Film or lens

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, iPacific said:

Did you do the darkroom work by yourself?

Even C-41?

I process all my own film, and even C41 which is easier in many ways than developing B&W films. I don't however have a darkroom at the moment, it's all done at the kitchen sink.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[John Robinson]

There is an old rule of thumb never to change more than one variable at a time when trying to evaluate the effect of changes in technique.  If you want to see the differences between lenses, shoot the same film stock each time; if you want to see the differences in film stock, shoot the same lens (and camera) each time. 

My preferred film stock for colour (when I can find it, becoming more difficult these days) is Fuji Superia 400.  I can say that some lenses turn in remarkable results on this stock (e.g. Summilux 50 either R- or M-series, or Summicron 35s, or some of the Zeiss Planars and Distagons) whereas others struggle to do anything more than "ordinary" (Nikkors, various novelty lenses from the East German or Russian manufacturers).  Sometimes there are surprises (the Rollei-branded Planar for example, or some of the Voigtlanders, even a TTArtisan). 

For monochrome it is interesting that the results are often different.  I standardise on Ilford XP2 for availability and ease of processing, always with a Yellow or Orange filter.  The Elmar-M 2.8/50 is a surprise to me, rendering in monochrome on XP2 in quite a different manner from when used on Fuji or an M9.  The Summiluxes and Summicrons are excellent but the slower lenses (Elmarits or Zeiss Sonnars and Distagons) seem better on monochrome than the faster lenses.

When film was cheap and plentiful I tried many different emulsions before settling on Fuji as my preferred stock.  Kodak Ektar and ProImage 100 are examples of stock that gives a look that is quite different from Fuji (albeit requiring careful attention to exposure) but currently very hard to find.  Kodak 200 in various brandings could be described as "workmanlike".  Fuji 200 looks uncannily like Kodak 200.  And then there are the stocks derived from cine film.  You can spend a lot of time looking at the various options for these stocks and each produces quite a different look under similar conditions.

I would say that, if you are interested in lenses, choose a favourite stock and stick with it.  To see the difference a choice of film stock/processing makes, try to stick to one favourite camera and lens.

[lmans]

On 2/8/2023 at 1:21 AM, John Robinson said:

 

For monochrome it is interesting that the results are often different.  I standardise on Ilford XP2 for availability and ease of processing, always with a Yellow or Orange filter.  The Elmar-M 2.8/50 is a surprise to me, rendering in monochrome on XP2 in quite a different manner from when used on Fuji or an M9.  The Summiluxes and Summicrons are excellent but the slower lenses (Elmarits or Zeiss Sonnars and Distagons) seem better on monochrome than the faster lenses.

When film was cheap and plentiful I tried many different emulsions before settling on Fuji as my preferred stock.  Kodak Ektar and ProImage 100 are examples of stock that gives a look that is quite different from Fuji (albeit requiring careful attention to exposure) but currently very hard to find.  Kodak 200 in various brandings could be described as "workmanlike".  Fuji 200 looks uncannily like Kodak 200.  And then there are the stocks derived from cine film.  You can spend a lot of time looking at the various options for these stocks and each produces quite a different look under similar conditions.

 

For all of 'that'..... then what? How much do you spend in the dry darkroom (digital software of sorts) to adjust etc.... ? jim

[Huss]

Cinestill 800 on an M7 with a Summilux 50 Asph.  You may be able to notice halation... 

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!

[Steve Ricoh]

37 minutes ago, Huss said:

Cinestill 800 on an M7 with a Summilux 50 Asph.  You may be able to notice halation... 

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!

Very subtle halation! 🤣 

It’s £20 a pop over here, too much for me.

[John Robinson]

21 hours ago, lmans said:

For all of 'that'..... then what? How much do you spend in the dry darkroom (digital software of sorts) to adjust etc.... ?

Testing, experimenting, evaluating different combinations of camera/lens/film can take some time, but the aim is to settle on the combinations that work for me and set up parameters (exposure, processing, post-processing) that product reliable, repeatable results.  With various post-processing presets (Nikon scanner then Capture One), I find that I can get from the negative to a final image reasonably quickly, and certainly faster than in the wet darkrooms I remember from the 1970s and 80s.

[TheBestSLIsALeicaflex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Developer, how developed, and of course quality of light, also big considerations with film and lens. 

[lmans]

3 hours ago, TheBestSLIsALeicaflex said:

Developer, how developed, and of course quality of light, also big considerations with film and lens. 

This is why "FILM" will never die....there are people that still want to practice the art of photography as opposed to pressing the shutter and have a postcard photo come from it. 

[Emtsoh]

5 hours ago, lmans said:

This is why "FILM" will never die....there are people that still want to practice the art of photography as opposed to pressing the shutter and have a postcard photo come from it. 

Same here. I enjoy to operate just my M-A, developing films at home and have sold any digital camera stuff I've owned (except my smartphone..).

Hope one day Zeiss and Voigtländer will offer again their canera bodies in addition to their lenses, for all of us who appreciate film photography. 

[lmans]

If they build it, they will come. Pentax will build it, ...they will come.  If Canon would do a new AE-1, they will come. Same with Zeiss and Voigtlander.

Leica and the M6 build, they Came.

[Herr Barnack]

Quote

Which do you feel has more impact on Leica M film cameras… the lens selection or film selection….

on terms of how you like your photos/images to look? 

Both lens and film play a role.  My first reaction was to say that film - and even more so, the developing procedure - play the most significant role. 

Then I stop and think about my own prints.  My most compelling printed images have come from using my 90 APO Summicron lens and my 50 f/1.0 Noctilux lens, whether they were attached to my former film MP, my current M4-P or my M-P 240.  Those two lenses are capable of magic, regardless of which M camera they are attached to.

The 28mm Summilux on my Q2 is also capable of producing some head turning results when used at f/1.7 so all things considered, I am leaning fairly well toward lens selection as my answer.

It goes without saying that darkroom wizards would disagree with that assessment.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Herr Barnack