Non-digital film photography and cameras

Posted on
of 898
  • These were scanned by Nik and Trick, not sure on the scanner but they were tif files.

  • So Leica rabbit hole, soon after getting the M3 ( ran 2 rolls only ) I found a decently price M2 so part exchange the M3, sold the Contax TVS and got myself an M2 + Voigtlander 35mm 2.5 Color Skopar. Very happy so far with the test roll some shots below from the coast.

    5 Attachments

    • 2021-07-31-0033-01.jpeg
    • 2021-07-31-0029-01.jpeg
    • 2021-07-31-0027-01.jpeg
    • 2021-07-31-0015-01.jpeg
    • 2021-07-31-0013-01.jpeg
  • love the first shot - what film?

  • Thanks, forgot to mention that, Fuji C200.

  • Out of interest why trade M3 for M2? What are the benefits?

  • For me personally 2;

    Short answer - The ability to shot 35mm and the viewfinder magnification.

    Long answer - First the magnification on an M3 0.95 + glasses which I wear was not the best, I couldn't see the whole 50mm frame lines and I don't usually shot too much 50mm, this bring me to point 2, which the M2 has frame lines for 35/50/90 and the M3 not. So you need (goggles) to shot anything wider than 50mm on an M3. The M2 also has the standard 0.72 magnification so even thought I can't see the full frame lines on 35mm it's much easier to my eyes and glasses. And in comparison the M2 feels lighter which is a plus as Leicas are tanks.

  • Have really enjoyed looking back through this thread, so much so 'll probably start posting side on shots of cars soon... Here's one from my first go on an Olympus XA with fuji superia 400.

    1 Attachment

    • 30220023 (2).jpg
  • That’s a great shot.

  • Very nice! Superia, such an underrated film.

  • Thanks all, I picked it up cheap to test the camera and was pleased to see how well it handles green. Will be using it again for sure.

  • Always so pleasantly surprised how well XA shots come out. * These are so great BTW

  • Thanks bud, really should shoot with it more often

  • I found the best compromise for glasses was a stupidly expensive diopter with the appropriate magnification for your required correction. Then remove your glasses while looking through the finder. It helps if you go to a shop that has a box of them and try them out until you find the right one.

    Of course that wouldn't change the magnification issue with the M3 vs M2 but it does help with focussing.

  • This is what I'm thinking. I have an eye test coming up this week so will have a further look then... But the prices are a day light robbery for a little bit of glass magnification. M2 works much better for me right now and currently on the second roll. voigtlander is a joy to use with it too and very compact.

  • Couple more from the Rollei on Ektar

    2 Attachments

    • 000027890011.jpg
    • 000027890004.jpg
  • They don't relate directly to your eye prescription for complicated reasons. That's why it's easier to go to one of the London Leica dealers and try a few out. I bought a second hand one that worked for me. Leica accessories are all silly money though!

  • Interesting to know, reading about online it seems people are happy with whatever they prescription says. Off to Manchester in a few weeks so I'll pop to the Leica store and try a few I guess.

    Thanks for the advice.

  • It was certainly the advice I got from the Leica forum years ago and it worked for me but maybe that was just myth.

  • I found an old film camera in the loft at the weekend that still has a half used film in it. I don't suppose there is any chance that the film is any good after 20+ years and could be developed?

  • 20+ years is a stretch, but you might still get something if you develop it.
    Especially if it's black and white film, and if it wasn't too hot in the loft all those years.

    What kind of camera is it in?

  • I've done the same thing before and got the film developed , turns out the door had been opened and wiped most of the pictures but still got 2 very grainy images from the beginning of the roll. Was also about 15/20 years old. I then shot an unused disposable that was about 10/15 years old from the same batch of cameras and got some good photos still with a bit of wacky colour shift, so worth it in my opinion!

    3 Attachments

    • 006_6.JPG
    • 014_14.JPG
    • 019_19.JPG
  • Thanks for the answers, I may go for it and send it off. It is a shitty kodak 35mm camera. I'll report back (if I get around to it!).

  • Bristol Old Vic theatre workshops, Spike Island

    3 Attachments

    • 5984627A-D08F-434A-869B-C408DB4787E3.jpeg
    • F2CCAEE7-2DA8-455D-93ED-F67B98D8CA75.jpeg
    • ABBD5935-1758-4ACB-8D00-2278DA2CC14A.jpeg
  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview

Non-digital film photography and cameras

Posted by Avatar for GA2G @GA2G