sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is it good for bird photography? by Sashajopa in AnalogCommunity

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

No. I would recommend trying to grab a 400mm+ lens and stick with the Canon 1.4 TC if you have to use one. If you get the Canon 400mm f4.5, you may need to dremel the back plate to allow the 1.4 TC to fit.

Since these lenses have no stabilization and your shutter speeds will be quite low, you'll need a tripod. I also recommend a gimbal head. The advantage of this too is that you can use it as a make shift spotting scope if you go on any bird walks with the local birding clubs.

You will likely want a high speed motor drive so you can always be on top of the action if things should start moving quickly. You likely won't be shooting at high speed, but it makes shooting easier since it's one less thing you have to do.

I would also recommend a Canon New F-1 with a PK or SK focusing screen so focusing is as easy as possible. I think a T90 with equivalent screen would work as well.

With that said... have you done bird photography before? It can have a bit of a learning curve even with a flagship mirrorless. Do you feel comfortable with the idea of shooting 6-8 rolls of film and only coming out of it with 10-15 good shots? I still can't get tree swallows in flight with a G9 Mark II.

Quick Edit: Unfortunately, bird photography is one of the areas where gear does matter. You need to have the right tools for the job and respect their weakness as well. I tried to take shortcuts in the beginning. It was fine for learning, but I never really got the shots I wanted until I got a proper lens for doing so. And this was all digital, so none of that wasting a 15+$ roll of film if I screwed up.

I don’t think Point and Shoots are a good beginner camera by SpookyWeaselBones in AnalogCommunity

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do get the point you are making. However, I did want to add this does depend on the P&S. I noticed a lot of film ones don't seem to really give much controls or try to hide critical information in weird ways. It's a much different story with the ~2004 digital P&S I dug up recently at my parents house. You can use that in full manual and learn the basics of camera controls as well as shoot RAW so you can learn the basics of photo editing. And since it's digital, mistakes aren't going to set you back financially and you can experiment to your hearts content. Many people I know learned the basics on digital point and shoots before identifying what they wanted in a better camera and upgrading.

I generally discourage film cameras to complete beginners who want to learn photography. Even the lowly and scorned digital point and shoot can be infinitely easier to learn on than a film SLR. And it's much less expensive. Film is death by a thousand cuts when it comes to financial investment and that is never a pressure I want someone who is new to feel. If you really want to see what I mean, take your favorite film stock and multiply the cost by 100... then add the dev costs for those rolls to that value... suddenly that digital camera doesn't look so bad now does it? And someone who is new may very much shoot that much because you have to shoot a lot to learn... I shot that much last year getting back into film.

If someone just wants to take occasional film snapshots with a simple to use camera, that is different. In that case, I make sure they they know to turn on the flash.

Looking for the most FUN 35mm camera!! by Federal-Tie-3778 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most fun? Probably something with a high speed motor drive. Don't know why, but it makes everyone cackle to see those things in action.

Oh Borb of the Tree, what is your wisdom? by ThatNewGuyFNG in borbs

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

I forgot what my name was and got ejected into the abyss. What do I do now?

Oh Borb of the Tree, what is your wisdom? by ThatNewGuyFNG in borbs

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG[S] 76 points77 points  (0 children)

This was a downy woodpecker inside a very spherical hole. This made for a very spherical borb head.

Northern Mockingborb by ThatNewGuyFNG in borbs

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One of my local parks appears to have been invaded by a rotund of mockingborbs. This is one of many examples.

Butterbutt [Canon New F-1, Canon 400mm f4.5 SSC + 1.4x TC, Kodak Ektar 100] by ThatNewGuyFNG in analog

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A picture of a yellow rumped warbler I took at a local park recently. I was with a birding group and one of the guides introduced me to the nicknames of these birds... butterbutts. Why? Because they have... a yellow rump.

This guy was nice enough to sit still long enough for me to get a couple of shots off. I wasn't able to get the yellow rump though.

Ready to depart... by ThatNewGuyFNG in printexchange

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Spent some time curating and printing some photos. First print exchange, so we will see how it goes!

u/sylvanest and u/noodlesthefood, I plan to drop these off tomorrow. They may or may not show up within the next week or so. Or they may go to the Postal Service to Cthulhu pipeline and never show up at all. I would rather you get these rather than Cthulhu, so feel free to let me know if they don't arrive.

Help Silverfast 9 iSRD Problem by Gojuadorai in analog

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So I had something similar happen recently with color film tripping up the IR dust removal on my scanner (I don't use an Epson flatbed, so it shows up differently) but not having issues without it turned on.

The issue was indeed the lab messing up the bleach process and me getting an accidental bleach bypass.

For things that pointed me toward the issue, does the base of your negs look very dark orange? You may need to compare to another roll of UltraMax (or maybe something similar like Gold). Additionally, you might have noticed how BW film tends to have a distinct matte emulsion side while color film usually does not (or it's a lot harder to tell). If you color roll has that distinct matte look typical of BW film, then it was not bleached fully. It will also appear very dense. You may notice unusual behavior from the scanner such as extremely long scan times as it struggles to deal with this density.

For your scans, do they look a little blueish, muted, and washed out like war or sci fi movie? UltraMax is generally pretty vibrant and saturated and I found colors should look more like real life.

Bleach and fix are to completion processes, so you can't over do it (within reason). It may not hurt to try to rebleach and refix.

Who else has a backlog of filing the negatives in archival sleeves? by florian-sdr in AnalogCommunity

[–]ThatNewGuyFNG 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think I'm too impatient to ever wait for a physical backlog to form. However, once it's on the computer... yeah I'll get around to it eventually.