Film Cameras

[genetic]

On topic: I recently exchanged my film cameras, with lenses and bags, for a couple of bottles of Bells

You'd only shoot on film if you need to - otherwise digital is perfectly fine.

 

[Dolby]

On topic: I recently exchanged my film cameras, with lenses and bags, for a couple of bottles of Bells

I've just got rid of my Pentax MZ50 and 55mm lens for R50.00 ... hehe

 

[noxibox]

You say its bull****? Evidence?

All you have is a company that claims they measured whether the grain was visible. In addition it's for a ridiculously low film speed. i.e. it's bull****.

 

[genetic]

All you have is a company that claims they measured whether the grain was visible. In addition it's for a ridiculously low film speed. i.e. it's bull****.

But it's still possible. I can guarantee you you could easily get the equivalent 100 mega pixels + out of any 35mm film using the right processing and scanning methods - even at an ISO of 200+.

 

[BigAl-sa]

But it's still possible. I can guarantee you you could easily get the equivalent 100 mega pixels + out of any 35mm film using the right processing and scanning methods - even at an ISO of 200+.

Using the same reasoning, I can get 100+ MP out of a cellphone camera with Genuine Fractals

 

[koffiejunkie]

All you have is a company that claims they measured whether the grain was visible. In addition it's for a ridiculously low film speed. i.e. it's bull****.

Just because it's low speed film doesn't make it BS. The applications where people tend to need massive resolution, i.e. landscape, architecture, fashion, product, etc is arguably the very areas where you can use tripods and lighting equipment which makes film speed irrelevant.

 

[genetic]

Using the same reasoning, I can get 100+ MP out of a cellphone camera with Genuine Fractals

Producing below par results .

Film has the actual resolution - no interpolation required, quality often depending on the scanner itself. A normal 35mm negative is often touted as being able to deliver 10k+ vertical equivalent pixels (which is 100MP).

However, you'd only ever be able to get that resolution from film with very expensive development process, which is way beyond what the average joe would be able to do, hence digital being more than adequate, and producing brilliant results.

Edit: PDF from Arri (35mm motion pticture camera) showing the resolution from a 10k scanner of a 35mm film frame.

http://efilm.com/publish/2008/05/19/4K plus.pdf

 

[bwana]

Just because it's low speed film doesn't make it BS. The applications where people tend to need massive resolution, i.e. landscape, architecture, fashion, product, etc is arguably the very areas where you can use tripods and lighting equipment which makes film speed irrelevant.

But they're typically not shooting 35mm are they?

 

[koffiejunkie]

But they're typically not shooting 35mm are they?

I wasn't saying they were. I was addressing the speed issue. The MF guys tend to shoot at low ISO too.

 

[ponder]

Using the same reasoning, I can get 100+ MP out of a cellphone camera with Genuine Fractals

That's like trying to turn lead in to gold. It's no substitution for true resolution, the improvement only goes so far.

 

[genetic]

That's like trying to turn lead in to gold. It's no substitution for true resolution, the improvement only goes so far.

It's like taking a 80x80 icon and blowing it up to poster size (using interpolation). Looks ok from a few meters away - but upon closer inspection, all you seeing is a muddied plain of blurred gradients.

 

[bwana]

That's like trying to turn lead in to gold. It's no substitution for true resolution, the improvement only goes so far.

Actually Genuine Fractals does an amazing job. I've used it to blow up 10MP files into massive prints with astonishing clarity.

 

[genetic]

Actually Genuine Fractals does an amazing job. I've used it to blow up 10MP files into massive prints with astonishing clarity.

But it's still interpolation.

You could bow up a few "hundred mega pixel" film frame scans to the same desired effect - with an even higher end result, but still, I get your point - digital can provide amazing results with all the benefits of digital attached.

 

[ponder]

Actually Genuine Fractals does an amazing job. I've used it to blow up 10MP files into massive prints with astonishing clarity.

I've saw something on the net a few years ago where they shot something with a 5MP Olympus E-1 and via interpolation created an image to go on the side of a semi trailer for advertising purposes.

Agreed the results are good for large objects from a distance not requiring to much sharpness but if I was standing in front of it it's still no substitute for resolution.

 

[Zing]

if anyone (preferably in joburg) has a working 35mm camera you'd like to swap for a couple of bottles of bells or up to r500, please pm me.

 

[koffiejunkie]

if anyone (preferably in joburg) has a working 35mm camera you'd like to swap for a couple of bottles of bells or up to r500, please pm me.

For 500 bucks I can make a profit out of you! *cough* ebay *cough* I think my EOS 500N was £20 i.e. around R220 in today's money.

 

[Logo]

Hey Zing, what exactly are you looking for. I may be able to help out.

 

[Zing]

hey logo, something i can load 35mm film into

i have an olympus pen ee2 but it needs attention and i've been advised to maybe cut my losses. so maybe a step up from there, a pentax MZ-M, hopefully with a lens? or a canon 300, but i can only consider it if it comes with a lens or if you tell me my current lenses will fit the body. obviously the autofocus won't work on the older body but that's okay. anyway, something in that field.

i want to play with film, do some arty stuff, get the basics right etc etc.

Edit: Just bought a Canon EOS 500N with Sigma 28-200 Aspherical Zoom Lens for R350. So I'm sorted. Thanks anyway.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Zing, your Sigma 70-300 will work on a Canon film body. The 18-55 and 18-135 won't.

 

[bwana]

hey logo, something i can load 35mm film into

i have an olympus pen ee2 but it needs attention and i've been advised to maybe cut my losses. so maybe a step up from there, a pentax MZ-M, hopefully with a lens? or a canon 300, but i can only consider it if it comes with a lens or if you tell me my current lenses will fit the body. obviously the autofocus won't work on the older body but that's okay. anyway, something in that field.

i want to play with film, do some arty stuff, get the basics right etc etc.

I'm willing to bet that of your current lenses only the Sigma will fit a Canon SLR - the 18-55 and 18-135 are both EF-S iirc. A cheap 50mm f/1.8 (which should be in everyone's bag anyway) would do a great job though.

You want to get artsy and do black and white? Nik Silver Efx Pro is your answer.