Scanning kodak portra 400NC

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In using the meter of film M's, it is important to remember that the metered area is:

 

1) very center weighted. All the meter sees is the part of the image that falls on the painted white/gray circle on the first shutter curtain. The rest of the curtain is too dark to provide the meter cell with much information. So there is none of the exposure compensation provided by the wide-pattern "intelligent" meters of most modern SLRs, which usually look at the whole scene, and are programmed to analyse the brightness patterns and discount, for example, bright areas in the top half of the frame (which their artificial intelligence assumes is sky).

 

2) variable with focal length. The metering dot is a fixed part of the total scene, so with wider lenses the amount of scenery metered is also wider - often including sky.

 

With an SLR, the FoV of the finder changes with the lens, so one is more aware of how much more the meter is seeing with a 21 or 24.

 

With the M's fixed-magnification finder, the "view" is always about that of a 28mm lens (with cropping indicated by the framelines for the real lens in use). With a 21mm lens, the metered area is practically the whole viewfinder. With a 135 lens, the metered area is about the size of the rangefinder patch in the middle.

 

In other words, with an SLR finder and 20mm lens pointed slightly down, one will notice that the sky still covers nearly half the frame (and thus is influencing the metering significantly) - whereas with an M, using the internal finder for metering, the sky may appear only as a thin strip across the top of the finder: a "28mm crop" of the actual image being metered, and thus not seem to be a significant influence on the meter, although it is.

 

The instruction manuals from the M6 on have a diagram to explain this and show what part of the viewfinder corresponds to the actual metered area with each focal length.

 

On the whole, the M metering system is not ideal for auto-exposure unless the scene is very evenly lighted. Nor were the similar simplistic averaging/center-weighted/spot systems used by SLRs up until the 1980's - which is why SLR makers developed the more complex multi-pattern artificial-intelligence meters beginning with the Nikon FA, as AE modes became a standard feature.

 

And even for manual exposure, one does have to keep in one's head the actual area of the finder that counts for any given focal length, what that area is then pointed at for metering, and whether the metered area is "appropriate" for the exposure desired.

 

I.E. for a backlit environmental portrait in a bright setting, one may need to meter the subject's face from a distance where it fills the whole frame, and then back off for composition. Or for side-lit people in front of a dark-glass modern building - meter off the sidewalk or some other sunlit area, to avoid the dark background creating an exposure for medium gray, blowing out the sunlit subjects in the process.

[jplomley]

Whenever I shoot chrome film in any of my camera systems, I use a 1-degree spot meter. Neg fillm I don't get too fussed about.

[noah_addis]

The Mamiya 7II and Coolscan 9000ED using SilverFast AI Studio are a notch above the M9 IMHO, especially when using chrome film. I only shoot the 35mm when I'm looking for atmosphere inherent from the grain of films like Neopan 400 and TriX. The 7II gives very clean B&W so if I want grain in 6x7, I have to jump to Delta 3200.

 

That has been my finding as well. For some photos like portraits or images with not too much depth of field I found the M9 files could be printed large (40x50in.) but for images with tons of sharp fine detail, they fell apart. Sure, they looked ok from a distance, but if I'm selling a print in a gallery I want it to be good even up close. With the M7II and Portra 160 or 400, there is grain in 40x50in prints but also lots of detail, and I far prefer the more analog look.

 

I will keep my Leica film bodies and lenses forever, and I do plan to use them again, as you said for grain and atmostphere or if I'm shooting in a more dynamic situation. Though, in general, my gradual shift to a more subtle photographic style is also a driving factor in my switching to medium format.

 

Noah, do you have any of your recent Mamiya work on your website? Would love to have a look.

 

I just got back from Chicago where I did some work for a nonprofit, it was environmental portraits of formerly homeless people, and the mamiya was brilliant for that kind of work. I've also been doing some other projects locally with the 6x7 and next week I'm going to Lima, Peru to shoot work for my ongoing project about squatter communities and informal settlements. I'm looking forward to the trip, it'll be my first all-film trip in years and I'm not even taking a laptop!

 

Once I get back from Lima I plan to redesign my website (I'm making it web standards complient with no more flash). I may try to post some new work before I leave for Lima but probably I'll just wait until I launch the new site. I'd like to say the new site will be up by August, but it may well take longer than that. It's good to be busy I guess.

[ndjambrose]

I've been rediscovering medium format recently too. I've been using a Bessa III (aka Fuji GF670) for a number of recent weddings, and a lot of personal work. I've shot probably about 40 rolls of 120 in the last couple of weeks. My drivers are the same as those mentioned above..... the quality is rather impressive. I also picked up a rather tired but splendidly functional Rolleiflex, which frankly outperforms most of my other cameras in results.

[jplomley]

For some photos like portraits or images with not too much depth of field I found the M9 files could be printed large (40x50in.) but for images with tons of sharp fine detail, they fell apart. Sure, they looked ok from a distance, but if I'm selling a print in a gallery I want it to be good even up close.

 

And this is what drove me to 4x5 and drum scanned chrome film for landscape applications instead of a digital solution. However, the Mamiya 7 lenses are so good, that when drum scanned, you have to look real close to tell the difference between the Mamiya and 4x5 (for scenes where movements of the 4x5 do not give you a clear advantage in optimizing the plane of focus and therefore DOF). So when I use the Mamiya on the street, I just consider it my portable 4x5 as opposed to my Texas Leica I regret not taking my Mamiya to Cuba...the M9 did the trick in many instances, but as you noted, I was disappointed in the detail I was able to render in large print size anytime there was high frequency information in a scene. If I thought I could get through airport security in Cuba with 4x5, I would seriously consider taking that system and just record the crumbling city of Santiago. But I suspect I would be forced to open up the boxes of sheet film.

 

Really looking forward to seeing your new work and website Noah. Please keep us posted.

[Stealth3kpl]

.the M9 did the trick in many instances,

 

It certainly did. It's a wonderful gallery as is the other work on your site.

Pete

[noah_addis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I actually went through a phase shooting with an 8x10 camera and color neg film. The quality was breathtaking but it was a bit too slow for the way I work. It was difficult (but not impossible) to respond to changing situations, lighting conditions or expressions. The work I was doing was local but traveling with the 8x10 would have been a chore.

 

After I realized small-format digital wasn't going to do it for me, I considered a handheld 4x5, but the Mamiya seemed like the ideal compromise. I can shoot it like a Leica, capture moments or at least, for example, capture a specific moment when people are interacting within a cityscape. And for portraits, it's fast enough to respond to a good expression or fast-changing light. But the quality approaches large format. And best of all, the cameras and lenses aren't all that large or heavy, and while I do carry a tripod, it's a very small one.

[jplomley]

Many thanks for the feedback on the website Peter. It will be overhauled shortly to provide larger sized images.