Soviet hardware is fun

[Bounty]

I'm waffling on whether to keep shooting with 120 film. I'm paying $20 for twelve photos (film, processing and scanning), so even when not compared to the $17 I pay for a 36-shot 35mm film, that's a hell of a lot of money. That Lubitel probably won't see the light of day for a good while.

Still, good to know. Those two shots were taken at f-stop 8 and 1/125s; it was a reasonably bright day and I didn't know how reliable the shutter timings are. Moving the timing ring gives me shorter and longer exposures, so the mechanism still works, but as for how accurate it is... I just left it on a reasonably fast setting and hoped for the best.

Something else I found interesting: the top lens has ranges on it to help with focusing. The lowest and highest are obvious enough (1.4m and infinity), but the ones in-between are f-stop values, not meter values, I think... I really should get around to reading the full manual.

[aerius]

See if you can find an Olympus Pen F series camera, these are pretty neat half-frame 35mm cameras. It'll take 48 photos on a roll of 24 exposure film. My dad has one with the lens pictured in the link and it takes very nice pictures. Unfortunately I don't know where he put all his photos so I can't scan any samples, but here's a thread with some photos so you can see what it's capable of.

[Bounty]

Don't those sell for $150+? Medium format is fun but it's not $150 worth of fun.

[Bounty]

640px limit? Dang.

Been to Antwerp again, and most of the shots were off. The film must've been knocked off the little "teeth" that keep in running straight; all the images had a thick unexposed border, and the last ten were all double-or triple-exposures where the leader disconnected or the roll bunched up, not sure which. I'll have to keep an eye on this... either I didn't put the roll on securely enough, which is a distinct possibility, or there's something mechanically wrong.

Incidentally, try to spot the picture where I accidentally tripped the shutter while setting the diaphragm.



















No flash and no tripod make night-time a tricky situation:

[Phantasee]

I'm assuming the accidental shot is the one of the sky at a funny angle? Just flip it around and it'll be a nice sky shot. I mean, it'll be a useless picture, but at least it'll be right way up.

What's the building with all the flags?

Which Hilton is that, btw? I just learned from my friend that she gets any Hilton in the world for 70% off, or $20CDN a night if it's a Hilton branded Hilton. 30% if I go without her...perhaps a visit might be in order, since any cheapskate could afford a hotel at those prices.

[Bounty]

It's the Hilton Antwerp Hotel... unsurprisingly.

The building is the side of Antwerp City Hall. I wish I could've taken better pics, but I was just the guy who carries the shopping.

[Simplicius]

That's some dramatic lighting in the photo fifth from the top.

I've just started putting a roll of Ilford through my Rollei, bringing it back to life after a thirty-year sleep. The hardest part so far has been that cocking the shutter and advancing the film are two totally separate processes, so in my first four frames I probably made a total of 9 exposures. But I might have got one of them right, which would be neat since it was of a B-57A fuselage I found in a bit of marshy pasture in the back-country.

[Phantasee]

It's the Hilton Antwerp Hotel... unsurprisingly.

The building is the side of Antwerp City Hall. I wish I could've taken better pics, but I was just the guy who carries the shopping.

Oh wow, I feel dumb. Somehow I missed the line specifying where you were when I first read your post, and again right now. Third time was the charm.

Can you take some pictures with just a regular digital camera with auto settings and stuff? I just want to know if the colours I'm seeing are there or if they're because of the film you're using. Everything looks a little grey... isn't there more colour in Belgium? No offense or anything, but I'm just going by your pictures. Even the skies seem greyer than I'm used to.

[Bounty]

Can you take some pictures with just a regular digital camera with auto settings and stuff? I just want to know if the colours I'm seeing are there or if they're because of the film you're using. Everything looks a little grey... isn't there more colour in Belgium? No offense or anything, but I'm just going by your pictures. Even the skies seem greyer than I'm used to.

The muted colours are mostly my fault. The sky though, that's just grey most of the time, we have a lot of heavily overcast days.

For comparison, a pic with the Kiev:



And the same from a different angle with a Powershot on Auto:

[Bounty]

I've just started putting a roll of Ilford through my Rollei, bringing it back to life after a thirty-year sleep. The hardest part so far has been that cocking the shutter and advancing the film are two totally separate processes, so in my first four frames I probably made a total of 9 exposures.

Heh... the first time I shot medium format I took me a few tries to understand the "circle, two circle, three circle, shoot" system in the red window. My photographer through the film advance was just broken, all of my shots had blended into each other.

[Bounty]

Missed one, though it took a bit or rotating and cropping to make it presentable:

[Bounty]

Coming tomorrow, assuming I took photos worth developing: the UNESCO world heritage site of the Grand Béguinage, and the botanical gardens, even though they're pretty bleak this time of year. Fingers crossed.

But I might have got one of them right, which would be neat since it was of a B-57A fuselage I found in a bit of marshy pasture in the back-country.

So, did you get any more good pictures out of it?

[Simplicius]

So, did you get any more good pictures out of it?

Two (identical) shots of the airplane came out, and one of Rockport Harbor wasn't so underexposed that I couldn't Photoshop some life into it. Other than that, I got one inadvertent triple exposure and a lot of blank frames. I'm inclined to think that the shutter needs a little work, not least because it was exposed to a lot of moisture during my photo run.

The film worked very well, though, despite the fact that it was seven years out of expiry.





The sky is too bright (though there was no detail to lose) but that's what it took to lighten up the lower half of the image. Not an awful lot notable here, except perhaps for the ketch Adventure across the pier. I'd have gone closer for a better photo of her, but they were hauling out a sailboat with the Travelift so I stayed well clear.

[Bounty]

Neat. Are you going to try and repair it yourself?

[Simplicius]

That would be a bad idea, since in order to diagnose the issue I would probably have to take the whole thing apart - and if that kind of treatment is unavoidable, I might as well let a professional do it, assuming I can find one. Plus, I would almost certainly bungle the taking-apart or the putting back together; at least now all the parts are in the body and in the proper place.

[Bounty]

Sun 1, Bounty 0. The light meter tried to warn me, but I stuck to 1/250 and the result was... bright.

The Béguinage:





















Shots of the Dijle running through the town:





The botanical gardens, est. 1783:

























And a shot from the walk home:

[Phantasee]

I love the way the greens are so...green. Your last picture especially, that's my happy place.

[Bounty]

Thanks. I can't take all the credit, that's just the way the pictures came out. Beautiful days tend to do that.

I've got a few more coming in in a few hours, this time from the Zenit.

[Bounty]

Jesus Christ











All Zenit pics. SLR's aren't my thing.

[Phantasee]

Wow, that's all kinds of wack. I'm learning so much about photography through you, Bounty. Now I can tell you with some confidence that you fucked up the exposure (overexposed!) and you can't focus for shit.

[The Grim Squeaker]

The (new?) film has better colours (or you're fucking up less ) and the dynamic range of film is a joy to see. the shots with golden sunlight, or properly exposed bright blue skies on brick look fantastic

[Bounty]

New film? It's still the same old Superia 200.

[The Grim Squeaker]

New film? It's still the same old Superia 200.

Your last 3 shots are blurred, the shutter speed was too low.
Guess you're taking shots of more interesting things with better light then, the first batch gave the impression of being doused with dirty rainwater then burnt . (But the last few batches are better )

[Bounty]

Thanks. I try to pay attention to things like light and composition, but still I always seem to end up with the same tourist shots. Ah well, at least I'm having fun.

The last batch may be blurry because I'm still not used to turning the lens to focus. The Kiev's got a dial, so you don't have to move your hand between focusing and taking the picture, but Zenit hasn't. At least, it hink that's what the problem was since parts of the shots aren't blurred. Could be wrong, though.

[Bounty]

This is a longshot, but does anybody know a sure-fire way to secure the film leader to the take-up spool? I tried folding it, I tried tape, and while I've now got a system that sorta works, I'm pretty sure it's not the correct one. The manual for the Kiev basically tells me to improvise...