Analog film photography and cameras

cgrayson, where abouts are those shots from, i think i recognise a couple of the places

All of them are in Newcastle.

thought so. heaton park running track?

It is indeed.

Sorry if repost...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300558952023

I'd love to see how they do things like that, do they just run a lens (or whatever) though a big saw or do they disassemble, cut each part then reassemble?

Lasers.

I bought an untested XA2 off eBay the other day for a few quid. It turned up today and it's actually an XA, the battery compartment had a corroded battery wedged in that I managed to get out, I cleaned it up and put some fresh batteries in and it appears to work! Will put a roll of film through today

this is my fav.

Anyone use lomography cameras?

i find they're perfect if you want to capture new age fun but with a vintage feel

All joking aside, Lubitels are lovely, once you get used to them. Super bright lens.

i find they're perfect if you want to capture new age fun but with a vintage feel

ha!

for the money they charge you can invariably do infinitely better, and their own-brand 'lomography' cameras (not the lomos) tend to be pretty shit, and very expensive. the fisheye one is fun though. for the money of a lubitel (on their site) you could probably get a yashicamat, or maybe even a rolleiflex. not saying the lubitel is a bad camera though..

also they seem to make people think that every photo you take will be super-saturated and with very high contrast, but this is simply down to the cross-processing of the film. most of the cameras don't really offer anything that you couldn't achieve with cheaper, better made ones.

£280 for a lomo lc-a is completely ridiculous, as is the mark-up on the other cameras they sell. zenit-e (a great camera), for example can be had for <£20 on ebay, yet they charge £145.

the horizon panoramic camera is really cool though.
[/ramble]

Dodgy colour on the first two, some old expired Fuji slide film re-branded by Lomography, scans came out almost completely magenta. Others are Superia 200 and Acros, all shot on AE-1. Just discovered my 28mm has a massive patch of fungus. Any recommendations for a replacement FD?

Lovely stuff.

I agree with the lomo sentiment...far too expensive. The best lomo I've used is the Vivitar Ultra Wide and Slim. It's a point and shoot but they come out stunning! Cheap too.

the lomo ac+ is a beaut tho

ive only used one once but i honestly fail to see what the hype is about. i'd much rather have my xa2: it takes better pictures, it's more reliable, it only cost £15, and if i broke it i'd be able to afford a new one.

Some new scans - Minolta Dynax 4 - Kodak 400TX

/attachments/40211

and OM10 - Ilford XP2 super.

/attachments/40212

/attachments/40213

3 Attachments

ive only used one once but i honestly fail to see what the hype is about. i'd much rather have my xa2: it takes better pictures, it's more reliable, it only cost £15, and if i broke it i'd be able to afford a new one.

I think the hype is because its a remake of the original camera that started the lomo revolution off.

I have a Diana Mini but the camera shake on it is horrid, worst trigger mech ever.

it's not really a revolution though is it? more of a marketing rip-off.
the lc-a is basically just a normal compact camera.

After going through this thread, I've suddenly realised I have 10-odd rolls of film which have been through my various film cameras (all Olympus: OM-2n, Trip 35, 35RC). Should probably get them developed and scanned... might have to send off an order to Peak Imaging before this summer is out!

LC-A got me into photography though, before that I had a pretty good manual SLR and knew how to use it and how to develop and print, but I didn't use it that much. When I got an LC-A I carried it around pretty much everyday for a few years. Nothing feels as good to use, to me. Click-zone focus, one-handed control of everything from lens-cap to shutter-button, going from a cold start to taking a photo in less than 2 seconds, and intuitive playing around like covering the photocell to force long exposures. I loved it. Unfortunately the quality of the lens is really not that good - what you'd expect given the size of it - and I got tired of that and the distortion.

In short, great to use, but frustrating image quality.

[QUOTE=machineisbored;2169423 Super bright lens.[/QUOTE]

???

It has an internal light source that's equivalent to a 2.5K hmi.

f=1/4.5 my friend. That's right. If you look through it, it actually amplifies the light and sears your retinas off