Have we talked about film cameras lately?

pres589 (djronnebaum) said:

 I would feel like even more of an imposter shooting with a medium format camera.  Maybe another decade or so of practice.

As long as you're looking in the right end you'll look a lot more qualified than most people. You'd be amazed at how many people have started conversations with me when I'm using MF gear, especially TLRs. They seem genuinely curious, or had one way back when, or some other story. Hell, I had a guy start talking to me on the subway in NYC, and that's the least likely place to strike up a conversation with a stranger on Earth.

In reply to 02Pilot :

Sent you a PM

In reply to 02Pilot :

It's not that I would appear to be an imposter to others; I don't think my work is good enough to want to deal with all of the costs and such of moving to medium format.  I also value the portability afforded by smaller 35mm cameras. 

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

Yeah, I get it, especially the portability part. When I do use MF these days, it's for a particular purpose; most of the time I just grab a 35mm camera and go.

In reply to 02Pilot :

Sent you a PM. 

Beginning my journey into Medium Format film. Many thanks to 02Pilot for his assistance and for the lovely camera!

In reply to Recon1342 :

Cool!  I have a Seagull TLR laying around here somewhere that looks a lot like that.  I need to blow the dust off it and see if it still works.

Shooting B&W or color?  Doing your own processing?

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

I shoot everything. Haven't started my own processing yet, but I will eventually have a house with a dedicated darkroom. If you are on Instagram, you can find me @recon.1342. Been shooting film since I was in 4th grade and took a photography class.

The GRM forum is the extent of my involvement with "social media."

I just watched a couple videos on the Seagull 4A.  Mine's a 4A103 from the mid-90's.  Funny to hear some go on about how it's a surprisingly competent copy of the highly-regarded Rolleiflex.  It was just the cheapest 6 x 6 camera I could find at the time.

I got mine working pretty good just now.  And there's a roll of film in it.  Exposed.  Scary to think what might be on there, as I don't recall using this camera in this lifetime. 

David - what ended up being on that film you found in that camera? 

I feel like film cameras are going to make their resurgence in 2020 like vinyl has in the music industry. 

I've been on a disposable film camera kick over the last year. It's made for some great photos and surprises after they are developed. Maybe I'll dust off the old Canon 35mm I have laying around somewhere. The disposables are awesome for Champcar race weekends. I buy one for each team member and tell them to shoot away throughout the weekend. We've gotten some really cool stuff out of it. Lots of laughs as well. 

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

Send it to Thedarkroomlab.com and get it developed. Found film is awesome!!!

DirtyBird222 said:

I feel like film cameras are going to make their resurgence in 2020 like vinyl has in the music industry.

And I feel like the curmudgeon who has stuck with it and am annoyed at all the "new cool stuff" the hipsters have discovered. I used to be able to collect cameras a lot more cheaply...

But I am excited about the availability of film improving. Makes life easier for me by a long shot.

Recon1342 said:

DirtyBird222 said:

I feel like film cameras are going to make their resurgence in 2020 like vinyl has in the music industry.

And I feel like the curmudgeon who has stuck with it and am annoyed at all the "new cool stuff" the hipsters have discovered. I used to be able to collect cameras a lot more cheaply...

 

But I am excited about the availability of film improving. Makes life easier for me by a long shot.

That's how I feel about vinyl; however, I'm going to capitalize on the moment and make some monetary gains on albums I care absolutely zero about but were just handed to me by parents and aunts/uncles since they knew I liked collecting. Nothing like having a mint Jackson 5 vinyl that someone is willing to pay ludacrous amounts of money for. 

While in New York last week, I visited Brooklyn Film Camera. Cool shop, cool cameras, cool people. 

Grr.  Going to order some 120 rollfilm today.  B & W so I can develop it here.  Leaning toward TMX100.  Open to suggestions.  What do you guys recommend and why?

TMax 100 should be nice, very small and smooth grain, and prints from 120 should look awesome.  You can't really go wrong there.  I don't mind grain so much and like low light shooting; Tri-X 400 is a favorite for that.  Foma 400 can be fun although it's really more like 250ish ISO instead of 400 and it's not great to push vs. Tri-X or TMax 400.  I shot a roll of Ultrafine Extreme 400 last year for the first time and really liked the results!  Developed it using my normal scheme for developing Tri-X 400 at home.  

All of my B&W development has been done using Clayton F76+ and I push almost everything I shoot two stops or more.  It's a little hard to tell exactly how much of a push I get as I don't have a gray card.  I really need to get about a half dozen things done at home so I can get back into developing film and copying to digital.  I picked F76 due to being a liquid so no powder to mix and it's an easy one-shot solution (use and dump, vs. C-41 use and save and deal with a weakened developer next time around) and the stuff seems to keep pretty well.  Very few times have I come back from developing with F76 and not been at least okay with the results; I like all of the films I've mentioned above in it.  Ilford HP5+ isn't maybe so great in F76 but that's about it.  I've even developed UltraMax 400 in it and been happy with the results, like this;

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

Thanks!  Went with the TMX.  Also got a roll of the HP5+.  I've shot a good bit of Tri-X and it's okay.  Plus-X is extinct now, is it not?

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

I like HP5+ for B&W. Tri-X is a little more contrasty, and I like it just a bit mellower. That being said, you can get pretty good contrast with HP5+ by pushing it.

I like traditional grain B&W films, so HP5+ or TriX for me. I normally shoot at half box speed (the old Ansel Adams "overexpose and underdevelop" routine) to bring up the shadows a bit. Depends a lot on what I'm doing, though - sometimes I'll push a couple stops if I know I'm going to be handheld and using filters.

For color, I absolutely love Ektar with uncoated lenses. It's unmistakable and spectacular.

Odd, I have the opposite thoughts on HP5+ vs. Tri-X 400.  I really wanted to like HP5+ and it just doesn't do it for me although I wonder about changing developer.  Plus-X is long dead; I had to go look up what it was.

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

Shoot.  I wouldn't say "long dead."  According to the wiki, back in 2011, which was like yesterday.  Plus-X was probably one of the last six rolls of B & W that I've shot. 

02Pilot said:

I like traditional grain B&W films, so HP5+ or TriX for me. I normally shoot at half box speed (the old Ansel Adams "overexpose and underdevelop" routine) to bring up the shadows a bit. Depends a lot on what I'm doing, though - sometimes I'll push a couple stops if I know I'm going to be handheld and using filters.

For color, I absolutely love Ektar with uncoated lenses. It's unmistakable and spectacular.

Ektar with coated lenses is pretty good, too. This is Ektar 100 shot at 1/125, f/8; camera was my Pentax K1000, with the old standby SMC-A 50mm f/2.

HP5+ has better midtone separation. TriX feels a little more contrasty in similar development, but it's not a big difference in my experience. I had a link bookmarked that had test shots of color test cards with a bunch of B&W films that showed the differences in response, but for the life of me I can't find it.

Don't be tempted by FP4+ as a substitute for PlusX. They are very different, much more different than HP5+/TriX. Way more contrast in FP4+, without the smoothness. Not a bad film, but produces a very, very different look.

One film I haven't shot in quite a while but enjoyed is Pan F+. It's really slow, but produces beautifully smooth results with a low-contrast lens or careful filtration. I need to get some more.

Let the Ektar samples commence! Rolleiflex Old Standard (1933), 75/3.8 Tessar:

And here's one with no lens at all. Brownie Flash Six-20 (1940s, 6x9 curved film plane) converted to pinhole:

Picked this up off CL a while back.   Couldn't resist the 1:1.4 glass.  I met the guy in a 7-11 parking lot the next county over.  Forgot to check my wallet before I left and rolled up with $36 including a couple bucks in quarters.  I think he was asking $40.  I felt like an idiot, but he took the 36.

https://camerapedia.fandom.com/wiki/Yashica_Lynx_14E