.

With film I do slow down and really take my time, and I have to admit I enjoy it more than digital. Not by much, but it's the ease of use and convenience of digital that wins me over, especially as I don't have my own darkroom.
 
well i had a lovely surprise today, travelled all the way into loxleys to get my medium format film developed to be told they don't do b&w! :thinking::bang:

such a wasted trip, sweated my ass off getting there and the guy said i'd be better buying the chemicals and doing it myself.

he did recommend some expensive place down south but it's just a few rolls that i put through my voigtlander to test it so i don't fancy paying that much to see the crap results of some shots!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top