Zorki-4 first adventure

[csaba369]

My new oldies:




First roll (only test pics):















I can't believe how an old zorki with jupiter can render colors.

The lens was a jupiter-12.
Scanned with Minolta 5400, but only 'prescan' about 640dpi.
The film is a 'super market quality' Fujicolor 100.
Lightmeter was 'sunny16'..., all shot about f11

[greg]

I like the color and subjects, especially the girl and apple.

One thing I wonder about - you say these are scanned. Are they scanned from the negatives or prints ? Our local one hour labs tend to 'adjust' prints to their own liking. This is so common that I have stickers made that I put on the envelope holding the film for processing that say "Please Print As Shot. Do Not Adjust Color, Contrast or Brightness. Thank You"

Is this done in other places around the world ?

[Attila]

Try next time with slide you will be shocked I think !

[csaba369]

[GrahamNR17]

I love the look of the Zorki 4 camera. I think I should try to get one

[csaba369]

[Attila]

[Nesster]

The Jup-12 is a good one, I like it a lot. My Fed-3 doesn't look half as good as the Zorkis. When I bought it, I compared view finders to the Zorkis, a later version than yours, and the Zorki VF was better than the Fed, only the Fed's rf patch was clearer. So I went with the Fed.

[F16SUNSHINE]

[bawang]

I am negotiating to have a Zorki-4 delivered to me. It was on posted locally about 3 hrs from my location. I have no clue whether it works or not, but the for the asking price of $10, I will give it a shot. It's s/n says it's made in 1973 and comes with 2/50 (Jupiter?).

From what I have read the Jup-12 you have is a very nice lens which will probably the lens I will be looking for if I get the Z4.

Anyway, the color from your J12 is very nice.

Cheers.

[csaba369]

I've just made a normal scan 3800x2500 2700dpi.

The sharpness is not bad, as good as my 350D with an average lens. And I can make 5700dpi too, which is almost 50x70cm print from 35mm neg....



and a 100% crop



I think this is not bad - the quality, not the pic...

[Attila]

Crop is very pictorial like a paint..

If normal film this good on slide it will be lot better than 350D with any lens.

[csaba369]

Some question:

- is there any good, not too expensive viewfinder(s) for 35/85/135mm lenses?
- can I use voigtlander lenses (classic m39) with zorki? Viewfinder will work?

[Attila]

[csaba369]

[csaba369]

[nemesis101]

I like the colours, but is it my ancient eyes or does there appear to be a lot of sharpening artifacts in some of the shots?

Almost gives an oil painted look?

Probably just me!

Doug.

[martinsmith99]

[csaba369]

Ok men, as you asked:

Used Vuescan then Gimp for resize and crop, nothing more:







This is not my taste, I like post-procedure very much.

[csaba369]

And the last one, from 5400dpi (7597x4992 pixel)



I'll use digital only for macro and with long tele, film is much better for me than digital. Film has soul, sensitive stuff, pictorial if needed, really colorful.

Thank you for visiting.

[Nesster]

Do you have dust removal on? in the resulting pixel peep, sometimes that creates these sorts of artifacts.

[csaba369]

[csaba369]

Here you are, a simple scan turned off every luxury...





Do you see any difference?

[zewrak]

Yes. I see a big difference. I say thats how you should scan it, from now on.

[GrahamNR17]

Very big difference. Always use that setting from now on. It's much mroe realistic