Starter but capable film camera for 2022?

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, aksclix said:

Interesting setup you’ve got there.. I am tempted to build something myself.. 

It's not too difficult a job. You will need a "clean" space to work in and things like the copy-stand can easily be found online.This is similar to the one I adapted here, I found mine in a junk/charity shop for €25 but one can be bought new and adapted to suit, ( junk the baseboard and if you attach the column directly to the work-table top that gets one "wobble" point out of the way ).

https://www.amazon.fr/B-I-G-428931-Mrs-1-repro-Support-Noir-argenté/dp/B01K4J0KDI/ref=sr_1_10?__mk_fr_FR=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&crid=3DHIR87W2FGRW&keywords=copy+stand&qid=1644325361&sprefix=copystand%2Caps%2C144&sr=8-10

Bracing the column at the top something like I did locks everything down well, standing by itself it's not stable or true in terms of level/parallel to the base especially when you mount a camera as heavy as the D810-DSLR + Macro but might be ok with lighter cameras.

Negative Supply tools would be nice to be able to afford but honestly I have found that the EFH is good enough for my 35mm and 120 film needs so far.

This is what I use as a light source, bright enough, variable and you can if you want change the colour temperature too for colour neg' scanning, ( not required for B&W neg' scanning ).

https://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B07TVH72HQ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

Hope this helps..........

Peter

 

[aksclix]

8 hours ago, petermullett said:

It's not too difficult a job. You will need a "clean" space to work in and things like the copy-stand can easily be found online.This is similar to the one I adapted here, I found mine in a junk/charity shop for €25 but one can be bought new and adapted to suit, ( junk the baseboard and if you attach the column directly to the work-table top that gets one "wobble" point out of the way ).

https://www.amazon.fr/B-I-G-428931-Mrs-1-repro-Support-Noir-argenté/dp/B01K4J0KDI/ref=sr_1_10?__mk_fr_FR=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&crid=3DHIR87W2FGRW&keywords=copy+stand&qid=1644325361&sprefix=copystand%2Caps%2C144&sr=8-10

Bracing the column at the top something like I did locks everything down well, standing by itself it's not stable or true in terms of level/parallel to the base especially when you mount a camera as heavy as the D810-DSLR + Macro but might be ok with lighter cameras.

Negative Supply tools would be nice to be able to afford but honestly I have found that the EFH is good enough for my 35mm and 120 film needs so far.

This is what I use as a light source, bright enough, variable and you can if you want change the colour temperature too for colour neg' scanning, ( not required for B&W neg' scanning ).

https://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B07TVH72HQ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

Hope this helps..........

Peter

 

thank you! I actually did a home conversion last night with my S1r+sigma 105 macro on a tripod using ipad as lightbox. inverted using PS and the results were quite alright.. have to make some changes to the pixels appearing from the backlighting... will switch to a pure lightbox and then reevaluate results.. 

[aksclix]

folks who took the time to give me advice on film gear.. posted some images from my 645n today on the "I like film" thread.. I am liking this a LOT!!! the 645n definitely has the wow factor and the Nikon FM2 isn't too far either... 

here are some images with the FM2 and 105 f/2.5

posted others shot with 645n on the I like film thread..

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!

.. have  

[aksclix]

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!

[aksclix]

I scanned the negative of one of the above pictures myself using my S1R + Sigma 105 macro lens with a basic $26 light box from Amazon.. 
Inverted it, adjusted colors etc on Photoshop
What do you think of the result compared to the one above done at the lab? 
(just realizing I scanned it flip side.. I still like the flip image :)) 

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!

Edited February 15, 2022 by aksclix

[Fotoklaus]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb aksclix:

I scanned the negative of one of the above pictures myself using my S1R + Sigma 105 macro lens with a basic $26 light box from Amazon.. 
Inverted it, adjusted colors etc on Photoshop
What do you think of the result compared to the one above done at the lab? 
(just realizing I scanned it flip side.. I still like the flip image :)) 

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!

Did you really adjust the colours? Your white is almost pink... And did the neg lay flat? No sharp region anywhere...

[Doc Henry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/8/2022 at 11:26 PM, aksclix said:

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!

Hi , sorry but I prefer these lab scan.

Best

After my scan on Epson V700 or Nikon Scan CS5000 and V with their factory softwares  (never use Vuescan or Silverfast)

I also don't correct in Photoshop or Lightroom  .....   as I said above , I scan in TIFF >  size each photo = 120 MP 

more than M11 (color palette richer)

 

[aksclix]

6 hours ago, Fotoklaus said:

Did you really adjust the colours? Your white is almost pink... And did the neg lay flat? No sharp region anywhere...

Yea I didn’t do a thorough job there.. I I’ll play with it again.. but this exercise was to just know that this can be done without sophisticated equipment 

[Hintsalae]

I really recommend checking out Grain2pixel since you have photoshop available. It's free plugin for Ps and it does wonderful job converting negatives.

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, Hintsalae said:

I really recommend checking out Grain2pixel since you have photoshop available. It's free plugin for Ps and it does wonderful job converting negatives.

I found their site, but it wanted permission to show notifications (I declined, but it kept asking), and wanted me to click to show I wasn't a robot (made no difference) - and then I got a Russian page asking me questions. It may be bona fide software, but their current website looks a bit dodgy to me.

[pixie]

I am stunned! Advising everything BUT a Leica M! All those medium formats, that heavy bulky Nikon F6.. really? I always wanted portable, easily concealed and/or protected under a jacket, coat, parka.. Easy to focus in poor light! Seize the moment! One main lens, I prefer the 50mm but 35mm is great!

If you like grain use it! Go for BW not color! Don't use old film OD! Learn to develop and scan. It's easy and feels great seeing the film drying! Digital not come close! 

Less grain =slow film ISO 100 FP4. Faster  Ilford Hp5+ more grain, easier to use less light.

Why a Leica? Having to say this on a Leica site seems beyond madness! My M3 is in service and working for 55 years! 50mm Collapsible Summicron/ 35mm Goggle Summaron f2.8.

An older Leica-M, within 1 year with a roll ever week or two, lens in good shape You will have images that do not look like digital!  Delilah passed a few months later

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!

[250swb]

On 2/16/2022 at 1:49 PM, aksclix said:

Yea I didn’t do a thorough job there.. I I’ll play with it again.. but this exercise was to just know that this can be done without sophisticated equipment 

Photoshop isn't good at inverting colour images, or even B&W, which is why people buy plugin software like Negmaster or ColorPerfect. However your self scanned image gets a lot better if you apply 'Auto Colour' and 'Auto Contrast'. With a bit more tweaking of your scanning setup I'm sure you can do as good a job as the lab scan. Steadiness and accurate focus are the primary things to concentrate on, but also set your camera for the same colour balance as the light source.

[aksclix]

3 hours ago, pixie said:

I am stunned! Advising everything BUT a Leica M! All those medium formats, that heavy bulky Nikon F6.. really? I always wanted portable, easily concealed and/or protected under a jacket, coat, parka.. Easy to focus in poor light! Seize the moment! One main lens, I prefer the 50mm but 35mm is great!

If you like grain use it! Go for BW not color! Don't use old film OD! Learn to develop and scan. It's easy and feels great seeing the film drying! Digital not come close! 

Less grain =slow film ISO 100 FP4. Faster  Ilford Hp5+ more grain, easier to use less light.

Why a Leica? Having to say this on a Leica site seems beyond madness! My M3 is in service and working for 55 years! 50mm Collapsible Summicron/ 35mm Goggle Summaron f2.8.

An older Leica-M, within 1 year with a roll ever week or two, lens in good shape You will have images that do not look like digital!  Delilah passed a few months later

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!

Pixie - of course some Leicas were recommended.. the other recs were mostly due to budget constraints and nothing else! Also, I have never used a rangefinder, so we were trying not to introduce two new things to learn.. (shooting with film is new to me) 

anyway, I think I am ready for a rangefinder but it will have to wait until I clear up some funds for it. 😌

[aksclix]

2 hours ago, 250swb said:

Photoshop isn't good at inverting colour images, or even B&W, which is why people buy plugin software like Negmaster or ColorPerfect. However your self scanned image gets a lot better if you apply 'Auto Colour' and 'Auto Contrast'. With a bit more tweaking of your scanning setup I'm sure you can do as good a job as the lab scan. Steadiness and accurate focus are the primary things to concentrate on, but also set your camera for the same colour balance as the light source.

I agree that dedicated s/w meant for this purpose will do a far better job. I’ll check those out but just wanted to try out the simplest methods first without spending anything. I posted this one prematurely because it was not a great sample with all that pink tint.. 

[LocalHero1953]

I have Negative Lab Pro, but having had some practice, I now prefer to invert both B&W and colour 'manually' in Lightroom, by separate colour channels if necessary, then export it as a Tiff, which can be edited further with the sliders the right way round. I found NLP was too much of a black box with not enough opportunity to tweak settings in a way I could understand. I'm not convinced there's much to be gained by a raw workflow, even though that is what my scanning camera produces - after making Tiffs, I delete the DNG. Tiffs are a bit large though - swings and roundabouts!

[pixie]

Leicas were never inexpensive! 55 years later.. what was the cost? Many services, some adjustments, never ONE battery.

Easiest camera to load! Easy to use RF. Taught my daughter in 30 seconds. It's all nonsense about difficulties.. Try one out, change your life!

Look at all the famous who used these Leicas.. Good luck.

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!

[aksclix]

23 minutes ago, pixie said:

Leicas were never inexpensive! 55 years later.. what was the cost? Many services, some adjustments, never ONE battery.

Easiest camera to load! Easy to use RF. Taught my daughter in 30 seconds. It's all nonsense about difficulties.. Try one out, change your life!

Look at all the famous who used these Leicas.. Good luck.

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!

Sure.. it’s just a question of “when” not “why”… later this year, I intend to get an M digital first and will then get an M film body. I already have an S007, SL2 and a CL Leica. 

[alb59]

Contax. G1 or G2 along with the Zeiss G 28mm and 45mm lenses, or the 137 MA Quartz which will avail you of all the great Zeiss lenses C/Y mount.

[MesaArchive]

On 2/16/2022 at 6:49 AM, aksclix said:

Yea I didn’t do a thorough job there.. I I’ll play with it again.. but this exercise was to just know that this can be done without sophisticated equipment 

No offense, as it's a great photo, but your example is far from a strong argument for waiving sophisticated equipment. That said, I more or less agree with you that a proper set-up demands little more than elbow grease and patience, and with the right lens on the S1R (while I know nothing of the Sigma, you're likely on the right track with macro), you should be able to come pretty close to matching the lab scan, assuming you can finesse it in post. And if this is the route you're going to go down, it's about to get hammered home that film scans can be flexible in ways similar to a .RAW file (that is what you're capturing after all) with the resulting color ultimately only as satisfying as the user's ability to wield and manage the digital throughput. I say this because there can be a tendency amongst digital --> film converts to espouse platitudes of color film's "authenticity" or some such other descriptor that highlights a perceived lack in digital (i.e. not needing to be edited) as a reason why they might enjoy it more than digital, when in reality, that feeling of authenticity might only stem from the fact that whatever editing was done was simply done by someone else tucked away in a lab. This isn't to say that specific film emulsions don't have unique characteristics, of course they do, but color/tonal attributes, as opposed to exposure or grain, are not going to manifest as distinctly in a scan as they might in a wet print, and can obviously be readily adjusted to user taste. Put another way, if you scan the same negative by three different methods, or invert the scan in three different programs, you are going to see three distinct results. This can be a fun and instructive exercise, or it can be a slog and reminiscent of the types of processes you might have been trying to get away from in digital photography. As they say, the mileage....will vary....

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[aksclix]

1 hour ago, MesaArchive said:

No offense, as it's a great photo, but your example is far from a strong argument for waiving sophisticated equipment. That said, I more or less agree with you that a proper set-up demands little more than elbow grease and patience, and with the right lens on the S1R (while I know nothing of the Sigma, you're likely on the right track with macro), you should be able to come pretty close to matching the lab scan, assuming you can finesse it in post. And if this is the route you're going to go down, it's about to get hammered home that film scans can be flexible in ways similar to a .RAW file (that is what you're capturing after all) with the resulting color ultimately only as satisfying as the user's ability to wield and manage the digital throughput. I say this because there can be a tendency amongst digital --> film converts to espouse platitudes of color film's "authenticity" or some such other descriptor that highlights a perceived lack in digital (i.e. not needing to be edited) as a reason why they might enjoy it more than digital, when in reality, that feeling of authenticity might only stem from the fact that whatever editing was done was simply done by someone else tucked away in a lab. This isn't to say that specific film emulsions don't have unique characteristics, of course they do, but color/tonal attributes, as opposed to exposure or grain, are not going to manifest as distinctly in a scan as they might in a wet print, and can obviously be readily adjusted to user taste. Put another way, if you scan the same negative by three different methods, or invert the scan in three different programs, you are going to see three distinct results. This can be a fun and instructive exercise, or it can be a slog and reminiscent of the types of processes you might have been trying to get away from in digital photography. As they say, the mileage....will vary....

Interesting points and aligns with my thoughts too.. I’d love to do the processing myself (and not have someone else do it) as I can’t do the developing myself. I don’t want to be handling chemicals. Just don’t have the place for it. For me, this venture into film photography has been an experimental one and while I love it, I only plan to do it occasionally.. so, going all in with developing and scanning doesn’t make sense for me. And for that same reason, I am ok with not achieving perfect results. 
 

I’ll play around with different s/w for processing these negatives and see what I like best. I am quite happy with the results I got from my first trial although it wasn’t perfect. I know I could bring it to the right colors I want given a little more time. I am yet to do a second round. Will be doing it soon!