Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Central Park (SMC "K" 135mm f/2.5)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:57 pm    Post subject: Central Park (SMC "K" 135mm f/2.5) Reply with quote

Some from Central Park. All shot with Kodak CN400BW film rated at 320 ASA, Pentax MX, Pentax K 135mm f/2.5 lens.









Other images available on flickr [link=http://www.flickr.com/photos/31364196@N04/sets/72157624178063817/]here.[/link]

Best wishes, Kris.


PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very nice set, like your results at 320 with this film. Especially like the comp
in the last.


PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent result

I especially love the first two, and you got a fine version of that last


PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cool photos.

The digital print is really well done also. I mean, they pop on my screen as few other BW.


PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The top two are priceless. What a range of facial expressions ...


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really love the last one!


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

+1 impressive quality


PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

these are really nice shots; i am very much liking your b&w work!

i notice that many times you set the camera below the iso setting of the film: here you shot 400 film at 320. could you tell me why you do that and if, when you develop the film, you have to tell the developer that you shot it that way.

thanks
tony


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 6:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rbelyell wrote:
these are really nice shots; i am very much liking your b&w work!

i notice that many times you set the camera below the iso setting of the film: here you shot 400 film at 320. could you tell me why you do that and if, when you develop the film, you have to tell the developer that you shot it that way.


Negative film likes slight overexposure, far more than underexposure. So you can shoot at ASA320 without the need to pull during processing.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Kodak CN400BW (which is one of my fav films) shows increased contrast when slightly overexposed (at least to my experience).

These are great shots. Thanks for sharing.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the opinion is this film works best overexposed, but these images to me look a tad underexposed...am i crazy?


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

second photo (the girl) is famous!

(nice contrast btw, i didnt know, that this C41 processed B&W film looks so great. time to buy roll or two... Smile)


PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rbelyell wrote:
the opinion is this film works best overexposed, but these images to me look a tad underexposed...am i crazy?


I would rather say they look like high contrast.

In my first reply, I overlooked that the film is Kodak BW400CN. While officially rated as an ASA 400 film, I prefer to use it as an ASA 200 film. At 400 or higher, the "grain" (actually dye clouds) get rather ugly.

Shot at ASA 200, it is a great film, in my opinion.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

These chromogenic BW films have a very wide exposure latitude. Setting a high ISO (or under exposing them) gives contrasty and more grainy images, setting a low ISO (or over exposing them) gives finer grain but flatter contrast images. Of course, the contrast can be boosted either in software or by the choice of paper at the printing stage.

I admit I use this as my 'lazy man' film when I am forcing myself out of my comfort zone and trying to take quick 'street' shots. When I am taking photos I have time to meter properly and fuss over, I use Delta 100. It is also useful when using an older camera if you don't have 100% faith in the metering or the accuracy of the shutter speed. It is a very forgiving film. I am trying a roll of 120 through my Lubitel at the moment. I shot a roll of Velvia 50 through the Lubi (a very unforgiving film!) and they are all about a stop or a stop and a half under-exposed. Sad They were all very carefully metered using my handheld meter too. They should scan OK though. Smile

K.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

#1 for me, excellent!


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
#1 for me, excellent!


That is my favourite too. Perversely, the Pentax Photo Gallery accepted the other three but not that one!

Best wishes, Kris.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do like those Kris.
Must try 320 the next time that I use 400cn. I mostley use XP2 or APXS.
I have started to set for overexposure with Superia XTRA and it gives much better results.
That`s a nice lens too.
I`ve been debating whether to get a 135 for my Pentax ME.
Looks like you`ve decided it for me Smile

Michael


PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

#2 for me. All of them are good, though. Nice series.