Analog film photography and cameras

This. Got one this year, absolutely stunning and compact.

I previously had a Mamiya 7. Its a brilliant camera, its fairly compact for MF and the optics are superb. Despite this, I myself downsized to an M6 for the same reasons you've stated - wasn't using it enough, weight & size. If I had the budget i'd absolutely have kept it alongside my M6, but I didn't and I don't really miss it. I admit that I occasionally miss the capabilities of medium format, and I'd love to one day own a Hasselblad, but then I question how much id use that too.

I like how portable my M6 is, its compact, reliable and it just works. I can shove it in my bag and not really know its there. I get 36 exposures vs 10 which is nice too. Maybe its worth going down the same route? Anyway, you can't go wrong with a Mamiya 7, its a nice camera.

In conclusion, I have itchy feet and always consider switching cameras thinking it will somehow force me to step outside more. Im trying to focus on taking pictures regardless of the thing in my hand!

the difference isn't that great

yes it fuckin is

Yea this too, the difference is huge and I expect most people could differentiate between 35mm and MF with ease. It all depends on what the purpose is.

@Bratkartoffles @MoroderOnABike

It all depends on what the purpose is.

Well quite, note the caveats in my original post please.

If you're printing large then obvs medium format is the way to go. Saw some of Vivian Maier's Rolleiflex negs printed large at Photo London this year and they were stunning.

However, printing A4 or smaller (or just posting on the internets) from a fine grained 35mm neg shot on sharp glass the difference ain't going to be that great.

Yea, what I'm trying to say is that the difference is huge, but it can be subtle dependant on the intended use/output.

I tend to shoot slower film in 35mm, because - faster lenses. That closes the gap (re image detail).

For sure there is a different depth/flatness thing.

@jambon just needs a holiday with the Hasselblad. Same time next year?

However, printing A4 or smaller (or just posting on the internets) from a fine grained 35mm neg shot on sharp glass the difference ain't going to be that great.

You might wanna look at a few A4 prints of something shot on 35mm with a really good lens, and then go ahead and put A4's of the same stuff shot on medium format next to it.

I'm sure you will notice there's really quite a difference, and it's not just about the fucking sharpness. Yes of course the Leica shot on fine grained film looks great (and sharp), but it's about much more than that.
The much bigger neg gives a lot more information, and you see this, for example, in the colours, especially in transitions of suble colours (like skin).
Also the equivalent focal lenghts still look very different shot on various formats (look at large format to see this really clearly) and it all renders more 3D / life-like (what @miro refers to as the "depth/flatness thing" I suppose).

Sorry if this comes across as if I was talking from a high horse but to me this "you don't see it anyway unless you print A0" and "35mm is sharp enough if proper glass and film is used" is really missing the point completely.

A few weeks ago somebody on here (sorry forgot who it was) posted a landscape shot (scenery looking down a hilly area, evening sun if I recall correctly) in this thread that struck me immediately, the way the whole thing looked, colours, rendering, depth, everything.. really fucking nice and completely on another level compared to 35mm.
My point being yes you do see it very much even if it's just a small .jpg viewed on a work laptop with a shit screen.

[edit] it was a shot by @MoroderOnABike but the imgur-hosted image is not showing any more
: ]

Yashica T4, not sure on the film.

2 Attachments

Om4, Portra 160 - anyone know where I should send my OM4 body to be fixed? I'm pretty sure the mirror is misaligned or something as it isn't focussing properly but the problem apparently isn't with the lens.

2 Attachments

Dog has facial expression like Snoop Dogg

Did you go to the moon?

I tend to shoot slower film in 35mm, because - faster lenses.

Suppresses guilt of selling the 50mm f/1.2...

I think shooting more is the priority for me, as opposed to dropping a load of cash on a 'better' camera. If I get back into it then there may be an argument for spending a lot of money, but not right now. I'm away this weekend so will pack the 35mm and see how we go. If not, see you in 6 months time - always appreciated :D

well put, the 105 2.4 on pentax 67 is a good example of this

@jambon wanna borrow something?

Shrugs speaking of my own experience from A4 ink jet prints from scans, I don't notice much of a difference. I'm sure other experiences are available (especially as I'm shooting 6x6 and 6x4.5, not shot 6x7 or 6x9).

[troll]I wouldn't put old formulas from Leica in the sharp glass category, I'm talking about modern Nikon and Canon glass ;)[/troll]

Yes (the version in the Houston space centre anyway).

@jambon wanna borrow something?

That's very kind thank you. Will shoot some rolls of 35mm and if the mojo doesn't become back I might hit you up.

Even fairly ordinary lenses out-resolve colour negative film ... but you see the colour aberrations easily. So something good (for instance nice Zeiss or Minolta lenses) holds colour together well whilst old simple-formula lenses (or badly made modern lenses) look a bit ropey.

^ This is why both of these things can be true at the same time:

• iso 100 b&w can look seriously sick on a 35mm and a good lens.
  
• Colour neg in 120 can look pretty soft, even with ok lenses.
  
  

{edited (whilst drunk) because drunk}

Cool, how was it? I was at Cape Canaveral a few weeks back.

That sounds like a job Aperture could do?

If not there is this fella who has a top rep (but I have no 1st hand experience of)
http://www.om-doktor.de/

Bronica ETRS / Portra 400.

1 Attachment

Heads up; just picked up some Portra 400 35mm from Carmarthan Cameras for a reasonable price of £43. Came back in stock today too.

I'm in LA at the moment, and for some reason a box of Portra is £34 here. I would offer to bring back loads but I'm at my baggage allowance limit already!

Whaaa?? Must be the import fees as Im sure its made by Eastman Kodak someplace NY. Next time I'm out ill have to stock up! Do you know how much Portra 800 is out there?

About £8 to £9 a roll it seems