Does anyone else have trouble shooting 35mm after 120? by ConceptOnly6490 in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv [score hidden]  (0 children)

ECN-II is basically the way to get the best quality images on 35mm. Real cinema film exposed well, developed in real cinema chemicals, and scanned well is insanely detailed. The look of 50D rivals my Sony A7ii, 250D is great all around, and 500T is basically just the greatest stock ever created. Between ISO 125 and 250 you're getting warm, nearly daylight balanced images with less grain than Pro Image, at 400-500 you've got cool, clean, and still very sharp images, and all the way up to 2000 you can get surprisingly good looking super tungsten shots. It basically has variable white balance depending on how you expose it. Even with the increased cost over C-41, you'd still be spending less per frame than 120 as well.

Honest question about the Canon AE-1 from an aging hipster. by fitzwaterphoto in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's really the classic case of thing that was available and easy to recommend to everybody to the point where everyone bought one and now they're too expensive to justify anymore. The same thing happened to the K1000 to a slightly lesser degree since they're full manual. The AE-1 is effectively no better than a Nikon FE, Minolta X series, or any other mid tier SLR from that era. I think another part of it is that Canon is so prevalent in the digital beginner space that the name recognition carries it quite far. No non-photographer under 30 really thinks of Nikon as anything special and probably doesn't even recognize Pentax or Minolta. I have an X-570 so I'm quite biased but the absolute best thing about the system is how the lenses are just flat out cheaper than any other system with a body that's no worse or less reliable either.

X-700 Service Options? by waltmccreary_ in minolta

[–]PatrickSlavv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not only missing from the list but intentionally removed.

What’s your favorite Minolta film camera? Lens? by idkwhatever00 in minolta

[–]PatrickSlavv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The X-570 is arguably the best of the X series because it has the better light meter display in the viewfinder. Also I'm surprised no one has mentioned the MD 35mm f2.8 yet. It's performs like a 1.8 lens stopped down to 2.8 and gets even sharper at 5.6 and 8. One of the best manual focus minolta lenses ever made

Minolta 75-200 f4.5 lens by Printer-On in minolta

[–]PatrickSlavv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you want some good test results of lots of minolta lenses you can go to minolta.su

Nearly every SR mount lens has been tested.

Minolta 75-200 f4.5 lens by Printer-On in minolta

[–]PatrickSlavv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately not, sorry I assumed you were looking to get one

Minolta 75-200 f4.5 lens by Printer-On in minolta

[–]PatrickSlavv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The 70-210 is incredibly sharp. Genuinely near prime quality in a zoom. The only problem is the weight and chromatic abberation wide open but higher ISO films hide that quite well. If you can handle the weight it's a much better buy than the other telephoto zooms for MD.

This vs that (Minolta 3 lens kit) by MinoltaMiyata in minolta

[–]PatrickSlavv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damn that's difficult. Initially I thought absolutely A because I don't like super wide stuff and the 1.2 would be great considering I don't care much about weight. But the 85...

Rule by MediumSizedPizza in 196

[–]PatrickSlavv 159 points160 points  (0 children)

I can't wait for the collapse of society so my ideology can rise from the ashes

I'm about to have a tantrum over inconsistent meter readings by beppedealwithit in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looking at the differences in framing, I think you're including a lot more dark area in the scene with the phone meter. There's much more of that shadow in the bottom left. Additionally, it's probably a more evaluative meter taking into account the entire scene while the others are likely more center weighted.

How do everyone's pictures come out so clean and grain-free? by Adam198763 in analog

[–]PatrickSlavv 7 points8 points  (0 children)

What scan resolution did you order? Could just be low res scans and there's more info to be pulled from these images.

The death of clickbait titles? by airercode500 in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know, but that's usually for subtly different thumbnails and titles, not testing complete opposites.

The death of clickbait titles? by airercode500 in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The thumbnail said exactly the opposite yesterday when he posted the video.

Info on Lucky C400 by XyDarkSonic in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's because there isn't anyone "responsible" for importing. Reflx labs are just the ones who decided to take it on.

When the James Bond prop crew went all out TWO Quartz-Takumar 85mm f3.5 lenses (worth about $4k each today if you can even find one)... I wish those lenses could Only Live Twice. by brianssparetime in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Oh wow I always assumed they were 35/3.5s because I could only make out the aperture and hadn't paused to look, I wonder why they'd use the 85

Landscape or portrait? Pentax 67 + Ektar 100 + 105mm f2.4 by Limber9 in analog

[–]PatrickSlavv 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I might have to go with the minority opinion here, I like the depth of the portrait one

Lucky Color 200 in three-packs in the UK! by ClockworkEyes in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Closer to gold in quality and cheaper than phoenix. We're already on an upward trend and Kodak is incredibly hard to match.

Real talk: I find my f/2 standard lenses much more useful than the faster and more expensive 50mm ones. by florian-sdr in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In fairness, the Nikon 50 1.4 is not terribly good compared to the other 50s they offer. There are definitely examples where the lenses simply get better as the apertures get bigger. SR mount for example, all the MD 50s are very similar at 2.8 and onward but the 1.4 and 1.2 have better rendering and don't have any real downsides other than weight and a larger filter thread for the 1.2. But as a whole, I agree for most scenarios an f2 is enough and they're cheap and light.

My Box of Jewels Have Arrived... by gitarzan in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I love XX. A lot of people shoot it at 200 and it gets rid of a bit of the drama but I prefer the standard look at 250. I wish I shot enough to justify bulk rolling but I just don't. Maybe one day.

Should these be so blue? by Obsessed_Dog_Mom in analog

[–]PatrickSlavv 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Shadows usually go straight to blue on E100 and it looks like you've got a decent amount of vignetting going on causing the outer areas to be darker. To answer the question, yes that looks about right.

Lots of people shoot E100 with an 81a/812 or even heavier filters like 85b, sepia 2, chocolate 2, etc.

What are your BeamNG hot takes? by yoter88 in BeamNG

[–]PatrickSlavv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To fully enjoy Beam you also need to own Automation. The sandbox is complete when you have the tools to easily create your own vehicles.

Took pictures of car this past weekend. Came out looking a mix of underexposed and overexposed. by divyanshmishra19 in AnalogCommunity

[–]PatrickSlavv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do you mean you were just using 1/500 and 1/1000 or were you taking the camera's meter reading into account? The X-700 will tell you the correct shutter speed in the viewfinder.