paulfish4570
Veteran
that will do.
OM, I've become a Zuikoholic!
- Thread starter pggunn
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 4K
- Views 876K
philosomatographer
Well-known
Jockos - ah, another Fomapan 100 user! For some strange reason, I really like this film. (Well, liked, I don't have any left, can't get any more locally. I am going to try out some of the Adox old-school films though, I've already ordered some.)
I used to be very concerned about grain etc. in 35mm but I now embrace this as part of the small-format aesthetic. When I want grainless and higher resolution, I just use a larger format camera. Makes all the the lens performance anxiety etc disappear, just enjoy 35mm for what it is!
I used to be very concerned about grain etc. in 35mm but I now embrace this as part of the small-format aesthetic. When I want grainless and higher resolution, I just use a larger format camera. Makes all the the lens performance anxiety etc disappear, just enjoy 35mm for what it is!
T
tedwhite
Guest
I think, if you google Freestyle in L.A., they may still have Fomapan.
Jockos
Well-known
You could probably buy it from the US. Freestyle has added a slow, albeit cheap, international shipping option!
I think I fell for the really creamy off-whites that came straight from the scanner - actually I haven't tried any film thus far that goes so well with my Nikon scanner. And the grain seems reasonable to!
Although I did find it a bit physically soft, got scratches all over from the squeegee 🙁
T
tedwhite
Guest
Jockos: Don't squeegee Fomapan. The emulsion, when wet, is amazingly soft and thus will scratch if you just breathe hard on it.
What I do is finish the wash off with fotoflo, then just hang it and let it air dry in a dust-free and breeze-free environment as even tiny particles of dust can stick to the soft emulsion. With other, sturdier films (Tri-X, for example) after I've hung it I'll run a thumb and forefinger down the filmstrip to remove excess water. Of course if you dig ditches for a living you will have rough-textured skin so you can't do that either.
I gave up on squeegees years ago after scratching a 2 1/4 X 2 1/4 portrait neg.
What I do is finish the wash off with fotoflo, then just hang it and let it air dry in a dust-free and breeze-free environment as even tiny particles of dust can stick to the soft emulsion. With other, sturdier films (Tri-X, for example) after I've hung it I'll run a thumb and forefinger down the filmstrip to remove excess water. Of course if you dig ditches for a living you will have rough-textured skin so you can't do that either.
I gave up on squeegees years ago after scratching a 2 1/4 X 2 1/4 portrait neg.
Jockos
Well-known
Yes, I even read that on the Internet before I tried the film, yet I was stupid enough to do it anyways; thinking that since the squeegee was brand new and thoroughly rinsed, there shouldn't be any problems.
Guess I learn the hard way 😀
nighstar
eternal beginner
is digital allowed....?
55mm/1.2
BEST FRIENDS by nighstar, on Flickr
55mm/1.2 + Olympus Auto Extension tubes x3
creamy p.i.n.k. by nighstar, on Flickr
55mm/1.2
BEST FRIENDS by nighstar, on Flickr
55mm/1.2 + Olympus Auto Extension tubes x3
creamy p.i.n.k. by nighstar, on Flickr
wblynch
Well-known
I thought the spirit of this thread is dedicated to the OM film cameras. But I am only one small voice.
ColinW
* Click *
Indeed. I thought the same. I suppose it depends on the OP.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
OM3 + Zuiko 24/2 on Ilford XP2
paulfish4570
Veteran
beautiful "print," will ...
kemal_mumcu
Well-known
Liquid-Sky
Unregistered consumer
Om-2n 50f1.4 ilford hp5+
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
^------- Please tell me that it's a deliberate construction, and not someone hanging off the parking garage...😱
Liquid-Sky
Unregistered consumer
agi
Well-known
OM3 + Zuiko 24/2 on Ilford XP2
Gorgeous Will...
I just picked up a 24/2 myself and was wondering if a hood is needed to reduce flare. Do you use a hood on yours?
I've become a complete Zuikoholic now...
John
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
MaxFrank
Member
Wow, I never realized how awesome these OM cameras look. I'm tempted to buy one now but I also realize that I do have a perfectly fine working minolta X-700. Could someone compare the size of these bodies, and even better if they have experience with both tell me which they prefer. Glass for the olympus seems to be more readily available, but the minolta glass is cheaper.
redisburning
Well-known
I don't have an x-700, but I do have an SRT-101.
I like the OM-1 a lot more as a camera. It's a lot smaller and I like the viewfinder better.
The only Minolta lens I have is the 58/1.2 and it's definitely better than my OM 50/1.4 silvernose or 1.8 mij IMO. That being said, I like the OM 50/3.5 MC Macro more than any other SLR lens I own.
Both are solid. Both have different looks as a family of lenses. I like my OM lenses and wish I had some more but most of my money going forward will go to M mount lenses.
Pete B
Well-known
I bought a an OM1n and an OM 2n and some lenses on impulse a few months ago. Rather than take my Leica ski touring in Alaska I took the OM1n. It performed faultlessly and I'm very impressed with the flare resistance. It's got me wondering if I really need so much money tied up in Leica glass/bodies.
Pete
Pete
