Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I bought 20 rolls of Kodak TMAX 100 and developed in pure Kodak D76.

The general rendering is satisfying not in the TX way but with good definition

and nice black grey scale

I think Kodak TMAX400 suggested by Philip is in the same manner.

I have now 20 rolls for tests ... I will tell you what I think  :)

 

Tam Ky beach at a fishing village at dawn !

Vietnam September 2016

 

 

Leica MP-50 Summilux Asph

Kodak TMAX100

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

Best

Henry

Edited by Doc Henry
  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last month I took an early morning walk along the Ridgeway in Wiltshire, armed with GW690II / Velvia 100 and M7 / Portra 160.  On a different forum I have seen comments about Velvia and that some people do not like its colours.  I know I'm comparing apples & oranges cabbages here (i.e. 6x9 -v- 35mm; transparency -v- negative; different labs; different scanners) but for what it is worth, one image from each combination to see how they compare.  In each case I have clicked on 'Auto WB' in LR Dev module.  First Velvia then Portra:-

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, different colours for sure Keith. I'd say that both could possibly stand a bit of colour tweaking, but I am the last to ask/suggest. This is the reason B&W is "simpler". One less thing to worry about.

Both are nice. Just different.

Gary

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few firsts here.

New (to me) Super Angulon 21mm f4.

New film, RPX100.

First time scanning 35mm with the flatbed Epson.

M6.

Gary

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

And another.

Liking what I see so far.

It's different for sure, and I want to compare the SWC with this M6/SA21 setup.

Gary

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrific shot Rocky. Widelux seems like a cool camera. And for being at EI12800 the result is remarkable. What developer was used?

 

br

Philip

Thanks Phillip! I'll get back to you on that one, I got them done by a lab called blanco negro.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Example from the first film dev'd & scanned by Canadian Film Lab. M7, C-Sonnar 50mm, Portra 160.

Early Morning Hiker on the Ridgeway

How long did it take to get the scans ? I was gutted when I heard they were moving I could walk to their unit from my house in 15 minutes

 

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which Epson, Gary?  (I have had a V700 for quite a few years).

An old Perfection 4870 Keith.

Cheap as chips, more to "try the flatbed" style, as I have an equally cheap Plustek 8100 for 35mm.

I had been "scanning" with a Leica BEOON, but since I now have the 4870, the BEOON has sat untouched.

And of course for the M/F stuff (I now also have an SWC), it is a must.

Gary

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice photos Henry. And look virtually grain-free. 

 

My apologies, my post was possibly unclear. Tri-X can certainly be used in low light. The point I made was not concerning low light capabilities; it was about resolution and sheer 'detail-gathering' capabilities. The rather dominant grain of Tri-X (in 135, I hasten to add; Tri-X in 120 is very different different film oddly enough) may give the impression that less detail may have been captured as compared to less grainy films, like T-Max 400, or digital. It's of course only my view.

 

Hi Philip, I bought TMAX 400 recently, I will have to test it but I do not agree in full with you about TX
I think it's a film that can be used in places where light is low or almost no light at all , like in the case of Nowherman.

Demonstration :

 

attachicon.gifImage5cathcandlekodtx400lfht+++950cr.jpg

 

attachicon.gifImage6cathrsgirlkodtx400m728cron-Modlufht+++red900.jpg

 

attachicon.gifImage6cathlumikodtx400lfht+++-950.jpg

 

 

Leica M7-Summicron 28 Asph-Kodak TX400

Lens open at f:2

Kodak TX dev. home at 22°C in pure Kodak D76

 

Rgds

H.

 

Great results Gary. RPX100 seems like a film worth trying. And the SA 21 of course. 

 

A few firsts here.

New (to me) Super Angulon 21mm f4.

New film, RPX100.

First time scanning 35mm with the flatbed Epson.

M6.

Gary

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, all for the opinions on the photo.

Keith - I agree with in one sense as there is nothing like being there in person but I would also add that I was really disappointed at how muted the low res version that I posted came out.  It robs the image of all of the striking details and clarity that are in the full res version, such as the ability to see people on their terraces as well as letters and numbers on the taxi cabs.  I have posted this on my flickr page in much larger (though not full) resolution and will keep it there for a day or two in case anyone is interested.

 

Philip - Ha, ha, pay back is a b$tch :)

Seriously, it was this photo that was taken with the lens by NASA in 1969 on the moon (wide open @ 1/250 on Ektachrome) that was the closer for me  :p

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Christoph - Thanks very much.  I have been itching for a longer focal length for quite some time now and my old Linhof clunker kit only goes as long as the 180mm Sonar, which is a great lens but on a 6x9 back it is not even an effective 35mm format FL of 80mm.  There are so many perspectives of NYC that I want to capture with the longer FLs, so in that sense it will be a pet hobby of mine for the next few months.  I also picked up a 500mm APO Tessar from B&H but it had bad lens separation and so I immediately returned it.  I would get a lot out of that lens as well.  But I will take my time to bond with the Superachromat first.  

 

That's a great shot Adam, what an amazing view.

 

 

I somehow feel that one actually has to be there to appreciate the image.  Hard to visualise its full majesty on a flat screen!

 

 

Adam,

Nice, I like the condensed perspective and the long exposure time makes for interesting painting of cars on the roads. Lots of things to see as well, one can almost look into the office windows opposite. I suppose this is the start of a new New York series from you? And did you get the Superachromat for those kind of shots?

Rgds

C.

 

 

Very cool Adam. I like it a lot, the light is great and the colours look very accurate, which I guess the lens had something to do with. The lens has really sucked in all the details. Did you have to adjust the verticals? If so you did a great job because it looks completely natural. 

 

Now that 250 is on my list, darn.

 

Philip

 

 

Wonderful shot but take care of you

Superb color Adam

Best

Henry

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Example from the first film dev'd & scanned by Canadian Film Lab. M7, C-Sonnar 50mm, Portra 160.

Early Morning Hiker on the Ridgeway

Wow, funky color palette, Keith.  But it holds together really well.  Almost looks like a lomo film stock of some kind.  Very cool.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

For Dave - Sailing 200 nm out from Carnarvon in the Indian Ocean, we got becalmed, and i took a dip. This is probably a good time to have trustworthy mates, and not to have had a major argument before going over the side (Kodachrome - Canon F1N w/ FD 17mm in Ewa housing)...

31274311261_2b6faa5ca0_c.jpgA001 by Eoin Christie, on Flickr

 

31274302941_0e133ef052_c.jpgA002 by Eoin Christie, on Flickr

 

31274294351_d5134a1da0_c.jpgA003 by Eoin Christie, on Flickr

 

31353027316_86ce8625cd_c.jpgA004 by Eoin Christie, on Flickr

 

31353024276_f86f63e6d4_c.jpgA005 by Eoin Christie, on Flickr

 

very cool, Eoin.  I think the first is my favorite.  Love those blues and of course the unique POV.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a long time, but I finally got around to doing some portraits that I had promised this couple back in the summer. 645n, 120/f4, FP4+, HC-110, a strobe, two fill lights and the X1 for the scans.

 

30579588384_315feba049_c.jpg

Calora and Keith 3 by chrism229, on Flickr

 

30579593664_40486b310f_c.jpg

Calora and Keith 2 by chrism229, on Flickr

 

30593631093_127d3541ed_c.jpg

Calora and Keith 1 by chrism229, on Flickr

 

Chris

  • Like 18
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a long time, but I finally got around to doing some portraits that I had promised this couple back in the summer. 645n, 120/f4, FP4+, HC-110, a strobe, two fill lights and the X1 for the scans.

 

30579588384_315feba049_c.jpg

Calora and Keith 3 by chrism229, on Flickr

 

30579593664_40486b310f_c.jpg

Calora and Keith 2 by chrism229, on Flickr

 

30593631093_127d3541ed_c.jpg

Calora and Keith 1 by chrism229, on Flickr

 

Chris

 

great stuff, Chris.  So great to hear from you.  The last one is my fav by far.  Lovely tender moment that they will cherish for a long time.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, yes I will get a longer lens too, but probably one of the FE models.

 

Is it really the C Superachromat you have? I would have thought you'd go for the CF. 

 

Incidentally when the original Earthrise photograph was taken on Christmas Eve 1968 William Anders almost missed the shot. Here's the audio recording

 

 

Philip - Ha, ha, pay back is a b$tch :)

Seriously, it was this photo that was taken with the lens by NASA in 1969 on the moon (wide open @ 1/250 on Ektachrome) that was the closer for me  :p

attachicon.gifmoon.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, yes I will get a longer lens too, but probably one of the FE models.

 

Is it really the C Superachromat you have? I would have thought you'd go for the CF. 

 

Incidentally when the original Earthrise photograph was taken on Christmas Eve 1968 William Anders almost missed the shot. Here's the audio recording

 

yes, you are right, I picked up the CF (black) and not the silver C that was used in 1969.  I think my lens was made in the late 80's.  But that moon photo still blew me away and I hope NASA negotiated a royalty deal with Zeiss for that one!

 

That audio recording is HILARIOUS!  How many astronauts does it take to screw in a light bulb?? :) :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...