Entry to film photography

[LeoTheSolar]

Sounds like a good plan. Remember many of the older cameras are sort of different than their more modern counterparts eg. you'll see DIN instead of ASO. The shutter speeds do not often match up with the geometric progression of the aperture scales so it makes exposure settings a little more arcane. Arcane...that is a good word to describe the old rigs. You have to get to Leica IIIG really before you start recognizing things that you see on a later model camera. Things to look for upon purchase. Check shutter curtains thoroughly. Rangefinder patch and alignment. Dry fire the camera while inspecting it. Fire it at different settings and look for anomalous type stuff. Rangefinders tend to be more temperamental than slr's part of the reason they were eventually supplanted by the slrs.

You may want to look into the Minolta CLE. A bit more modern type of rangefinder very reasonably priced on the used market right now but just do your research so that you will know what you are up against. The CLE is a Leitz Minolta joint effort and a M mount camera. Something along these lines or M2 M3 Bessa would probably be the best place to start if at all possible. Looks like you are sold on the rangefinder on paper at least...that is a good thing...we need more rangefinder folks in the world.

Well its atleast I like the concept much more than slr's. I dont think i'll be doing macro, or things thats require very precise framing anyways. Mostly will be just landscapes, potrait with background context, amusing sightings. Im the type that goes touristy and not the "today im going out for a shoot at so-and-so location" kind. So pretty much the more pleasant styling will be better to carry around 24/7. Minolta CLE runs on battery 😅

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Sounds like a good plan. Remember many of the older cameras are sort of different than their more modern counterparts eg. you'll see DIN instead of ASO. The shutter speeds do not often match up with the geometric progression of the aperture scales so it makes exposure settings a little more arcane. Arcane...that is a good word to describe the old rigs. You have to get to Leica IIIG really before you start recognizing things that you see on a later model camera. Things to look for upon purchase. Check shutter curtains thoroughly. Rangefinder patch and alignment. Dry fire the camera while inspecting it. Fire it at different settings and look for anomalous type stuff. Rangefinders tend to be more temperamental than slr's part of the reason they were eventually supplanted by the slrs.

You may want to look into the Minolta CLE. A bit more modern type of rangefinder very reasonably priced on the used market right now but just do your research so that you will know what you are up against. The CLE is a Leitz Minolta joint effort and a M mount camera. Something along these lines or M2 M3 Bessa would probably be the best place to start if at all possible. Looks like you are sold on the rangefinder on paper at least...that is a good thing...we need more rangefinder folks in the world.

Cheapest digital rangefinder (still pricey though - it is difficult to engineer rangefinder parameters into digital not to mention it is so niche nowadays)...and a cult classic...Epson RD models

One of the things I love about RF cameras is their silence. I once owned a black Canonet (the old Canon 7S is another cool classic rangefinder) that was cherry cosmetically and functionality wise. Smoother than a Swiss watch. That camera found me always checking the film counter to see if I had shot or not...that is how quiet the shutter was on that camera!

Here is my "space" camera...still have it...these can be had for a song and a dance and they are incredibly well made excellent rangefinder cameras...these are Ansco made by Minolta badged for America. There are tons of these Minolta fixed lens units some of the later ones are very nice and fully controllable. I paid 30 bucks for mine a few years ago...every time I hold it I think wow I bought this for only 30 dollars...it feels like it should cost 400 dollars or something. Read the story about the space camera here

The thing with the shutter speed, I read about the one such as on Leica III where they have their own set of shutter speed that doesn't jump by full stops. I expect those to be incredibly hard to use sunny 16 rule when I need to change by full stops to compensate.

I have a different question that probably applies to digital also. It's on selective exposure on different parts of the same scene. In film I guess it can only be done using dodge and burn? Any on-field ways I can achieve that without using filters? On like let's say a silhouette with a bright, but not quite enough scenario

 

[Nikonzen]

This is how you know you are a born photographer - you carry a camera around with you 24-7 and not the one on your phone either!

I have done that often in the past and most of the time I still have the fanny pack bag some where near me at all times but I seem to go through all or nothing type spells nowadays. I have this old FE that I carried around every where with me a few years usually with a pancake 50 on it made for a real lightweight small one hander rig...that camera is indestructible and just will not miss despite whatever one throws at it.

 

[Nikonzen]

The thing with the shutter speed, I read about the one such as on Leica III where they have their own set of shutter speed that doesn't jump by full stops. I expect those to be incredibly hard to use sunny 16 rule when I need to change by full stops to compensate.

I have a different question that probably applies to digital also. It's on selective exposure on different parts of the same scene. In film I guess it can only be done using dodge and burn? Any on-field ways I can achieve that without using filters? On like let's say a silhouette with a bright, but not quite enough scenario

Yes you are spot on about the first part. Yes I would liken it to an American trying to use the metric system...sorry that is the best example I can think of. LOL

My solution for the second part has been to move the film scan into a digital darkroom. Filters are very important to film IMO. Even more so in B&W...with film there is no good reason to forsake the filters as long as you have good quality filters. Not many filters for color really just a handful. They are definitely part of the film system in my books that being said I only use them in certain situations and not really that often.

I like melding the technologies if you will...as much as I like purely mechanical cameras. I mean you are talking to a guy that now uses a digital camera in full manual mode no meter with lenses all of which predate 1980 heck I have one that is a 1963 model! For some reason beyond me I can't seem to hold onto any AF lenses for very long haha. I've tried. I use various techniques chimping bracketing historygrams etc. I essentially have brought my film learned foundations and placed them into my new digital toolbox. Ask me about AF and I really can't tell you a lot...hahaha Ask folks who have shot alongside me and they will tell you it is amazing how he does that. I can almost pick up any camera anywhere and know how to use it effectively right from the get I bet. It is simple really once you are rooted on firm ground.

OK here is something that may be of importance to note. The one thing that I have had the most difficulty with is focus. I wear glasses because I cannot see things in the distance to save my soul...very poor vision. Add middle age to that. It makes it very challenging but I have gotten much better at it with more consistency. It took 3 or 4 years of fairly heavy shooting to get to that level however.

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Yes you are spot on about the first part. Yes I would liken it to an American trying to use the metric system...sorry that is the best example I can think of. LOL

My solution for the second part has been to move the film scan into a digital darkroom. Filters are very important to film IMO. Even more so in B&W...with film there is no good reason to forsake the filters as long as you have good quality filters. Not many filters for color really just a handful. They are definitely part of the film system in my books that being said I only use them in certain situations and not really that often.

I like melding the technologies if you will...as much as I like purely mechanical cameras. I mean you are talking to a guy that now uses a digital camera in full manual mode no meter with lenses all of which predate 1980 heck I have one that is a 1963 model! For some reason beyond me I can't seem to hold onto any AF lenses for very long haha. I've tried. I use various techniques chimping bracketing historygrams etc. I essentially have brought my film learned foundations and placed them into my new digital toolbox. Ask me about AF and I really can't tell you a lot...hahaha Ask folks who have shot alongside me and they will tell you it is amazing how he does that. I can almost pick up any camera anywhere and know how to use it effectively right from the get I bet. It is simple really once you are rooted on firm ground.

I think digital editing is inevitable then. I don't see myself going insane with all the safe light setup. I assume filters are going to be a pain to use on a rangefinder, since there's no TTL, you can't align the filter(example an ND filter) with the scene, right?

 

[Nikonzen]

I think digital editing is inevitable then. I don't see myself going insane with all the safe light setup. I assume filters are going to be a pain to use on a rangefinder, since there's no TTL, you can't align the filter(example an ND filter) with the scene, right?

It is just what I have discovered. There are others who still practice the traditional way and there is something to be said for that too. I have always been about available light only. Now a good 5 years into the hobby am I just beginning to take on flash seriously but this is really only because my photography has grown to the level such that flash is sort of the next step.

Some rangefinders do have TTL capabilities.

With the filters and color one might use a CP filter for effect. Maybe a warming type filter again it is effect. If you are shooting a portrait in the sun with a wide open aperture you might need a ND filter to knock out a stop or two of overpowering light. B&W filters are a whole different ballgame. Which brings us to another important aspect in the discussion of film - B&W.

If you want to learn a different way to see things learn B&W. Learn to see in tones and then you will learn one of the great secrets of photography. Contrast.

 

[LeoTheSolar]

It is just what I have discovered. There are others who still practice the traditional way and there is something to be said for that too. I have always been about available light only. Now a good 5 years into the hobby am I just beginning to take on flash seriously but this is really only because my photography has grown to the level such that flash is sort of the next step.

Some rangefinders do have TTL capabilities.

With the filters and color one might use a CP filter for effect. Maybe a warming type filter again it is effect. If you are shooting a portrait in the sun with a wide open aperture you might need a ND filter to knock out a stop or two of overpowering light. B&W filters are a whole different ballgame. Which brings us to another important aspect in the discussion of film - B&W.

If you want to learn a different way to see things learn B&W. Learn to see in tones and then you will learn one of the great secrets of photography. Contrast.

Starting out with b&w but it does sound kind of idiot proof with +5ev tolerance xD I doubt i'll ever take an interest in flash photography thanks to my touristy nature! I like the lighting temperature alot better from the sun and fires too. Fading of florescent balanced film wouldn't affect me all that much I guess

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Hey guys! Its been awhile hasnt it. Im here to share images from my first roll(Kodak Ultra Max 400)! Developed and scanned at Lomo Gallery Store(THEY FORGOT MY PRINT ORDER!!Dayum have to go down tomorrow again).

 

[LeoTheSolar]

I have totally no idea what's the first one lol...Thats the first frame of the roll and supposed to be a takoyaki stand :dunno:

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Here's some more

 

[oceanpriest]

what camera and lens u are using? very glowing :what:

 

[Octarine]

what camera and lens u are using? very glowing :what:

Looks like some fogging as I had it on a filter not used for a long time.

 

[LeoTheSolar]

what camera and lens u are using? very glowing :what:

The lens has got some fungus I think. But nothing I can clean. It's a fixed lens rangefinder with fixed clear filter on the front. SOFTTT pics

 

[Nikonzen]

Many of the fixed lens units can be flooded with rosonol lighter flood to clean the ap blades and you couldtry to get the fungus then...all that is required is a good set of spanners and some guidelines...if at some point you would want to DIY clean up let me know and I'll try to provide you with some information about the process.

Looks like you are on your way Leo! I sense some good photography out of you.

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Many of the fixed lens units can be flooded with rosonol lighter flood to clean the ap blades and you couldtry to get the fungus then...all that is required is a good set of spanners and some guidelines...if at some point you would want to DIY clean up let me know and I'll try to provide you with some information about the process.

Looks like you are on your way Leo! I sense some good photography out of you.

Thanks for the encouragement and advice! Rangefinders are great! But I think i'll look for one with brighter and larger rangefinder patch. I keep getting too carried away, forgetting to focus!
I was getting interested in tlr since the waist level ground glass and larger format seems to fit landscapes and posed portraits quite well. But it seems ridiculously heavy. Lubitel 166+ the all plasticky one from lomo was supposed to be light but when I picked it up... What even makes tlr s so heavy? Their internal construction is similar to slr without the flippy mirror mechanism, so shouldn't they be lighter than slr s? :0
How do tlr focus anyways? Same as rangefinder style focusing?

 

[oceanpriest]

Thanks for the encouragement and advice! Rangefinders are great! But I think i'll look for one with brighter and larger rangefinder patch. I keep getting too carried away, forgetting to focus!
I was getting interested in tlr since the waist level ground glass and larger format seems to fit landscapes and posed portraits quite well. But it seems ridiculously heavy. Lubitel 166+ the all plasticky one from lomo was supposed to be light but when I picked it up... What even makes tlr s so heavy? Their internal construction is similar to slr without the flippy mirror mechanism, so shouldn't they be lighter than slr s? :0
How do tlr focus anyways? Same as rangefinder style focusing?

there's one seagull 205 rangefinder on Buy and Sell section

TLR is quite light compared to other medium format camera (Hasselblad, contax 645, etc), and Seagull TLR is even lighter.

TLR focusing mechanism is almost same as SLR, u must make sure image is sharp on the focusing screen. The only difference is there are two separate lenses in TLR, one for viewing and one for taking picture. When you are focusing, what you are seeing is from the viewing lens. the viewing lens is coupled to the taking lens.

 

[LeoTheSolar]

there's one seagull 205 rangefinder on Buy and Sell section

TLR is quite light compared to other medium format camera (Hasselblad, contax 645, etc), and Seagull TLR is even lighter.

TLR focusing mechanism is almost same as SLR, u must make sure image is sharp on the focusing screen. The only difference is there are two separate lenses in TLR, one for viewing and one for taking picture. When you are focusing, what you are seeing is from the viewing lens. the viewing lens is coupled to the taking lens.

Thanks for the input! I cant imagine what kind of focusing is that since I hadnt handle any slr before either :') I read on other forum that only some famous brands such as mamiya/rollei/yashica have reliable lens/build quality, that true?

Im like going backwards chronically in terms of equipment. Still considering! Maybe i'll get smth brand new thats less likely to break down on me(fm10/bessa r3m). Time to start da saving!!

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Here's another bunch of questions, please be patient with me! =]

[General]
-How do you shoot unmetered indoors. Is there something similar to sunny 16 for that?
-A rule that utilises a larger ev range than sunny 16?
-With very small aperture(such as F22), it doesn't matter where I focus does it?(i forgot to focus some of the earlier posted images, though still in focus)(the fogginess is due to fungus infected lens I think)

[Rangefinder]
-Let's say I put the rangefinder at its minimal focusing distance, using very large aperture(such as F2). From where till where is in focus? Front element till focused distance? 1/3 front, 2/3 back from focused distance?

 

[Octarine]

-With very small aperture(such as F22), it doesn't matter where I focus does it?(i forgot to focus some of the earlier posted images, though still in focus)(the fogginess is due to fungus infected lens I think)

[Rangefinder]
-Let's say I put the rangefinder at its minimal focusing distance, using very large aperture(such as F2). From where till where is in focus? Front element till focused distance? 1/3 front, 2/3 back from focused distance?

Search for 'hyperfocal distance'. Usually, the depth of field calculators online have this detail included.
It depends on sensor size and focal length.

 

[LeoTheSolar]

Search for 'hyperfocal distance'. Usually, the depth of field calculators online have this detail included.
It depends on sensor size and focal length.

Aite thanks for the lead!