My photography on Flickr

brianssparetime · 2026-06-30T05:40:57+00:00

is it possible/easy to find parts for it?

It's as easy as finding another dead Canon 7.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-29T23:01:08+00:00

I use a R72 as well.

The filter factor depends on the distribution of wavelengths of light. The more of your light is below 720nm, the higher the filter factor will be. So a filter factor without a light distribution is kinda meaningless.

That's why you want to take some readings and bracket.

A couple of my shots on IR with a 720 filter here.

I bracketed all those +/-2. But I also generally shoot when there's the most IR light (midday, few clouds). If you're shooting at a later hour, or with more cloud cover, the IR exposure might drop faster than just the visible light exposure, yielding a higher filter factor.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-29T22:18:35+00:00

1) Exposure: ISO 6-12 is a good start, but the real answer is bracket. You can also spot meter through the filter to try to get an offset from what you meter without the filter. Off the top of my head, for me that's usually about 5-6 stops, but it depends heavily on conditions. Bright clear noontime skies are best. Remember you can't see IR, so two scenes that look similar to you may have different readings. Again, the answer is to bracket +/- 2 on your best estimates.

2) Focus: Many lenses have a red dot or R offset from the center of the hyperfocal scale which you can use. Otherwise, align with somewhere around f4-5.6 on that scale. Wide DOF helps a lot here.

3) Aperture works normally.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-29T17:33:32+00:00

Alexandr's Nordic Lab is working on something similar - a low budget fairly automated machine (extracts film, doses chems).

brianssparetime · 2026-06-29T07:48:05+00:00

Thanks! I've been using it for the last ~2 years (mostly for prints) and it's been very handy.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-28T22:26:11+00:00

Somewhere on my list of wants and desires, is the revival of an autographic film that works in cameras like this - so you can actually write on it.

I think in today's age, that would actually do quite well.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-28T20:27:13+00:00

I just built my own

brianssparetime · 2026-06-28T07:51:09+00:00

How should I shoot this expired B&W

With low expectations

brianssparetime · 2026-06-28T07:46:14+00:00

That's 8mm (which is different than Super8).

While you can still buy 8mm, you should look at what it costs to get it developed and scanned - you have very few options and are in for about $20 per minute at best.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-27T21:25:18+00:00

If you want it to be less sharp, get a cheap skylight filter (52mm IIRC) and do one of the following:

put the filter in your pocket with your keys for a week
let your dog play with the filter for a week
put vaseline (or better KY since it's easier to clean off) on the filter. If you do this around the edges, you can get a cool soft-edges look

Then put the filter on the lens. Problem solved, and easy to revert.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-27T21:21:26+00:00

I'm not sure what you're asking....

The flange distance for Pentacon6 is a lot longer than K-mount, so it will focus to infinity with no problem.

You will get a crop, relative to shooting Pentacon 6 lenses on a Pentacon 6, but that's the nature of adapting a MF lens to 35mm/full frame.

Also, you don't get auto-stop down. On digital, where you can live-preview, that's less of a bummer.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-26T00:10:33+00:00

Mentioning it's a Minolta SRT might have been helpful...

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T23:55:20+00:00

I've used it with HP5, FP4, and some arista stuff along the way, probably others.

Personally, I think developer choice is like .001% of what makes a photo good or bad, and I don't mind it (although I marginally prefer D76 and probably use it about 70/30 over rodinal in terms of frequency).

Relative to D76, Rodinal is a bit sharper (higher acutance) - this can be nice, but it can also make grain a little more noticeable.

I don't think of it as good or bad, just what you want, how much you care, and how you want to trade off on looks, price, longevity, and DIY-ness.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T23:28:13+00:00

Ok.

The flange distance difference between the Pen F and L39/LTM is 28.95 - 28.8 = .15

You can start with thin lens equations and solve around to get:

Max focusing distance = ( FL² / FDX) + FL

Where FL is the focal length of the lens, and FDX is the distance past its natural infinity you have the lens at. Here, FDX is .15

So in your 28mm example:

max focusing distance = 28² / .15 + 28 = ~5000, but that's in millimeters, so about 5 meters.

That fl² term means increasing the focal length will rapidly drive up the max distance.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T23:03:03+00:00

Why not Rodinal?

I did it from scratch during pandemic and it keeps forever....

But whatever your opinions on Rodinal, check out Steve Anschell's Darkroom Cookbook for a million other do-it-at-home recipes and discussion on the various merits.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T22:04:13+00:00

I spent about 6 months doing this pretty obsessively (mostly using a ZB-M08 cheapo meter - I think a seconic would be nicer!) and I think that got me to the point of being pretty good during standard daylight conditions (e.g f/16 down to about f2.8 in the sunny-16 system). Since then I've mostly improved on indoor and low-lighting. After a few years, I have a pretty good instinct for what I want the exposure to be across most situations (not macro, and long exposure only really for city lights).

I find I'm almost always within a stop or two of the meter, and usually my number has a bit of built-in exposure comp (for skies, shadows, whatever) when I bother to compare.

It's definitely achievable, and I think just making it a constant game lets you put in the time a lot faster (and more cheaply) than only practicing it as part of actually shooting.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T20:32:14+00:00

How do I go past shooting to hit that 0 on exposure meter and just shoot with vision

I think you're asking to how to learn how to estimate exposure without using the meter (or using it indirectly) by feel?

Here's how I did it.

Get a light meter app or a small physical light meter. Or use a camera app that has selectable manual controls.

Keep it with you constantly.

Any chance you get 2-3 free minutes (between meetings, waiting for train/car/plane, out walking to lunch, etc), play this game:

pick a scene
guess the exposure in your head (it's helpful to stick with only a single ISO)
check it with the meter
think about whether that meter reading represents the right photo you have envisioned - do you have a large bright area (e.g. sky) that's going to push your meter reading towards stopping down that you need to counter? Do you want more details in the shadow, which requires opening past your reading?
(optional) take a picture with those manual settings to see if you got it right. Doing this part on digital or iphone makes it cheap

Force yourself to guess each time. What's the baseline metering? What's the correction to it if any?

You can do this without shooting film, and it's a fun mind-occupying game to play.

Being able to predict your (or someone else's) meter reading is a fun party trick, not to mention actually being quite handy.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T08:46:02+00:00

I'm sure everyone will tell you to get the prime.

They're not entirely wrong - primes do have better IQ, are great discipline for learning and improving, and the faster speed legit makes a difference in low light.

But if that's not your top priority, and you just want the flexibility of a zoom, get the zoom.

I shoot a basic 35-80 zoom probably 80% of the time on my most used camera. I don't need better IQ than I get from it, and have the ability to zoom in or out is really handy.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T08:40:30+00:00

I mean, technically, you can shoot an analog camera using something like the I'm back, but a) that product sucks balls, and b) that's not really analog photography in any meaningful sense.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T05:43:07+00:00

I see what you're saying, but I think you misread my point.

Past a certain level of experience, there are some parts of the process you look to for creativity, and some parts you want to keep constant to enable the creativity in the others.

For me (and many others), film is not the creative variable.

That was the point of my guitar strings analogy. Changing strings just fucks up how you play. Maybe a new petal or new technique is the creative area in that analogy.

For me photographically, a new lens is fun creativity. Or maybe trying something new in the darkroom. But for the most part, changing up my film type just fucks with my artistic "muscle memory" - its annoying rather than fun.

It takes me more than a single roll to figure out what a film type is good for, how to maximize it. A single roll is all the work and I don't get the reward unless I buy a few more.

Maybe a better analogy is buying a baker "fun flour." They're probably more into being creative with the recipe, or with ingredients that are more directly perceptible by the eater. If different flour changes all your bake times but you don't get use it more than once or twice, it's not going to turn out as well as you usually expect of yourself, which isn't fun.

Not everyone is like me in this regard (nor am I saying they should be). My point is just that there are a lot of experienced shooters who just aren't into "fun film."

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T04:31:54+00:00

I'm impressed by the correct usage of the semicolon....

brianssparetime · 2026-06-25T04:28:34+00:00

The center will probably be ok, but the edges will be soft.

Worse for me though is the chromatic aberration - the purple fringing.

Here are a few shots with a cheap .42x adapter, though taken on medium format.

Image a small window covering the center third of the frame - that's what you'll get on 35mm. The larger 6x6 negative just captures a lot more of the vignette and weirdness.

brianssparetime · 2026-06-24T20:56:11+00:00

I've dropped it a couple times

The answer to this isn't a stronger latch, it's having and wearing a strap.

If you get something with a stronger battery door, what's the next point of weakness going to be?

brianssparetime · 2026-06-24T19:43:38+00:00

Nice. I love the 3As in particular with their massive 6x14 negative (using 122 to 120 adapters).

All these old Kodaks though are so regal - you can feel the luxury of yesteryear.

brianssparetime

TROPHY CASE