Adam14
Established
Thanks again for all the very helpful replies to my previous thread! I am going to buy the R3A and have a few final questions.
-any comments on the Nokton 40/1.4 MC vs 50/1.4
-Tri-X seems to be the recommended film.If travelling and this film is not available,what kind of results can I expect with other types of film,say something that a drugstore or Walmart might sell
-how much of a difference is the result if you take film into Costco vs a professional place to have prints made
-for general travel photos with mostly daytime but some lower light photos,is it better to use 400 or 200
Thanks,
Adam
-any comments on the Nokton 40/1.4 MC vs 50/1.4
-Tri-X seems to be the recommended film.If travelling and this film is not available,what kind of results can I expect with other types of film,say something that a drugstore or Walmart might sell
-how much of a difference is the result if you take film into Costco vs a professional place to have prints made
-for general travel photos with mostly daytime but some lower light photos,is it better to use 400 or 200
Thanks,
Adam
Spleenrippa
Yes, Right There
Hmm... Are you new to 'film photography' or photography in general?
kshapero
South Florida Man
see all my answers above.
rdeleskie
Well-known
Don't worry Adam, we're all newbies when we first start something.
I'm guessing you are trying to choose between the Nokton 50mm f1.5 and Nokton 40mm f1.4. For the Bessa R3A, I would recommend the Nokton 40mm. I personally love the 40mm FOV, and it will serve you in place of both a 35mm and 50mm while you get started. Another consideration is this: there is a tremendous variety of incredible 50mm lens out there. If you find that rangefinder photography is your thing, you'll likely want to try some of them. The Nokton 50mm is a terrific lens, but if you start experimenting with Summicrons, Summitars, Sumarits, Summars, Heliars, etc., etc., it will probably end up neglected or sold. There aren't as many choices in the 40mm range (the Summicron-C and the Rokkor, which is the same design, being the two most accessible), so the 40mm is likely to be a better long-term investment IMHO. Plus, part of what makes the Bessa R3A unique among modern rangefinders is the 40mm framelines, so you might as well get full use of them. Don't worry if you wear glasses - just use the entire viewfinder to compose and you will be fine.
In addition to Tri-X, you might consider Ilford XP2. This film can be developed anywhere, including one-hour labs, and the results are very pleasing (all the b&w shots I have posted here are on Ilford XP2). If you are not going to develop the film yourself, Tri-X can cost a little more to send out, and you'll have to wait longer to get your results.
Most off-brand film sold at Blacks, Loblaws (in Canada), etc. is just repackaged brand-name film. If you do a search on RFF, you'll find a thread where all this is explained. If I had to grab a roll out of a drugstore, I'd probably choose Fuji Superia 400. I like the colours and it scans reasonably well, which is important to me.
For print film, I would choose ISO 400 over 200 for several reasons. The first is that my understanding is manufacturers sometimes simply rerate their 400 as 200, instead of producing a "real" ISO 200 film. The wiser and more knowledgeable members will be able to clarify/correct me on this I'm sure. Also, when I shoot ISO 400, I usually rate it below that (manually set the ISO to, say, 320) which has the effect of slightly over-exposing the negative. Print film holds detail very well in the highlights, less so in the shadows, and this will give you more information on your negative which you can make use of when printing or scanning.
As for the print quality of different labs, that will probably vary from place to place, but I wouldn't expect a huge advantage at a pro lab vs a one-hour joint at 4x6 or 5x7. Larger than that I would definitely go to a pro place. As for processing negative, I have had as much negative damaged at pro places as at chain stores. These days, I drop my film off at a one-hour photo place, get the negative developed, no prints or scans, and then scan it myself. If you can process your own negative at home, all the better (I don't have room). Through trial and error, you will find the method that works best for your needs.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Get the 40 1.4 MC, hard to beat on the R3A, and a wonderful lens anywhere anytime, from direct sun to dark churches... Small and sharp! Don't get confused by its decent price...
And get all the Tri-X you can... It's never enough!
Cheers,
Juan
And get all the Tri-X you can... It's never enough!
Cheers,
Juan
Adam14
Established
Thank you all for your replies! All the advice and info is very much appreciated! Yes,rdeleskie,it is a bit intimidating as a newbie but I can see that this is going to be a very friendly place to come for help and advice 
As far as scanning goes,I thought that you could only scan a print.I see now that you get a negative made and then scan the negative...here is where I am lost... do you scan the negative into a computer and then develop it with software?
Adam
As far as scanning goes,I thought that you could only scan a print.I see now that you get a negative made and then scan the negative...here is where I am lost... do you scan the negative into a computer and then develop it with software?
Adam
Adam14
Established
Another question re lenses
Another question re lenses
I think that I will get the Nokton 40/1.4(In answer to one of the responders,the 50mm that I was referring to is the Nokton).I am thinking of also getting a portrait lens for wife/sons. I would appreciate comments on the 75/2.5 Color Heliar vs Lanthar 90/3.5.
Thanks,
Adam
Another question re lenses
I think that I will get the Nokton 40/1.4(In answer to one of the responders,the 50mm that I was referring to is the Nokton).I am thinking of also getting a portrait lens for wife/sons. I would appreciate comments on the 75/2.5 Color Heliar vs Lanthar 90/3.5.
Thanks,
Adam
kshapero
South Florida Man
Some one answers this but also keep in mind that you can take the easy route and just have the lab make a CD for you to go with your negs.
kshapero
South Florida Man
tough call, I love them (75/90) both. I'd get the 75 for the faster lens.
rdeleskie
Well-known
I have a 90mm Elmar f4, which produces very nice portraits, but which I don't use nearly enough. I find it a little difficult to frame and focus when shooting moving objects or doing street photography. Rangefinders excel from wide-angles up to "tele-normals" or "short-teles."
Without having used the 75mm (I have read it is excellent), I think it will be a little more versatile on your Bessa R3A, and the length is a nice compliment to the 40mm. The extra speed is also useful, as Akiva has noted.
Without having used the 75mm (I have read it is excellent), I think it will be a little more versatile on your Bessa R3A, and the length is a nice compliment to the 40mm. The extra speed is also useful, as Akiva has noted.
robbeiflex
Well-known
Thank you all for your replies! All the advice and info is very much appreciated! Yes,rdeleskie,it is a bit intimidating as a newbie but I can see that this is going to be a very friendly place to come for help and advice
As far as scanning goes,I thought that you could only scan a print.I see now that you get a negative made and then scan the negative...here is where I am lost... do you scan the negative into a computer and then develop it with software?
Adam
Once the film is developed, you can either have the lab scan it to CD (jpegs) or you can scan it at home. Many scanners have a negative mode and even account for different film types, or alternatively Photoshop, GIMP and many other software programs have a negative function. If you don't have a scanner then its better to get started having the lab scan your prints to a CD,. Then if/when you decide it would be more economical to buy a scanner there are many threads on that topic too.
Also, another vote for XP2 for black and white film that can be processed by a colour lab. That's how I got started.
Welcome and have fun!
Rob
rdeleskie
Well-known
Thank you all for your replies! All the advice and info is very much appreciated! Yes,rdeleskie,it is a bit intimidating as a newbie but I can see that this is going to be a very friendly place to come for help and advice
As far as scanning goes,I thought that you could only scan a print.I see now that you get a negative made and then scan the negative...here is where I am lost... do you scan the negative into a computer and then develop it with software?
Adam
Hi Adam,
If your flatbed scanner is set up for it, or if you have a dedicated film scanner, you can scan negatives. The scanning software turns it into a positive.
As Akiva mentioned, you can also get your pictures scanned and put onto a CD when and where you get them developed. That's a great way to start, and many people stick with that method and avoid the hassle of scanning everything themselves. Once your pix are scanned (by whatever method), they become as versatile as digital images (because they are digital images at that point!). You can colour grade them in Photoshop, email them, print them, post them here, etc. For me, it's the best of both worlds - film capture, digital finish - and it suits both my mentality and skill set.
Scanning is one place where pro shops can differ from chain stores. Pro shops usually give you more options when scanning. In particular, they will scan at higher resolution than most one-hour places. That said, you can always just get your negative rescanned if you want to grab an image at a higher resolution down the road.
Cheers,
Adam14
Established
Thanks again for all the very helpful replies! I have learned a lot today!
Armoured
Well-known
Another vote for XP-2 or the Kodak BW400 - the key is that both of these are decent black and white films that can be developed anywhere (it is the same process as colour film); they also scan well. Developing "real" (or traditional) black and white is much more of an art and scanners often don't deal with them as well. My own experience is that a lot of the one hour places do well with the C-41 process black and white, and that even the pro places can be uneven with traditional B&W (not to mention it can be hard to find a place to do them at all). I've also been surprised to find this film in drugstores and corner stores. It's a bit more expensive though.
And in a pinch, don't be afraid to buy the colour film you can find - if you want to convert to B&W and use a computer, it's not difficult and gives decent results (although some purists might disagree).
Scans from the corner store can vary in quality, but it's often cheap and good enough for casual use. With the negative, you can have it scanned later or do it yourself if needed.
I also agree on the 40mm length (although I don't have that specific lens). There are zillions of 50mm lenses around you can try later.
And in a pinch, don't be afraid to buy the colour film you can find - if you want to convert to B&W and use a computer, it's not difficult and gives decent results (although some purists might disagree).
Scans from the corner store can vary in quality, but it's often cheap and good enough for casual use. With the negative, you can have it scanned later or do it yourself if needed.
I also agree on the 40mm length (although I don't have that specific lens). There are zillions of 50mm lenses around you can try later.
Adam14
Established
Armoured..thanks very much!