Orchids in the evening.
Considering the camera was handheld at a shutter speed of only 1/125 sec, the sharpness is excellent. The shutter vibration is better than what I expected. I’m pleasantly surprised.
The lighting was mixed (natural twilight and nearby incandescent) and the colour is true to what I saw.
Tonality is really nice too.
–
–
Aperture: Undisclosed
Shutter Speed: 1/125 sec
ISO: 400
Camera: Undisclosed
Lens: Undisclosed
As promised, here is the 100% crop from the image posted earlier today:
–
–
Aperture: Undisclosed
Shutter Speed: 1/200 sec
ISO: 500
Camera: Undisclosed
Lens: Undisclosed
For the first time in five years, I am without a digital Leica M (my Leica M9 is gone, and so are my Leica lenses).
I don’t see myself purchasing another digital Leica M again, unless:
–
The Leica M3 and Voigtländer Nokton 40mm are still with me.
The Mamiya RZ67 is with me.
My deep connection to rangefinders will remain with my M3, and I will continue to develop my portrait photography with the formidable RZ67. Both of these are, of course, film cameras.
I’ll therefore be exploring another digital system.
In fact, it’s already in my hands.
—Peter.
–
In Greek mythology, Theseus was the the hero who slayed the Minotaur in the Labyrinth of Knossos.
He then sailed home, on a ship that — having long been in service — was in obvious need of repair. Wooden planks were therefore removed and replaced.
Theseus’ Paradox arises from the following thought experiment: suppose, over time, more and more aging planks were removed and then replaced with new pieces of wood until — eventually — no original plank remained.
–
–
Most people would still consider it Theseus‘ ship, but… Would it still be the same ship that served him so well?
There are several potential answers to this question, and one further wrinkle that involves taking all of the old discarded planks and re-fashioning another ship, thus creating two Theseus ships (the one with all of the replaced parts, and a new-old one with the old parts). It’s very mind-bending.
So…what’s this have to do with photography?
Nothing. But…
I recently purchased a 1963 Leica M3 in completely original condition, and sent it in for servicing. Even though it was working well enough in most situations, several of its optical and mechanical parts were in poor condition and needed to be replaced. The exterior covering was replaced too.
I’m currently waiting for its return.
While I’m waiting, the question I keep asking myself, after all of these changes is:
Is this the same M3 that allowed me take this image?
Or has my ship sailed?
—Peter.
–
When you create things (like photographs) you become emotionally attached to them. Consequently, you are often not in the best position to judge whether your creations are any good.
Having said that, I’m normally pretty accurate at predicting which of my images will be favourably received.
However, I still get fooled. Sometimes, what I thought was good, you think is, well…
Here are 5 images I posted over the last few years that received minimal or no comments. They were figuratively sucked into a vacuum and left for dead.
I realize that perhaps you may have been away when I first posted them. Or, perhaps you were too pressed for time, and couldn’t leave a friendly comment.
But I am instead going to assume that you disliked these images.
How could you? 🙂
–
–
–
1. Bajan Tapestry.
This was photographed last month, so I admit I may be biased by the recency of my creation. Yet, I believe this may be one of the best images I’ve ever created.
–
–
2. The Kick.
The proverbial decisive moment. Caught on film, no less. Whimsical, and perfectly composed with a dash of symmetry. Tell me otherwise.
–
–
3. The Kiss.
It’s all about Love. You would have to be heartless to ignore this one. And you did.
–
–
4. The Window, Part 2.
Reflections, connections, and longing gazes. Life as a dream. Works for me.
–
–
5. Portrait of an enigmatic young man.
So enigmatic, it confused you. I guess.
–
–
There are other examples, but I won’t berate you any more.
Thanks,
—Peter.
I recently reported on the Plustek 120 scanner for scanning B&W film.
After reading about my positive experience with the Plustek 120, my friend Mark purchased one. Mark, being a Master in film processing, develops both B&W and colour film. While using the colour film dust removal feature of the Silverfast sofware, he initially found things weren’t working. However, a few quick changes in Silverfast solved the problem.
Mark writes:
–
Thank you for this information Mark.
—Peter.
I thought it might be a good time to link to an old post of mine, from over two years ago.
What prompted this?
Looking at some images from a popular website, where a guest photographer was sharing his experience with one of the latest cameras. The images were beautiful, but the processing was over the top. Too plastic.
When processing, my friends, you have to keep it real.
–Peter.
Completing my move back into shooting film is my acquisition of a Leica M3.
I’m revisiting an old friend, in that I’ve owned two of these previously (a couple of examples of my previous output with the M3 can be seen here and here) .
This one is from 1963, and it still has the “L” seal intact — which means it has never been opened to be serviced since leaving the factory in 1963.
How well does this 50+ year old camera fare?
Here is a test shot from today (focus is on the angels):
↑Leica M3, Leica 50mm Summilux ASPH @ f/1.4, and Kodak Tri-X 400.
–
The focus is spot-on, and most of the shutter speeds are working perfectly.
Now, do I get it serviced to get the last ounce of performance out of it, or do I leave it untouched (with the L seal intact)?
Hmmm…
—Peter.
For some reason, my open letter to Leica has been getting a lot of traffic today.
–
–
Anyone who wants an updated CCD sensor in a future Leica M model. Anyone who places emphasis on rangefinder simplicity and also values high image quality at low-to-moderate ISO values.
Yes, Leica, incorporate the ergonomic improvements of the M240, but help differentiate the brand from the mediocre CMOS landscape by bringing back an updated CCD sensor.
Please bring back a superior, simple, and reliable still-photography camera worthy of the Leica brand.
(If you’re reading this and are in agreement, please click on the Dear Leica dot below and sign your name in the comments section.)
Thanks,
—Peter.
–
–
___
Related posts:
Here is a high magnification crop from each scanner, from yesterday’s Smile image.
Qualifiers:
*This was done for my own evaluation purposes. I have other crops I’ve compared but I’m only posting one because it is representative of the overall results.
–
The Epson V700 is on the left, the Plustek 120 is on the right:
–
My verdict?
However, the Epson V700 was hampered by its substandard film holders. Those of you who are using the BetterScanning substitutes are likely coaxing better performance out of the Epson.
Please note that we are splitting hairs with these crops. The overall image quality is excellent for both.
In actuality, I was happy with the Epson — until I saw what I can get from the Plustek. And my goal was to get something at least as good as the Epson in a smaller package. The fact that I’m getting better image quality (in the context of my workflow) is a bonus.
The second big bonus with the Plustek is that there is no large, smudge-prone, glass panel present from which I have to keep wiping away fingerprints.
The third big bonus with the Plustek is that the film holders can accommodate 3 frames of 6 x 7 film (the Epson ones hold 2.5… which is very inconvenient).
Finally…
I’d like to congratulate Plustek for keeping film scanners alive. I’m no longer plagued by crazy notions of purchasing a used (and discontinued, and unsupported) Nikon Coolscan 9000 for an inflated price in the second-hand market.
The Plustek 120 appears to be a quality product that is well-conceived and is well-executed. And thank you Plustek, for finally including well-engineered film holders!
Hopefully, it’s built to last.
—Peter.
I’m just finalising my post about my recent experience with the Epson V700 vs. Plustek 120.
Please note that the discussion is based on a single shot comparison (done for my own evaluation purposes) and therefore it is not meant to be a scientific analysis!
—Peter.
That was fast delivery!… ordered yesterday, here today.
(Thank you Canada Post)
–
–
I still have the plastic protective sheet on the front 🙂
The footprint is certainly much smaller than the Epson V700. Excellent.
For comparison purposes, here is the Plustek 120 from above, with a standard 3-hole punch and my recent Polaroid photo sitting on top of it:
–
–
Now, the question is:
Will it perform as well as the V700?
—Peter.
Here is my first image from the first roll of Kodak Tri-X 120 put through the Mamiya RZ67.
I self-processed the film at home like this, and self-scanned on an Epson V700.
Looking at the tonality of this image, I want to weep tears of joy.
Nothing I’ve experienced with digital comes close.
People, all these years we have been duped.
Instead of constantly upgrading e-cameras,
We could have had this all along.
And now film is dying.
Shame on us.
—Peter.
↑Mamiya RZ67, Mamiya 110mm @ f/2.8, and Kodak Tri-X 400.
Okay, enough of the Polaroid-ish films shots.
I stepped into the world of MF for one reason and one reason only: Tri-X on a larger sheet of film.
So, tomorrow I’m posting a test image that I shot using Tri-X 400, and scanned with my now returned Epson.
—Peter.
Yes, I’m looking to you for advice.
If you had to choose between the Epson V700/V750 or Plustek OpticFilm 120 to scan Medium Format film, which would you choose?
My newly arrived refurbished Epson V700 is defective (but I have been able to coax some scans out of it) so now I’m wondering if I should replace it with a new one or move to something else. I’m only interested in scanners that are currently in production, so that excludes the various Nikon and Minolta offerings.
Thanks,
—Peter.
The answer to my Guess Which Gear question is:
Mamiya RZ67 Professional Pro II and Mamiya RZ 110mm F/2.8, using Fujifilm FP-3000B (Poloraid-type) B&W film:
As the name implies, the Mamiya RZ67 is a 6 x 7 film format system. Its film “sensor” size can be appreciated by looking at this comparison:
This is a modular system and the Polaroid film back provides less “sensor” size (and less image quality) than 120 film, but I purchased it along with the 120 film back so that I could get instant results and feedback. As you can see from my first Test Image, I messed up on my initial settings (I had the ISO on the camera set to 800, while the Fuji FP-3000B is pegged at ISO 3000) so it was a good thing the damage was limited to only one image vs. an entire roll of 120 Kodak Tri-X.
[Incidentally, Fuji has recently announced that it is discontinuing this film 😦 . There’s an online petition asking Fuji to bring back the FP-3000B and so far there are over 10,000 signatures. You can still find it in stock, but prices have jumped quite a bit. If you’re interested in using it, buy it while you can — and sign the petition!]
Knowing my love of small Leica rangefinders, why did I even look at this behemoth of a camera? One word: PORTRAITURE.
If you look at the sample images online, you will be amazed. Hopefully, I will produce something worthy of this camera. The gear, for me, will be relegated to formal shooting, which means I will seldom use it. However, given how easily and inexpensively one can obtain such capable film-based medium format systems, the decision was easy.
As a side bonus of first using the Polaroid back on the Mamiya, my kids were amazed at seeing “the pictures come out of the camera, like in the old cartoons!“. It’s great to see that in this age of digital wizardry, something as old as this can fire up their imagination.
Now… off to dig up my old film developing equipment and brush up on…
Thanks for your interest.
—Peter.
I messed up.
What can I say?… it’s a new camera, new lens, new medium. Literally the first test shot.
Any guesses as to what I’m using?
(The image borders provide a strong hint about the identify of the medium.)
—Peter.
I’m about to go on holiday.
While I’m gone, please help keep the momentum going, and consider signing my open letter to Leica.
–
–
Anyone who wants an updated CCD sensor in a future Leica M model. Anyone who places emphasis on rangefinder simplicity and also values high image quality at low-to-moderate ISO values.
Yes, Leica, incorporate the ergonomic improvements of the M240, but help differentiate the brand from the CMOS-muddy-file-with-video/EVF-me-too landscape by bringing back an updated CCD sensor.
Please bring back a superior, simple, and reliable still-photography camera worthy of the Leica brand.
—Peter.
(and thank you to the over 150 individuals who have already signed)
–
___
Related posts:
