Great News From My Iso 1600 Kiev 4AM

[ruben]

My "pro deployment" consists in two Kievs 4AM, which took the shirt out of myself to CLA. One of them is for Iso 1600 Neopan, the other for Fujicolor 200. It takes me time to end a single film due to the fact that I have another pair of non-Kiev compact users.

Despite CLA, a problem remains on both: frame spacing. I have not been able to come with a good solution before loading them with film.

Half an hour ago I unloaded the Neopan Kiev for the first time and the film is already washing. The first thing I noticed was that the re-winding proceeded very smooth. After processing and before drying I gave attention to a single issue: frame spacing. I was really frightened.

Well, let's say that with a broad heart, frame spacing is "acceptable". Broad at the begining and end, accurate at film center frames, here and there an erratic exception.

But I can live with it and I am happy to the sky! Focusing has been adjusted and the best fitting lens selected, so here I can expect highly good results.

Now this is not the end of the frame spacing story. If I have done things well, the current pattern should not go worse due to self unscrewing of the screws....

Among my Kiev fleet, I have several other Kiev models, among them 3 Kievs 4AM. I prefer the 4AM due to its features, but it is clear to me that from the technical view they are the less good ones, all of them with the same bad frame spacing pattern.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Spyderman]

Maybe you should try a 4a... the classic fork seems to be more reliable and more easily adjustable to reach even spacing...

 

[ruben]

Agreed, but in so far the frame spacing of the other Iso 200 Kiev 4AM will be accepable too, I will stick with the 4AMs, with which I am heavily invested already.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[xayraa33]

that 1600 iso film sure looks grainy especially that outdoor shot of the falashas.

 

[nzeeman]

nice series ruben. i like shot with girl with rifle and night shift shot.

 

[ruben]

ABOUT THE NEOPAN 1600

Hi Folks,
I owe an explanation about the images with Neopan 1600. During my life I have seldom used this film, yet from the technical point of view this last one has been my worst.

There are several reasons for that. Being the Kiev a meterless camera, I guessed many of the shots, this sending me to have to perform extreme corections with Photoshop of contrast and brightness. Here alone there are a lot of grounds for me to improve. Both with improving my metering consistency and finding a better balance with Photoshop.

Secondly I don't think the film fits night shots, but interiors or low daylight.

I just went too happy to use the Kiev, and too much careless. Besides this film I processed another two, one of them using an OM2 (a metered camera) and the other unidentified one. Here the results are very good and consistent.

Street photography with a meterless camera, and handheld meter is not the most comfortable way to deal with flying UFOs, unless you get experienced.

So don't take the grain you see as typical of Neopan, since it is not. Relatively, it should look great, when correctly exposed.

Besides all these, the huge majority of the pics were done at widest aperture.

Cheers,
Ruben