Photon42
burn the box
Breathe deep, wait until monday, get two EKTAR film rolls and have them developed at your local lab. The ZI and the bio aren't made to be sold 
ferider
Veteran
Hi Andy,
answering your original question: the Biogon should bring at least about US 600-700, the ZI about 800-1000, here or on ebay.
Nothing wrong with moving digital. Your photos, your time, your wallet, etc.
Best,
Roland.
answering your original question: the Biogon should bring at least about US 600-700, the ZI about 800-1000, here or on ebay.
Nothing wrong with moving digital. Your photos, your time, your wallet, etc.
Best,
Roland.
Last edited:
android
Established
Breathe deep, wait until monday, get two EKTAR film rolls and have them developed at your local lab. The ZI and the bio aren't made to be sold
Yeah, perhaps I should just forget developing and pay the processing costs..
f16sunshine
Moderator
Roland makes a great point. There is nothing wrong with moving to digital. If you like the RF experience and it seems you do with this nice kit. Consider hanging on to the Biogon and moving into an RD1. The RD1 and ZM 2/35 are made for each other. In dollars your only about $300-$500 away with the funds from the ZI sale. Film is great but surely not a religious experience.
android
Established
Thanks Roland. The prices you've estimated are certainly food for thought. My original thinking was to sell up and hold onto the funds until someone releases a digital camera that I'd really like to own. Though.. after the number of responses telling me not to sell I've decided to think about it for a bit.
android
Established
Actually, my other camera is an R-D1s! And as much as I love the results it produces I still find myself picking the ZI nine time out of ten.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Stick at it!, if you really want to do it - it's like undoing a bra strap blindfold, and nearly as much fun!.....just make sure that reel is clean and dry and if mine starts to stick - usually a sharp tap (finger flick) on the side, gets it going again.
Dave.
Dave.
android
Established
Interesting analogy though if you are struggling with a bra strap you can always ask for assistance.
Well maybe anyway..Otherwise.. I'm erring towards keeping the camera and sending film off for processing. I know that it is not as much fun or as rewarding as developing your own film but losing film is not really an option.
thomasw_
Well-known
Do you prefer the look of film to digital? I do and so do others; but some don't see the aesthetic difference or prefer digital, perhaps because of its look or its ease of use/convenience. You need to answer this for yourself. It is seems to me that you are just frustrated. I have little doubt that if you take some time and practise loading film onto a reel, you'll be fine in due time. But the bigger question is, "why go through the hassle of using/developing/wet printing film?" The only reason that suffices for me is that its worth the effort because I prefer the aesthetic qualities of the end result. Of course, like most things in life, you need to answer this one for yourself. -----That said, and whether or not you stick with film or not, I am a big proponent of not giving up on oneself: thus I'd master this reel loading process just so you can claim that you did master it, and that it didn't kick your butt
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Hi Andy, my fellow Traveling Camera Project compatriot
After your frustration subsides you may want to consider this other path:
Move up to medium format.
Why?
- First, medium format rolls have fewer shots. So you're less likely to lose 36 of precious images to botched film loading (in the beginning). Thus, you'll be less frustrated.
- Secondly, MF is an upgrade in quality compared to 35mm or smaller (digital or film both).
- Thirdly, if anyone tell you that 120 format is much more expensive than 35mm to shoot and develop yourself, ask for a proof. My experience tells me otherwise.
Truly for a lot of people, it's the perfect balance between the "hassles" of doing developing/printing yourself and the end results that is "worth it."
Your ZI sale should afford you a decent MF camera and lenses. You'll have fun selecting which one in the meantime
After that, pick up a new set of Hewes or Nikor stainless steel 120 tank and reels (these are bigger than 35mm ones, thus easier to work with), resist the temptation to go with used ones, as a slight bent will cause your frustration to come back again.
Then watch Jason Brunner's videos on how to load a reel of film.
As a bonus, Jason's videos will make you laugh also.
Last edited:
android
Established
Do you prefer the look of film to digital? I do and so do others; but some don't see the aesthetic difference or prefer digital, perhaps because of its look or its ease of use/convenience. You need to answer this for yourself. It is seems to me that you are just frustrated. I have little doubt that if you take some time and practise loading film onto a reel, you'll be fine in due time. But the bigger question is, "why go through the hassle of using/developing/wet printing film?" The only reason that suffices for me is that its worth the effort because I prefer the aesthetic qualities of the end result. Of course, like most things in life, you need to answer this one for yourself. -----That said, and whether or not you stick with film or not, I am a big proponent of not giving up on oneself: thus I'd master this reel loading process just so you can claim that you did master it, and that it didn't kick your butt
I'm with you on this one - I prefer film to digital. Someone here once described the 'gestation period' of the whole using film thing. You shoot, you develop and then finally you print/scan to enjoy the fruits of your labors. I'm sure digital shooter's (esp. those who have never shot film) will likely look at the whole process as crazy and pointless but I enjoy this ritual.
So the frustration was not with shooting film as a whole but just that I was fed up of losing precious shots through my failure to successfully complete one part of the process. And that part of the process appears to take frequent continued practice to master unlike say, riding a bike (IMHO).
Funnily enough the aesthetic quality of the end results is not what I prefer about film over digital - it's the ritual of the whole process itself.
--Andy
android
Established
Hi Andy, my fellow Traveling Camera Project compatriot
After your frustration subsides you may want to consider this other path:
Move up to medium format.
Why?
- First, medium format rolls have fewer shots. So you're less likely to lose 36 of precious images to botched film loading (in the beginning). Thus, you'll be less frustrated.
- Secondly, MF is an upgrade in quality compared to 35mm or smaller (digital or film both).
- Thirdly, if anyone tell you that 120 format is much more expensive than 35mm to shoot and develop yourself, ask for a proof. My experience tells me otherwise.
Truly for a lot of people, it's the perfect balance between the "hassles" of doing developing/printing yourself and the end results that is "worth it."
Your ZI sale should afford you a decent MF camera and lenses. You'll have fun selecting which one in the meantime
After that, pick up a new set of Hewes or Nikor stainless steel 120 tank and reels (these are bigger than 35mm ones, thus easier to work with), resist the temptation to go with used ones, as a slight bent will cause your frustration to come back again.
Then watch Jason Brunner's videos on how to load a reel of film.
As a bonus, Jason's videos will make you laugh also.
Hey Will,
Thanks for the suggestion. Medium format has tempted me in the past and at the time the reasons for not taking the plunge were the lack of any affordable med format neg scanner and the noise of the kit (I was looking at a Kowa 6).
I love the ZI for a number of reasons and size is one. If I sold it I'd probably be looking to replace it with whatever supersedes the Olympus EP1. I'd still love to try medium format in the future though.
--Andy
wgerrard
Veteran
I very recently began dabbling with doing my own processing, using a Patterson reel and tank. Practice does help. I went through a dozen or so iterations before I felt comfortable loading a reel in a changing bag.
That said, these reels seem to me something that no one has thought of redesigning for 50 years or so. They certainly could be made more user-friendly. For that matter, if the leader strip wasn't rewound entirely into the cannister, then why not feed that strip to a little battery-powered gizmo that would wind the film around a reel? I very much doubt the market can support such a device, or even the redesign of reels and the subsequent retooling, though.
If you decide to switch full-time to digital, don't anguish about it. An awful lot of people around here shoot b&w film, but use digital for color. I use film because the cameras I like use film. I scan everything, so any unique film-ness is lost (at least, I can't see it.) If there's ever an affordable RF or RF-like digital that I like and can use my lenses, I suspect I'd buy it.
That said, these reels seem to me something that no one has thought of redesigning for 50 years or so. They certainly could be made more user-friendly. For that matter, if the leader strip wasn't rewound entirely into the cannister, then why not feed that strip to a little battery-powered gizmo that would wind the film around a reel? I very much doubt the market can support such a device, or even the redesign of reels and the subsequent retooling, though.
If you decide to switch full-time to digital, don't anguish about it. An awful lot of people around here shoot b&w film, but use digital for color. I use film because the cameras I like use film. I scan everything, so any unique film-ness is lost (at least, I can't see it.) If there's ever an affordable RF or RF-like digital that I like and can use my lenses, I suspect I'd buy it.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
I find that it is not Bill, I only have a cheap Epson flat-bed, but my film scans are quite different to my digital files, and hardly need any fine tuning in PS. Mostly the colours seem more subtle and natural, and looking through my work, I can usually differentiate between the two.
Dave.
rayfoxlee
Raymondo
Andy, disappointed to hear you wanting to give up. I cut my teeth loading 120 and these buckle and stick like crazy and 35mm seemed a breeze, but there is always a time when you think it's easy and it goes wrong. The more you fiddle, the hotter your hands become as you have found (especially in a changing bag) and the more likely you will have a problem, so working quickly is important.
I have looked at my Paterson reels and they have a ball bearing on each side - this may or may not be the same as yours. These must be free moving. I probably have some spares for you to try if you want to send me your address.
If you still have problems, the C41 route (B&W or colour) would seem the answer. I get Boots to do the d&p and I use the prints as 'proofs' for scanning. Cheap and really quite good. I have had no problems with their developing at all, unlike some so-called professional labs.
If you still want to sell, one was sold this week on eBay for £800 with a best offer deal (he started at a 'buy it now' price of £1050) without lens. I have been looking at rangefinders over the last few days and ZI does seem a bit niche, but there is little supply around of s/h bodies. If I were you I would persevere - by all accounts, they are great cameras.
Hope this helps.
Ray
I have looked at my Paterson reels and they have a ball bearing on each side - this may or may not be the same as yours. These must be free moving. I probably have some spares for you to try if you want to send me your address.
If you still have problems, the C41 route (B&W or colour) would seem the answer. I get Boots to do the d&p and I use the prints as 'proofs' for scanning. Cheap and really quite good. I have had no problems with their developing at all, unlike some so-called professional labs.
If you still want to sell, one was sold this week on eBay for £800 with a best offer deal (he started at a 'buy it now' price of £1050) without lens. I have been looking at rangefinders over the last few days and ZI does seem a bit niche, but there is little supply around of s/h bodies. If I were you I would persevere - by all accounts, they are great cameras.
Hope this helps.
Ray
sojournerphoto
Veteran
ZI just went on the bay for £800 in as new condition. Looked really nice. I think that's probalby aobut right for a good one.
35/2 biogon probably about £500 in mint condition.
5D (1) about 800 to 850 and 50 1.4 about 150ish I suspect.
a 5D and a 50 1,4 is a very nice rig (I've got one), but the Ikon is smaller and feels nicer in a mechanical sort of way. The output is not really comparable as they are so different.
Mike
35/2 biogon probably about £500 in mint condition.
5D (1) about 800 to 850 and 50 1.4 about 150ish I suspect.
a 5D and a 50 1,4 is a very nice rig (I've got one), but the Ikon is smaller and feels nicer in a mechanical sort of way. The output is not really comparable as they are so different.
Mike
android
Established
Thanks for the suggestions Ray. Indeed, the Paterson reels I have also have a ball bearing on each side. There's been some much appreciated advice on how to load various reels above and I'm reminded of a anecdote that I heard once about the Japanese Olympic archery team. They practiced for ages and only became masters once they closed their eyes and stopped looking at the target. Or so they say.. ;-)
Thanks also for the offer of sending a reel. I've been pretty much convinced to hold onto the ZI but I will do as you've suggested and send the film off for processing elsewhere. Interesting that you say that Boots do a good job. I just assumed that one had to pay a professional lab for decent neg's (so not even including prints). I think I'll give them a go next.
Thanks again.
--Andy
freeranger
Well-known
Don't give up!
Get back on that horse!
...or buy a crate of xp2
Get back on that horse!
...or buy a crate of xp2
MartinP
Veteran
Commiserations with your struggles on the reel-loading front. If you send any film to a mass-market lab for development-only processing, use Ilford XP2. This is the same process as normal colour-print film, so they can't screw it up by giving it some averaged-out black-and-white processing time - C41 is standardised. The Ilford film has the advantage that there is no orange tint, so anyone can easily print it on normal paper if/when required.
As you know, plastic or (undamaged) steel-reels should be trivial to load, therefore there must be a problem occurring. That problem is most likely a dirty reel, especially as you describe it happening 'halfway' all the time. Soak the reels in hot water for an hour then take a nail-brush and heavily scrub out the tracks, carefully examining them as you go, looking for little bits of emulsion or dried-on mystery lumps etc etc.
When loading in a changing bag, it is often helpful to put the deep part of a shoebox inside right at the front of the bag, by the zip, as this will give you a bit of empty space in which to work.
Take the film out of the cassette in the changing-bag (it will stay in a compact loose roll), so there is no metalwork to get jammed in the start of the reel tracks when you do each 'winding' movement. If it feels stiff at any point, tap the sides of the reel to free it up before forcing it so hard that it comes out of the ball-bearing catches. The tip given by someone else of keeping a practice roll (cheapest, oldest film you can get) to build up confidence is, of course, very practical too.
As you know, plastic or (undamaged) steel-reels should be trivial to load, therefore there must be a problem occurring. That problem is most likely a dirty reel, especially as you describe it happening 'halfway' all the time. Soak the reels in hot water for an hour then take a nail-brush and heavily scrub out the tracks, carefully examining them as you go, looking for little bits of emulsion or dried-on mystery lumps etc etc.
When loading in a changing bag, it is often helpful to put the deep part of a shoebox inside right at the front of the bag, by the zip, as this will give you a bit of empty space in which to work.
Take the film out of the cassette in the changing-bag (it will stay in a compact loose roll), so there is no metalwork to get jammed in the start of the reel tracks when you do each 'winding' movement. If it feels stiff at any point, tap the sides of the reel to free it up before forcing it so hard that it comes out of the ball-bearing catches. The tip given by someone else of keeping a practice roll (cheapest, oldest film you can get) to build up confidence is, of course, very practical too.
Last edited:
wgerrard
Veteran
So many variables, including personal tastes and skills, are at play here. I scan on a Coolscan V. The digital I have these days is a Ricoh GX200 with an EVF. I tend to shoot it in full automatic mode. In for a penny, in for a pound.
I didn't intend to imply that the distinctive qualities of film disappear during the scanning process. But, I did mean to say that, in comparing my own scanned and digital images, I'm not sure I can see distinguishing characteristics in either.