Analog film photography and cameras

This thread has reminded me no matter what format you shoot in, no matter whether you use digital or film, out of focus shots still look crap :)

thanks for that......

thanks for that......

Wasn't aimed at you mate, I like your stuff.
But some of the stuff people put up in this thread.....well there are some really awesome shots, and there is some stuff I look at and think did they even bother to attempt to adjust the focus before they hit the shutter.

we're not pro's here.... we take photos to please no one but ourselves... maybe thats how certain people want their images to look.

if i wanted a photo to be perfectly in focus, i wouldn't use a camera with a plastic lens.

don't be so quick to knock people back.

Subsist,
In my opinion the first shot would have been better carried off with a shallow depth of field and critical focus on the eyes, not with the whole shot out of focus.
The second image would look better in focus I think.
The composition of both however is perfect, thats one thing that some people never get no matter how technically adept they become.

we're not pro's here.... we take photos to please no one but ourselves... maybe thats how certain people want their images to look.

if i wanted a photo to be perfectly in focus, i wouldn't use a camera with a plastic lens.

don't be so quick to knock people back.

I'm not knocking the people back here, nearly everyone here knows how to make a good photo, there's a lot of nice work, just sometimes that little bit of extra attention to detail can be the difference between good and great.
Maybe that didn't come out right i'm a bit grumpy and tired this morning, sorry guys.

I've just taken some rolls to be D&P'd at Jessops, New Oxford St. 4 rolls, glossy prints and transferred to CD for £24. Wish me luck.

sounds like good value.

The pics i posted earlier were not meant to be crisp or compsed, I like them to be the complete opposite of what I try to achieve with my proper camera.

Anyone like to play with wide angle photography on 120 roll film?

Home build camera using a Super Angulon 47/5.6 with Graflex back and cassettes for 6x9, 6x7 and 6x6.
The empty Graflex frame can be used to create a front/body for other lenses ;-)

I need Leica M glass!

1 Attachment

I've just taken some rolls to be D&P'd at Jessops, New Oxford St. 4 rolls, glossy prints and transferred to CD for £24. Wish me luck.

ask for no prints, it's cheaper.

Camera - 46 yrs old. Lens - 50 yrs old. APX 100

nice!

MetroLandman, is that your shot, or one belongiong to MPerson? Unless you're the same individual? It is excellent.

Do'h rumbled. Yep, that's me MPerson on the Leica & Rangefinder forums and Metroman on APUG.

My son enjoying a Dandelon & Burdock.

M2 | Elmar-M 50/2.8 (Type 1) | APX 100 | Diafine 5 + 5

Thanks. Sometimes that lens just gives me a tingle!

Filmus-Monochromus

My son enjoying a Dandelon & Burdock.

Enjoying? Bleugh.

Stunning image though.

Point taken. However I had a Rollei on loan for a few weeks and it's da bomb, taken some stunning photos. Never used the TLR, any significant differences? Naturally I'm looking to save cash money If I can.

The only real difference with Twin lens rather than Single lens is 'Parralax Error'. This is the difference between the viewing lens and the taking lens, it's hardly noticible when taking wide angles or landscapes, but becomes more of a problem when shooting up close. However if you are aware of it you can clearly correct for it.

There's lots of graphs and diagrams online that explain the exact difference, but it's never been a problem for me.

hi, just got my first EVER film back (just gave it to the girl in jessops and asked for a cd)

please go easy on me i'm a complete novice.

taken with a pentax p30 (mainly on auto mode) on some cheapo kodax B&W film (dunno what speed etc.)

my thoughts are;

• I got carried away with the cheapo red filter
  
• I need to work on composure and also keeping camera level for portraits etc.
  
• ditch the glare/hood thingy (is this causing the dark corners)
  
• they came out quite grainy (is this caused by film or exposure setting??)
  
  

any advice gratefully received , i reiterate "be gentle it's my first time"

1
23

the first one is dope!
I think the graininess is mainly due to ISO
higher you go more you get sorta thing?

you can sorta get away with harsh grain on b&w though sometimes
and I think I'm correct in saying that the better of professional film will have less grain at the same ISO?

where did you shoot these?

cheers for reply. photos were in mauritius which was ace. The film was 400 iso (reduced to a quid a roll in the airport) but i reckon I should have gone lower considering how bright the sky was etc.

I'm really enjoying grainy 400 films at the moment. I'm getting this one enlarged, the focus is crisp but its super grainy.

Old boy at Ridley Market last week.

Not technically that hot but his face made this image stand out compared to the rest of the set.

M6, Summicron-M 50mm,
Kodak TMAX 400

1 Attachment

ask for no prints, it's cheaper.

I like prints in a large, individual contact sheet kinda way. And I though £24 was cheap enough. They came out OK.

Anyone used Peak Processing? Sent me films off for processing a week ago and not heard nothing yet - i'll give them a few days before chasing them up..

Peak are supposed to be excellent, and are one of the few that do (did?) prints directly from slides. Cibachrome, and previously RA-4.
Could be the postal stike that has caused a backlog. I think I used them quite a while back for d&p from a wedding shoot. No problems.

any one have any Kodacrome left, I'm out, can't find any state side and I want it.

Chris, some of the (UK) Camera Fairs throw these up sometimes, but more and more rarely I think.

120 or 35mm?