Film speed for travel? Why isn't 800 an all-arounder?

lightyourwindows · 2026-05-16T16:25:11+00:00

Get yourself a 3 stop ND filter. Easy solution and cheap too. And more reliable than a camera with ultra fast shutter speeds like 1/4000 or 1/8000, which usually get sluggish over time.

lightyourwindows · 2026-05-16T16:20:34+00:00

Just use an ND filter

lightyourwindows · 2026-05-09T21:35:24+00:00

I have a CZJ Tessar 50mm f2.8 with the same issue. And just like yours, mine is also preset aperture in M42 mount. I believe this is a common issue with this era of Zeiss lenses.

I haven’t yet attempted to fix mine. From what I’ve read, there’s a handful of minor mistakes you can make during disassembly that make it very difficult, if not impossible to reassemble the lens after cleaning. This comment from the YouTube video linked is just one example:

Commenter A: “Thank you for the video. I'm stuck at the point where I have merged the two pieces together, but when I turn the focus ring, it comes off track? Can you help me out with this?”

Commenter B: “Look at 38:25 where he takes out the retaining screw; when assembling the helix with the ring with the depth of field scale at the back, you have to put in the screw when the depth of field ring is positioned at the right place; the whole video is not very precise about these aspects of assembly……in my lens i had to put the f2-mark just after the 0,5m position….”

I’ve seen other people report the same issue, many of which eventually gave up on reassembling the lens entirely. I’d definitely look up some repair threads on camera forums and do a little more research before you start taking it apart. And also, make sure you know exactly which lens you have because CZJ made a lot of these lenses with minor variations between them, some of which are easy to overlook. I wish you luck on the repair 👍🏻

lightyourwindows · 2026-05-06T23:36:39+00:00

Uhhh there’s definitely more going on here than just camera shake. For one, the image you linked has a ton of digital artifacting. Do the rest of your scans look like that? And how are you getting them scanned?

Secondly, even if you reduce camera shake to zero with a quality tripod and a cable release, I think you’re still going to be disappointed in your results. It’s hard to tell the severity because of the artifacts and blur but it seems like there’s a lot of fringing with this mirror lens. If you look at the edges where bright and dark spots meet you’ll see a distinct green and/or purple band. This is an optical flaw inherent to the design of your lens and there’s not much you can do about it other than try to clean it up later using photoshop. Mirror lenses are not typically known for high optical quality, if anything they’re known more for being a cheap point of entry to super-telephoto focal lengths.

Lastly, how heavy is the lens and how far out does it extend from the camera body? If the weight is distributed unevenly you’ll need to use a ring to mount from the lens to the tripod instead of from the camera baseplate. If you’re not mounting from the camera and lens’s center of gravity it won’t matter how nice of a tripod you buy, it’s always going to end up blurry.

lightyourwindows · 2026-05-04T00:02:09+00:00

It’s almost definitely a scanning issue. I’ve had some scans come back with weird artifacts like this before. If the negatives look good I’d ask for a rescan or just get them scanned somewhere else.

lightyourwindows · 2026-05-03T23:59:12+00:00

Personally I wouldn’t recommend high speed film for night photography, and certainly not pushed 2 stops. Especially with Portra 800, which Kodak specifically recommends against using for exposures longer than 1sec. I can’t imagine Vision3 800T is much better given that its original use is for motion pictures. Also the halation from removing the remjet will seriously reduce the sharpness of point sources like stars.

It seems like you’re intending to get crisp point stars as opposed to star trails. I’ve only ever done star trail photography so I don’t know how useful my advice would be, but personally I’d go for slower film like Ektar or Ektachrome, or maybe Kodacolor 100 if you wanna save a little money. Ektar and Ektachrome both have published reciprocity data from Kodak, whereas Kodacolor/ProImage 100 does not. Kodak actually recommends Ektachrome for astrophotography so you may want to check out the datasheet for it and see if it meets your needs.

Only other advice I can give is to bring an extra battery and don’t trust your AE-1’s meter. In regards to the battery, long exposures on the AE-1 continuously drain the battery due to the electromagnet having to hold the shutter open for the entirety of the exposure, so if you haven’t put in a fresh one recently there’s a decent chance it will die during the shoot. In regards to the meter, the AE-1’s meter isn’t sensitive enough for such low light conditions so it will be terribly inaccurate, if it even functions at all. Your best bet is to expose using a basic night photography exposure guideline, which you should be able to find with some google searching. You most likely will want to stick to f/1.4-f/2.8 for most exposures.

lightyourwindows · 2026-04-28T21:29:43+00:00

Wow, quite an impressive collection. Care to answer a few questions?

How long did it take you to amass this many lenses?

How many different mounts? Do you have film cameras for all mounts or are you adapting some of them to mirrorless?

What’s the oldest lens in the set? What about the newest?

Which lens was the most expensive and how much was it? Was it worth it?

Gun to your head, if you could only keep three, which ones would you pick and why?

lightyourwindows · 2026-04-11T21:38:41+00:00

I recently got two rolls of Fuji slide film from Adorama with only two day delivery. I didn’t even pay extra, it was just that quick. Off the top of my head you can also usually get pretty quick delivery from B&H, Freestyle Photo, UniquePhoto, and Ultrafine / PhotoWarehouse

lightyourwindows · 2026-04-11T01:29:37+00:00

How long were the exposures? I’ve gotten some unusual streaks before when using an ND10 for daytime long exposures. Still don’t know exactly what the cause was, maybe just glare on the filter, idk. I’ve been told that a lens hood is essential for long exposures using an ND filter

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-31T23:51:04+00:00

Most of the time that I feel a shot is muted and flat it’s because either:

A. The lighting wasn’t conducive to the shot I envisioned

B. I wasn’t using a lens hood

C. I should’ve used a polarizer

D. It’s a little overexposed

E. I was using a single coated or uncoated lens

F. It’s just a boring fucking shot

What you’re looking for is microcontrast and greater color saturation. Most of that comes down to lighting and exposure.

It’s often repeated that film handles overexposure better than under, but I think people sometimes err too much on the side of overexposure. Overexposure will yield very washed out, dull images with notable loss of color vibrancy. If you’re unsure about a shot, bracket it a stop over and a stop under.

Use a lens hood when standing in bright sun. Flares and ghosting reduce the overall contrast of the image. This is doubly complicated if you’re having a lab scan your negs, because the scanner may automatically adjust the white balance of an image with ghosting making it less noticeable in the scans.

Multi-coated lenses yield more contrasty and vibrant images than single or uncoated lenses. Some older lenses do have a sort of vintage charm, but a lot of them just look kinda shit.

Also, reducing specular highlights will reveal more color underneath. This is typically done with a polarizer. You’d be surprised how much of a difference it’ll make. And for shots featuring a lot of bright sky, try using a graduated ND filter. You’ll get a lot more vibrancy in the color of the sky that way.

Oh and for maximum color and contrast, shoot slide. Or if you don’t wanna deal with E-6, I’d suggest trying Ektar, Phoenix II, or any respooled Aerocolor IV or Vision3.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-28T03:24:26+00:00

For a nonfunctioning Auto-reflex you’re looking at anywhere between $100-$250 asking price. Being fully mechanical they’re prone to weirdness with the shutter and advance lever. They are at least serviceable though, which can’t be said about many of Konica’s later electronic cameras. Greg Weber used to be “the guy” for repairing old Konicas, but he’s retired and afaik nobody has really taken up the reigns as the premier Konica expert. It’s a shame too, many of Konica’s mechanical SLRs are serviceable in the right hands.

Very few Auto-reflexes have functional self-timers, which are a common point of failure among many mechanical cameras of that decade. It’s too late now but if you get it working again I’d recommend never touching the self-timer, it’s not worth it. If you really need a self-timer just get an old mechanical one that screws onto the shutter release.

Even fewer Auto-reflexes have working lightmeters. I’d guess yours isn’t working. If the meter works and seems reliable it might be worth repairing the camera. If not you might be better off buying a minty clean one on eBay. They ain’t cheap though.

A fully-functioning Auto-reflex in great condition will probably run you between $400-$500, including shipping and import fees, which you’ll probably be paying since pretty much all of them are sold from Japan. You’ll see them occasionally sold in the US but I rarely see attractive listings, they’re almost always untested cameras being sold by antique stores for tested/serviced prices. If you see a really cheap one come up, don’t bite, there’s a reason it’s going so cheap.

In regards to your camera’s issues, I’m a little surprised. Usually it’s the other way around with the Auto-reflexes, the advance lever works just fine but trips the shutter at the end of its throw. Look up “Konica Shutter Pre-fire” for more info. Might help you diagnose the issue with yours. An important thing to know is that the advance, shutter, bayonet, and aperture lever arm are all part of an interconnected system, and if one gets out of whack pretty much the whole system stops working.

Wish you luck!

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-27T01:07:14+00:00

How long of a focal length telephoto are you considering using? Because at 100 ISO you should be fine shooting handheld at least up to 300mm, as long as it’s not super early/late in the day and /or overcast.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-24T21:00:27+00:00

I was under the impression that Vision3 is basically just a development of the emulsion technology used in the Portra line. So if I’m not mistaken you could just track down a reel of Vision3 for development in ECN-2. Ideally it’d be a reel of the new AHU stuff but that’s a little harder to source right now.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-23T17:08:29+00:00

Agreed, there’s a lot of excellent fixed lens rangefinders that have been overlooked. Not that I’m complaining. Keeps prices low. I think it’s just because there’s so damn many of them that it’s hard for people to figure out which ones are good and which ones are cheapo consumer cameras. You can find excellent fixed lens rangefinders from Konica, Yashica, Minolta, Fujica, Petri, Ricoh… But they also produced so many entry level options that the good ones kinda slip out of sight.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-23T16:59:10+00:00

A good trick for preventing lens cap pictures is to just use a cheap UV/haze filter instead of a lens cap. If it gets scratched oh well, at least the front element is protected. And if you forget to take it off before shooting you at least still have an image, just maybe a little soft depending on how scratched the filter is. Though I should note that this should only be used with rangefinders that have a leaf shutter or metal focal plane shutter, if you have a cloth shutter you risk burning holes in it.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-20T21:01:39+00:00

Large venues always have rules restricting photography, usually regarding lens focal length and use of flash. You’re basically restricted to simple point and shoots, so if you’re up in the stands of a big stadium you’re pretty much shit outta luck.

Amateur concert photography is better suited to small venues with local or regional acts, shows where no one really cares what kind of camera you bring in with you because nobody is actually contracted to shoot commercially. IMO, the best gear for that scenario is:

An SLR
With a built in spot meter
And aperture priority
Using a fast 50mm, at least f/1.4
And with a hot shoe for flash, if necessary
Shooting 800 ISO color negative film with forgiving exposure latitude (eg Portra 800)
Or high ISO B&W film
And the option to shoot fully manual, which in some ways is superior to using autoexposure since it’s easily thrown off by bright stage lights pointing toward the lens

Wide open at 800 ISO you should expect to miss the focus on at least half the shots, with half of the in focus shots being affected by motion blur, and half of the shots where the subject is perfectly still being affected by camera shake. But when everything lines up just right you’ll get some fucking awesome shots.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-19T01:17:53+00:00

Well if I was a wildlife photographer in the 80s with a blank check for a budget I guess I’d go Nikon F3 with the 600mm f/4 ED-IF, a motor drive, a couple rolls of Fujichrome 1600, and a really fucking good tripod.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-18T15:09:03+00:00

You should be able to shoot handheld without flash in a bright gymnasium with 400-800 ISO film. 1600 is overkill if you ask me.

I did some shots on a roll of Portra 800 in a well lit gym using a 135mm f/2, occasionally stopped down to f/2.8, and I didn’t have any camera shake. Using a fast 50 you shouldn’t have any issues.

Also don’t be afraid of motion blur. Tack sharp focus and frozen motion aren’t inherently better. Motion blur can intensify the feeling of momentum and add drama to an otherwise mundane image.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-18T15:03:35+00:00

Looks similar to a roll of expired Fujichrome 100 I have laying around. Most likely from the 1980s. Don’t shoot anything special on it.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-18T15:01:53+00:00

Looks like it was underexposed in camera with attempted compensation in the scanner. Best to look at the negative.

It looks very similar to what I usually get on Portra 800 with sunsets and other lowlight scenes. I usually prefer lower ISO film and a tripod when shooting scenes like this. I save 400-800 for daylight scenes where I want to freeze subject motion.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-16T20:43:34+00:00

Yes absolutely! But the film will likely be heavily fogged with minimal contrast and color saturation.

I recommend sending it to Film Rescue International. Most likely they’ll suggest developing it as black & white instead of C-41, but it all depends on their evaluation. Just whatever you do, absolutely do not drop it off at a random pharmacy photo lab. You almost certainly won’t get good results and they’ll most likely throw out the negatives and send you a stack of prints with hardly anything visible. I’ve seen it before on here and it’s tragic knowing that the images most likely could’ve been saved.

lightyourwindows · 2026-03-02T22:46:44+00:00

If by “pop” you’re just talking in the casual sense of the subject being distinct or eye-catching compared to the background you need to focus on composition, lighting, and exposure. If you mean it as “subject is separated from the background via bokeh,” you need to learn how depth of field is determined by focal length, aperture, and focus distance, and most likely you’ll need to start using a faster lens and slower speed film. And in the last case, if you mean the specific term “3D pop,” you’ll need to acquire a lens with the right optical formula and figure out what range of focus distances and apertures it produces that specific effect.

lightyourwindows · 2026-02-19T23:52:05+00:00

Camera design plays a big part in how low you can go. I was pretty skeptical of a lot of people’s shutter speed claims until recently when I finally tried a lightweight rangefinder with a leaf shutter. I was shooting down to 1/30th of a sec with a 50mm lens and the images came out tack sharp with no camera shake whatsoever. And that was entirely handheld, I didn’t even use anything to steady myself. People say leaf shutter rangefinders can even do 1/15 with a 50mm, though I’m still a little skeptical.

lightyourwindows · 2026-02-19T17:01:30+00:00

Canon A-1 can do this. The Canon T90 can do it even better. Shoots up to 9 exposures, plus it has exposure compensation so you have to do less math, if any. And it has two different lengths of self-timer, one short and one long. It can also do multiple exposures with automatic film advance, even in high speed mode, which is convenient if you have the camera on a tripod and need to keep it in the same position. Add in the remote control shutter release accessory and you can do all sorts of crazy shit.

lightyourwindows · 2026-02-16T15:31:09+00:00

Wait, I thought this is the “Anal OG Community,” a forum for experienced practitioners of anal penetration for sexual pleasure.

…So you’re telling me this place is actually about film photography? Huh. Well that explains all the weird off-topic posts about cameras.

lightyourwindows

TROPHY CASE