Topic: Weekend 5th-7th May

[KevinAllan]

Here's a Scammell Scarab, a British three-wheel tractor unit manufactured between 1948 and 1967.

Expired Portra 800 in a Mamiya RZ67 with 75mm lens.

[Fluminian]

Nice photo, Kevin.

Pentax Z1p, Sigma 28mm-200mm f3.8-5.6 Aspherical, Efke KB100, Ilfosol 3.



cherries_ripen by Miljenko Vrankovic, on Flickr

[Urban Hafner]

Bronica SQ-Ai, 110mm f/4, Ilford HP5+


Zündapp by Urban Hafner, on Flickr

[jharr]

Coffee anyone?
Yashica 44LM + closeup lenses
expired Konica 160 @ 100


Y44-Konica160-016 by James Harr, on Flickr

[Terry]

Are you liking that Y44 James?

[Bryan]

James, I've had a lot of fun with the closeup lens on my Baby Rolleiflex.  It works just as well on my 6x6 rolleiflex. 

These were shot after Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day to finish the roll in my Voightlander 116 pinhole conversion.  I like these shots better than my submission.  The film is Kodak Verichrome Pan VP-616 that expired in August, 1965.  I developed it in Beerenol (Rainier Beer).  I was surprised how well the boat came out, it started rocking in the middle of the exposure.  The owner of the boat came down to move it out to a buoy, he was very nice about waiting a few minutes for the long exposure to complete. 

Sailboat on Sinclair Inlet by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Tacoma Narrows Bridges by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

[jharr]

Are you liking that Y44 James?

This 4x4 is a great little TLR. The lens is sharp and it is so light. I just picked up an original strap for it. The slow shutter speeds are off and the frame spacing is a bit unpredictable, so it does need a CLA. I think I am going to send it off to Mark Hama rather than risk messing it up myself. I like using it so much and it is a nice looker too. I'm thinking of taking it to Vegas in a couple weeks instead of a 35mm.

James, I've had a lot of fun with the closeup lens on my Baby Rolleiflex.  It works just as well on my 6x6 rolleiflex.

Yeah, these closeup lenses actually came with my Mat 124G. There is a little balsam separation on the taking lens, but it doesn't seem to have any effect on the photos.

[Kai-san]

A burnt out building is perfect for street art.

Minolta Autocord / Expired Fujichrome Provia 400

[Terry]

Nice shots there, Kai.  The sort of stuff I like: lots of texture!

[02Pilot]

Nice start. I quite like Bryan's first pinhole shot.

Mine is from a local Buddhist monastery last week. Leica IIIc, Canon 28/3.5, Kodak Gold 200.

[irv_b]

Yeah! I doooo  like that shot O2

I have a backlog to develop and scan here is a couple from a grey day near Margate

[Kai-san]

Thanks Terry.

[Indofunk]

I like Fluminian's (non-boat! ) shot, and Andrej's monastery reflection I've just processed a bunch of photos with a new-to-me 58mm/1.4 lens. The dof at 1.4 is razor-thin so none of my shots came out in focus I'll upload one later tonight or tomorrow...

[Francois]

I just got a new plant so I thought I'd check to see if the Instax Mini still worked. It's still the toughest camera I have when it comes to getting the exposure right...
So, here's my plant family. The new member is the weird fern on the left... it's got crunchy twisted leaves...

[Dave Elden]

Lundy Ponies, Lundy, UK, 2015.
CV Bessa R2, CV 35mm lens, Delta 400, Ilford WT paper (Se toned).
A print is currently in a modest exhibition in Ottawa.

Dave.

PS, the print actually has highlight detail unlike the JPG - honest 

[02Pilot]

Thanks Irv and Satish.

[Indofunk]

Here's a shot with my 58/1.4. I can't focus well under normal circumstances, never mind at night at 1.4 


Alone Together by Satish Indofunk, on Flickr

[02Pilot]

I like the shot, Satish. Focus doesn't appear too far off, and I wonder just how sharp that lens (what is it specifically?) is wide open in any case. Usually with fast lenses there's a notable drop in contrast and sharpness at full aperture.

[Terry]

Finally finished a roll of Delta 3200 that's been languishing in my Exa for about a year.
Exposed at a 1600 ISO and souped in R09 at 1+25.


Secaucus 1 par Terry B, on ipernity


Beaumont par Terry B, on ipernity

[ManuelL]

Great stuff. Love the Buddhist temple!

I took the Vermeer 6x17 pinhole out for a spin at the local open air museum. Kodak Tmax100 developed in Ilfotec HC.

[Indofunk]

I like the shot, Satish. Focus doesn't appear too far off, and I wonder just how sharp that lens (what is it specifically?) is wide open in any case. Usually with fast lenses there's a notable drop in contrast and sharpness at full aperture.

Yeah, well you should see it at full resolution But thank you, this one came out the best out of all the ones I took at 1.4. (The others were taken at a low-light gig at relatively close distances to the subject, so of course depth of field was very much at play there) The lens is a Minolta Rokkor 58/1.4. I suspect you're right, that the lens is simply very soft wide open. Still not sure if this is a necessary "improvement" over my nifty 50/1.8...

[Francois]

That's often the big debate. The 50 1.8 are almost always very contrasty and tack sharp. The 1.4, a bit less so. The 1.2 even less and I can't imagine what it would be like to use a 0.95 Noctilux.

[Indofunk]

That's often the big debate. The 50 1.8 are almost always very contrasty and tack sharp. The 1.4, a bit less so. The 1.2 even less and I can't imagine what it would be like to use a 0.95 Noctilux.

Exactly my point. I saw the 1.4 and hit BUY!!! but now I'm realizing that the extra 1/2 stop is really not worth it.

So, without me actually doing the test (which I don't think I could be arsed to do ), would my 58/1.4 be less sharp at EVERY aperture setting than my 50/1.7, or just at 1.4?

[Indofunk]

Also, secondary question. I always thought that aperture was calculated as some sort of a ratio of diameter/area/something of the aperture opening to the lens' diameter/area/something. So, how is an aperture less than 1 possible? That means that the aperture blades open wider than the size of the actual lens itself? I see aperture blades piercing the sides of the lens housing and forming a huge external hood-type thing No, wait, a lizard with those frilly things on its neck

[Sandeha Lynch]

It's focal length divided by lens diameter, so if your lens is a 50mm but the diameter is say, 55mm, then your max aperture is 50/55 = F.0.9

Fast lenses invariably have a problem with sharpness wide open, but not when closed down.  Other factors being equal, all 50mm lenses should be equally sharp at F.8, but it's something of a progressive scale as they are closed down, so comparing a 1.4 and a 1.7 you might find them equally sharp at F.2.8 though perhaps only by F.4.

I've heard that some of the older cheaper folder lenses were specifically limited to F.6.8 or F.8 simply because they were rubbish any wider.

[Aksel]

No, as in - the 1.4 can be as sharp, sharper or softer stopped down - it depends on the lens and the design. The noct is sharper and more contrasty at 0.95 than any slr lens I have shot at all apertures, that´s part of the reason it´s priced as it is  It even beats the Nikon noct 1.2. easily, then again it´s a cupel of decades between them. The f-stop is calculated as a relation between focal length and the relative diameter of the optical part of the lens (as far as I understand) A very simple rule of thumb - most lenses tends to be at their peek when stopped down four stops.

[Indofunk]

Excellent! Thank you for the lens (and math) lesson! Saved me a Google search

Solely based on that one roll with the 1.4, it definitely seems way softer than my 1.8. Guess that's why it only cost $60

edit: wait, I just checked and my supposed 1.8 is actually a 1.7 (FWIW). I was confusing it with my Canon D**R lens

[Francois]

Optical formulas can really be a nightmare. Take the Nikkor 1.2 for example. They have two versions of it, the 1.2 and the 1.2 noct. Both are very different. The noct is designed exclusively for night shots and is a bit rubbish in the daytime. The regular 1.2 is good in the daylight but not as sharp at night.

If you try your 1.4 in the daytime, I'm pretty sure you'll be surprised by how different the results it gives are. Thing it, at night you're always dealing with high contrast and mostly sharp edges, so the lens softness will be an issue. In dim light with slow film, the lens will probably be surprisingly good.

[Indofunk]

Thing is, at night you're always dealing with high contrast and mostly sharp edges, so the lens softness will be an issue. In dim light with slow film, the lens will probably be surprisingly good.

Yay! More things I didn't know! I am learning a lot in this thread.

[02Pilot]

Fast lenses are often remarkably different in character at the fast end. Even older f/2 lenses can be pretty distinctive, my LTM Canon 50/1.9 being one example - wide open, it's got all sorts of corner distortion, it's soft all around, and it glows, while the 50/1.5 from the same era is a little soft and low contrast but overall far better, even though it's ~2/3rds of a stop faster. The difference is down to completely different optical formulas, the 50/1.9 being a double-gauss Planar and the 50/1.5 a Sonnar. How lens designers get to their target maximum aperture is often more important than the number they stick on the front of the lens.

FWIW, I love the 50/1.9 as a night street photography lens. With HP5+ pushed to 1600 it's got a really classic look, and you don't really notice the imperfections.

[Indofunk]

Listen! I'm done larnin' for today. My brain is full

[02Pilot]

Great stuff. Love the Buddhist temple!

Thanks, Manuel.

[Urban Hafner]

And if you're totally done learning Satish ... I'm looking for a 58mm f/1.4 for my SR-1s. But I think you should just keep it and try it again.

[Sandeha Lynch]

And if you're totally done learning Satish ... I'm looking for a 58mm f/1.4 for my SR-1s. But I think you should just keep it and try it again.

Err, you mean like an Auto Rokkor -PF 58/1.4

I have one, cosmetically good on the outside and with original front cap, slightly stiff focus, some hazy bits on the glass, traces of ancient fungus but probably long dead, good aperture mechanism.

It'll only cost you the postage, Urban, but there is one condition attached:  you have to take the MC Rokkor - PF 55/1.7 as well (similar condition but smooth focus).   

[Urban Hafner]

That's a condition I can agree on Sandeha! Thanks!

[Sandeha Lynch]

Great !!  I'll reply to your message after the hour (forum limitations !!)

[Ezzie]

My contribution to WPPD and the runner up. Both taken with my DIY 6x24 pinhole camera, one on Acros, and one on FP4+. I actually prefer FP4+ with respect to pinholing, even if (or maybe because of) you need to calculate for reciprocity.

WPPD contribution:

Peaceful canons by Eirik Russell Roberts, on Flickr

Nearly made it:

P961 "Blink"; by Eirik Russell Roberts, on Flickr

[Adam Doe]

Another test of the Intrepid 4x5 camera. On FP-3000B.
FP3000B Intrepid 4x5 Camera by adoephoto, on Flickr