italy74
Well-known
Good evening everyone
I've finally got back pictures and files from the lab from the first roll, Portra 160 and this is what I figured out at the moment.
1) I need a little tripod. I tried to go down to 1/4s yet it's really a time "too long" to manage for me now. With 1/8s things are better and 1/15s already good. Keep in mind that having a 160 iso roll means shooting mostly wide open thus adding blur / narrow dof to the hand shake blur. With the second roll, shot in Portra 400, things should be safer.
2) I had a couple of overexposed pics but it might be my fault. I realized only a few minutes ago that +/- exposure compensation is reversed to what I thought, so let me try again 🙂
3) While the aforementioned rangefinder misalignment doesn't seem to be a problem, I need more care in focusing portraits. Probably, if my next lens will be a 21 F/4.5 I won't even care to focus properly, yet now I still have to do. This is again because of the narrow dof / wide aperture to compensate for the limited exposure time (and with a moving subject). This is usually the contrary I have on SLR where I can (from 50mm upwards) frame better people than scenes / landscapes where the split-line is less effective than the rangefinder matching.
In any cases, "blues" (without any cpl filter) are really nice, and prints are better than scans. I still have to learn the 35mm so I won't complain overall 🙂
A colleague of mine, aiming to me very close, seems to have a better eye for that. This is me, a few days ago. (Mixed lighting, neon and reflexed sun through the windows/shadows)
My adoptive son Ashu playing with the FM3A on the terrace (it's a crop)
From my terrace
Ashu and my wife, lunchtime
I've finally got back pictures and files from the lab from the first roll, Portra 160 and this is what I figured out at the moment.
1) I need a little tripod. I tried to go down to 1/4s yet it's really a time "too long" to manage for me now. With 1/8s things are better and 1/15s already good. Keep in mind that having a 160 iso roll means shooting mostly wide open thus adding blur / narrow dof to the hand shake blur. With the second roll, shot in Portra 400, things should be safer.
2) I had a couple of overexposed pics but it might be my fault. I realized only a few minutes ago that +/- exposure compensation is reversed to what I thought, so let me try again 🙂
3) While the aforementioned rangefinder misalignment doesn't seem to be a problem, I need more care in focusing portraits. Probably, if my next lens will be a 21 F/4.5 I won't even care to focus properly, yet now I still have to do. This is again because of the narrow dof / wide aperture to compensate for the limited exposure time (and with a moving subject). This is usually the contrary I have on SLR where I can (from 50mm upwards) frame better people than scenes / landscapes where the split-line is less effective than the rangefinder matching.
In any cases, "blues" (without any cpl filter) are really nice, and prints are better than scans. I still have to learn the 35mm so I won't complain overall 🙂
A colleague of mine, aiming to me very close, seems to have a better eye for that. This is me, a few days ago. (Mixed lighting, neon and reflexed sun through the windows/shadows)

My adoptive son Ashu playing with the FM3A on the terrace (it's a crop)

From my terrace

Ashu and my wife, lunchtime
