DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> I just bought a Canon film camera!
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 34 of 34, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/05/2007 12:33:31 PM · #26
Originally posted by photodude:
As an Elan owner, I will tell you that one thing you will enjoy is the eye controlled focus. I will never understand why Canon abandoned that technology

I got my Elan IIe specifically to have the eye-controlled focus. Maybe mine is flawed/old/etc., but I wasn't really that impressed with it. It's kind of cool, but I find that it doesn't often work just right, and needs recalibration fairly often.
 05/05/2007 12:41:58 PM · #27
Originally posted by bergiekat:
I've an old Pentax Spotmatic and a Pentax Spotmatic II (light meter in viewfinder) with some great glass for them. I know I'll get blasted for this, but IMO there are certain times when fim, flim...film (isn't that the stuff?) still outshines digital. :P And the darkroom experience itself is so fun!

I DO love my digital camera though, as the cost for "processing" is much better. I KNOW when my photos will turn out (sort-of), or at least can preview them, rather than shooting and hoping only to see inferior results after the film has been developed and the opportunity gone. When you have your film developed now, you can request a digital disk for your own editing. :) Enjoy your camera!


I still have my Spotmatic I bought used nearly 30 yrs ago - my very first camera. If has film loading problems but that battery still works!
 05/05/2007 12:50:13 PM · #28
Originally posted by Rebecca:
After trying both the Ilford mentioned and Kodak Tri-X, I vastly prefer the Tri-X.


I love the grain from Tri-X. I always liked using Kodak T-Max film also.

If you don't have access to a custom lab or a darkroom, but want to shoot B&W, you can always use the Kodak BW400CN, which can be developed at any color lab.
 05/05/2007 03:50:02 PM · #29
I have one of these, with a vertical grip - it looks mean with that on! It also has 'eye control focus', once calibrated you just look at what you want to take and it will focus automatically, however I found it better to use the autofocus on the lens.
Excellent camera, good weight which I like. My Sigma 28mm F1.8 performs much better on this than on my 300D.

Canon EOS 5

I would just use colour, when its developed have them put on cd and then convert to b&w on your pc. B&W processing can be a bit on the expensive side. I was lucky that my son's girlfriend worked at a hight strett photo lab so I would get my film developed, printed and put on cd. Sad to say they have now split up! Doh!

Mike


Message edited by author 2007-05-05 16:08:34.
 05/05/2007 05:18:33 PM · #30
Film is fun. B&W has a look you can't quite get with digital converted to grayscale, and it's fun to process it yourself.

You can get the stuff to develop B&W for like $50-100, but to make prints you need an enlarger and other stuff. Color is a lot more complicated.
 05/05/2007 06:23:24 PM · #31
Originally posted by MadMan2k:
Film is fun. B&W has a look you can't quite get with digital converted to grayscale,


That's because there is no true greyscale B&W paper :-) Alien Skins Exposure gets darn close to B&W looks.
 05/05/2007 08:51:24 PM · #32
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by MadMan2k:
Film is fun. B&W has a look you can't quite get with digital converted to grayscale,


That's because there is no true greyscale B&W paper :-) Alien Skins Exposure gets darn close to B&W looks.


There are printer systems that use a variety of gray inks to get better results printing digital B&W prints
 05/05/2007 09:04:29 PM · #33
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Rebecca:
After trying both the Ilford mentioned and Kodak Tri-X, I vastly prefer the Tri-X.


I love the grain from Tri-X. I always liked using Kodak T-Max film also.

If you don't have access to a custom lab or a darkroom, but want to shoot B&W, you can always use the Kodak BW400CN, which can be developed at any color lab.


I just picked up a contact sheet from the lab of a roll of TX400 pushed to 1600.
I really like the look of timelessness it imparts on some of the shots - well at least through the loupe.
Shot on a Bessa Rangefinder.
I also recently shot a roll of Ilford 3200 and was surprised at how much sharpness it maintained with relatively small nice grain for the speed.
There is a roll of HP5 loaded and am interested to see how it looks since reading good things about it.

There is definately a romantic feeling with loading up a roll, hearing the soft click, manually advancing the next frame while hoping that you got the shot knowing you will just have to wait to find out.


05/05/2007 11:51:00 PM · #34
Originally posted by bergiekat:
I've an old Pentax Spotmatic and a Pentax Spotmatic II (light meter in viewfinder) with some great glass for them. I know I'll get blasted for this, but IMO there are certain times when fim, flim...film (isn't that the stuff?) still outshines digital. :P And the darkroom experience itself is so fun!

I DO love my digital camera though, as the cost for "processing" is much better. I KNOW when my photos will turn out (sort-of), or at least can preview them, rather than shooting and hoping only to see inferior results after the film has been developed and the opportunity gone. When you have your film developed now, you can request a digital disk for your own editing. :) Enjoy your camera!


I too enjoy(ed) the Pentax cameras. I have the K1000, the KX, and the MX for 35mm and the LX for medium format (although it is waiting for my brother to get the money to buy it from me). They are great cameras and durable as all get out...but your two...made while Asahi-Pentax was still in existence... could stop a mMack truck and still deliver a wonderful photo.

And... you won't hear any disparaging remarks from me about the film cameras. Digital is cool... and I am trying to learn as fast as I can, but film is still the best medium in most cases. Clearer, more definition, and much more correctable for a variety of things. Something to do with the fact that Digital uses Pixels to assimilate a picture... so the picture you are working with is made up of a gazillion or more little dots. Where with film, with the right film, you get a form of "cloaking" the picture. The film is made up of a bunch (not as many as a gazillion) of little bits of stuff instead.

Okay...somehow, even I don't know what I meant by that. Sorry!


Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 11:49:23 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 11:49:23 AM EDT.