poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10472 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
negative is better than digital
if you have a crop dslr, negative is the only way to use your wide lens
sensors have problem with wide angle, they don't see light coming at angle; the result is vigneting and awful border
the second problem is the sensor filter who eat all small details, textures are washed out and everything look like plastic
another problem with new generation sensor is hardware noise filter that cannot be disabled, this is the price to pay to the 25000 iso and more
unfortunately digital labs also use heavy noise filter and results are even worse than digital
it cost good scanners and time to get good negative quality, but it is much better than digital |
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11059 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Negative film gives more exposure latitude to correct during developing if necessary -- there is more low-lovel light information available on negative film that can be brought out, more detail available in darker portions of image than on digital. Digital stops are different than film stop. In dimest digital stop only two colors are available, in next digital stop only 4 colors, etc., while film captures all the colors at all the stops. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
eeyore_nl
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 837 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eeyore_nl wrote:
hexi wrote: |
You can develop/print films home, with equal results as a lab used to do, its quite simple. The main advantage is in terms of large prints or slides, the colors are better, and in terms of costs its cheaper than a "digital lab" including camera + a decent A2/A3 printer + ink and paper.
|
True, but with already one room short, a darkroom (or even a corner of a room) is not going to appear soon. |
|