So this isn’t in all my photos only some, I Use a Pentax super A1. The bottom half of the photo sometimes comes out as nothing. This is annoying and unpredictable. I have read that It may be the shutter, so would using it at a slower shutter speed maybe help? I usually adjust apature manually and let the camera decide the shutter speed. Could I maybe not go quicker than 250? I just cant remember which shuttter speed the photos that came out okay were taken at/#.
Ever since the 35mm small frame gained popularity in the mid-1900s it’s well known (and perhaps lamented) the particular crop factor became a de-facto standard by late 1900s when people discussed their fields of view, a useful thing when talking about compositions, compression and other related things.
Nowadays one can say he’s got a “35mm lens” when he means he bought a micro-4/3 lens with a focal length of 17mm. Perhaps not technically correct but as a “standard” the 35mm equivalency gets the point home. You know what kind of a field of view a 35mm lens sports.
How were these coffee machine conversations back then, before 35mm took over the world?
Was it just like “well I have this here lens says 200 mm on the side and it makes a mighty good portrait” and that be the end of that? 🙂
I have some 35mm slides that I would like to digitalize. I am thinking about building something like this, https://petapixel.com/2014/02/11/neat-diy-projector-rig-lets-digitize-15-slides-per-minute-automatically/ (modifying a slide projector to feed be slides and mounting a dslr photographing the slide currently shown by the projector) and am wondering what type of lens would be best for the job. The projects I have seen uses a macro lens but to my question.
For this kind of flat to flat photography where both the sensor and subject is 35mm across what advantages and dissadvantages does different lens types like macro lenses, projector lenses and enlarger lenses.
What I have figured out of my own, might contain missconceptions.
Macro lenses, no fussing around with adapters and extension tubes
Projector lens, one tend to come with a used projector so it will be cheap
Enlarger lens, optimized for flat to flat projection
I obviously realize that I will have to adapt any non native lenses and add extension tubes until I can focus in macro distances.
So my question, which kinds of lenses ate suitable for this and what are their respective advantages and dussadvantages?
I recently shot a roll of kodak 200 (36 exposures) and got them developed on the high street and all 36 shots have been exposed onto one frame; all other 35 frames are blank, shown on the attached image. What could have caused this? I loaded and unloaded the film as usual but am using a borrowed K1000. This isn’t the first time this has happened so could really do with some ideas as to why this happens. cheers!
enter image description here
Why do I have to manually focus in “P” ? This lens says AF-S. I have gone through the settings and tried using different focus settings and the camera won’t auto focus but I can manally focus. My camera is not on manual settings. I just bought this D5500 after using my D200 since 2006. I’m a female 76 yrs old and my D200 gets too heavy when I’m hiking. I consider myself an advanced amateur. …not a professional. Is anyone else having this focus problem with the D 5500?
I have 4 binders filled with 35mm black-and-white negatives and contact sheets. I’ve had good luck scanning the contact sheets, but bad luck scanning the slides. Professional scanning services are 50 cents to $ 1.25/image. Apparently you don’t want to scan to B&W JPEG, because they are only 8-bits deep, but scanning to TIFF results in files that are 20-30 MB/image. And none of the home scanners are truly automatic, by which I mean that I can’t just put down the negatives on the scanner, hit a button, and end up with 10 decent scans.
I’ve also read that Digital ICE doens’t work with black-and-white negatives.
So what’s the right approach for scanning a lot of 35mm B&W negatives. I’m interested in preserving them and making them usable. My budget is $ 500 to $ 1000, and the scanning cost of the commercial scanners seems $ 5000 or more for the amount of images that I have.
My impression, confirmed by some of the research I’ve done, is that scanned negatives tend to be more noisy on screen that they would be when printed in a dark room.
I mostly scan films because I don’t know yet how to print in a dark room. What would be a reasonable noise reduction setting in Lightroom to make the photo on screen look similar to what it would be when printed in a darkroom?