advertisement


Zuiko 40mm

Vuk,

It looks fine to me, too, but you typically don't get that kind of contrast without a bit of cooking.

Joe
 
cooking is part of the B&W deal.,, but it has to be proper cooking, which is the case here. i would have done pretty much the same, if that matters.


vuk.
 
Not much cooking at all Joe, pretty much al dente - regular scanning with auto settings in Vuescan, then saved as .dng files and the same slight curves I use on pretty much everything, colour or B&W.

The first file does look a bit cooked, so I rescanned it again to make sure - but that's just the way it is. [Just replaced, with the the brightness down a touch]

The Zeiss might be underexposing a stop in darker situations, which with the two stop push on the Rollei Retro/Agfa APX 100 film will help to give this look. But it's way more obvious with the Zeiss than with a Canonet and an OM-2 I tried at the same time, same film, developing and scanning.
 
I am not familiar with Rollei Retro, but if you 2 stop under-expose Neopan and then compensate with longer development time (in Rodinal) then it certainly does boost the contrast.
 
Rollei Retro 100 is rebadged Agfa APX 100 - loads of it very cheap in Germany at the moment - about 1.40E a roll.
 
Yes, it's got the look of pushed 35mm film - reduced dynamic range and extra contrast, and the grain being more obvious due to the longer development time and the greater magnification.

I've just had a quick look at the silverprint site, and the Rollei film is more expensive than I thought - i'm having a bit of a 35mm resurgence, as i'm getting into my Pentax MX again. Anyone tried Fomapan 100? I'm trying to get off the ilford wagon, and rather than just use Tri-X I thought i'd give something else a go...
 
Ah, just found it on Ag Photographic for £1.89 a roll - not quite your £1.20, but i'll probably buy a chunk and see how it freezes...
 
I've used Fomapan 200. Apparently its supposed to be good for pushing without any increase in development times, so I exposed it at 400 asa and developed at box speed. Hideous gravel sized grain was the result!

I've got a roll of 200 on the go at the moment which I've rated at 160 asa to see if it works out any better.
 
BTW, due to your mention of 40mm lenses, i've picked one up for my Pentax MX. Their design is a f2.8 pancake, and i've wondered about it before. I'll see how it works out when it turns up. I paid £45 for it, which is about the right money. Hard to argue with lenses at this price...

Cesare
 
Yeah, that's the one. The MX is a really nice camera, and the standard 50s are all good - i've got a 50/1.7 on mine, and there was a 50/2 and a 50/1.4. At sensible apertures they are all rather fine.

The MX, if you don't know, is a manual camera with a meter - it has no auto mode. The later ME model had an aperture priority shooting mode, and some buttons to adjust stuff if you want to shoot from the hip in variable light. The shutter on the MX is cloth, so it is pretty unlikely to be damaged when picking up an older camera. This does limit the shutter to 1/1000th of a second.

The viewfinder on the MX is quite special.

Cesare
 
There's one supposedly particular excellent 50mm f/1.4 isn't there - a Super Takumar or something? Sorry, don't know a lot about Pentax.
 
Yes, the SMC 50mm f/1.4 in M or A guise - the M will be cheaper as they don't have the ability to have the aperture controlled by the body. The 1.4 has a different 8 blade aperture mechanism c/w the 6 blade 1.7, and gives better bokeh.
 
guybat said:
There's one supposedly particular excellent 50mm f/1.4 isn't there - a Super Takumar or something? Sorry, don't know a lot about Pentax.
Click to expand...

Super Takumar would be an M42 mount - lenses were named after Takuma Kajiwara. Newer K mount lenses are called SMC-Pentax in place of Takumar ...

of course you could also get SMC takumars ;-)

WIKI
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top