On The Road with Vicky Lamburn

Continued from Part 2

Part Three – Final thoughts on a TLR and Medium Format in a digital age

Anybody who knows anything about my photography knows that apart from a quick snap on my mobile phone, I only use film cameras. Despite holding down a job in IT working on the forefront of web technologies – I still don’t have any desire to go out and buy digital camera. But with all that considered, how does this weigh up in a digitally dominated photographic world, and even though I spent a mere £120 on this system so far (excluding film) – is it really such a good investment?

Read the rest of this entry »

Gary e-mailed me after I started the C330F Review (which I hope to finish tonight) with regard to this gem of a medium format camera. Well, he has a great blog himself looking at photography from the world of Mamiya.

As I have grown very fond of my C330F, there is a chance I’ll also invest in a 6×7 system such as the Mamiya RB/RZ67. Click the logo to follow on to his great blog:

He’s also the US distributor so why not check out www.mamiya.com whilst you’re at it?

Part Two – Twin Lens Quirks and Revelations

Continued from Part 1 | Skip to Part 3

So what is the Mamiya C330 or the C series in general? They are Twin Lens Reflex (TLR) cameras which means as the name suggests they have two lenses. One of the lens is the one you view through and the second lower lens is the one that is the taking lens (i.e. with the shutter that exposes the film behind it.)

This leads to a few interesting quirks. The first advantage of a TLR is that you can see virtually what you are taking a picture of as you take it. This has some distinct advantages for long exposures and portraiture where you want to be sure the person/people had their eyes open at the time of exposure. The second advantage is that compared to some medium format systems the Mamiya TLRs are cheaper than other interchangeable lens counterparts like the Bronica ETR, Mamiya 645, Pentax 645 (6×4.5 cameras) and the Bronica SQ and Mamiya 6/7 (6×6 cameras.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Part One – To Medium Format and Beyond… for sixty quid…

Skip to Part Two | Skip to Part Three

To most people, film is 35mm. In fact for most people, it never enters their mind that there is anything beyond their digital compact, their 35mm camera or indeed something beyond, “one of those fancy SLR things.” Mention medium or large format to most people and they will go, huh?

In case you are one of those, think of a piece of film like a piece of paper. With 35mm, imagine sketching a landscape on that size of paper? It’d lack a lot of detail and the only way to pack more into that sketch would be to make the pencil ever sharper (my analogy to ISO/ASA speed.) If you enlarge that piece of paper from 1 by 1½-inch to say 2 ½ by 2 ½-inches you can make a more detailed sketch of the landscape because you have more room, even without using the sharpest of pencils. And the same happens again when you move from medium format to large formats like 5×7, 8×10 and so on.

Read the rest of this entry »

I have to clear something up right away before I start here. Firstly, I’m still shooting film (35mm and 120) if you don’t follow things here — but that’s a personal choice — this doesn’t mean I don’t like or agree with digital photography (as Mike Johnston on photo.net put it recently, it’s really just photography now) because I think it’s an amazing thing and brilliant too. Resolution wise 35mm digital to 35mm film at the top end digital has it wrapped up. So I just want you to get this fixed in your head: what I’m about to say isn’t a film-head’s Luddite knee jerking. So if you think I’m debating that pointless digital vs. film debate, I’m not. In any instance it’s possible to do HDR imaging with film and a computer scanner.

Anyway, High Dynamic Range photography, or HDR.

I’ll say this right away, a small portion of it is excellent. Sharp, in keeping with the composition, balanced and sometimes even subtly brilliant – this small proportion is absolutely excellent and I think it’s cracking.

Then there is the majority: I think it looks awful. It’s not sharp, it’s gaudy and unbalanced and takes on a surreal look. If a surreal look is intended then that’s fine but I have to say over-done HDR photographs are fast becoming a pet hate of mine. I wonder if sometimes the bad examples are the result of some people not spending time over metering for difficult scenes and instead shooting at ‘any old’ time of day and then putting the frames together on the computer.

In some senses the use of ND grad filters is how traditionally we would have played with light and it’s always been done to some degree so HDR isn’t bad per se, it’s the execution of it in some hands. And some hands are as subtle as a slap around the chops!

I can only assume that some are using HDR as a proxy to make up for the inability to understand exposure. Those who do understand it make good HDR images as they have bracketed appropriately to make the composition.

I sometimes use ND Grad filters which in a sense is HDR too as I am manipulating light and how it falls on the film’s suface, extending the dynamic range. But when one sees the masterwork of say Ansel Adams and his famous images, compared to a lot of HDR work — you can see the difference.

I just had to say this because I like HDR when it’s done right but by god is there a lot of pap out there.

There again, I’m slightly alergic to colour anyway (hence all the black and white!) so I’m probably not the best judge

Pending the receipt of my first batch of Velvia 50 slides shot with my EOS 3 back from the lab, I’m close to being able to formulate an opinion on the EOS 3’s overall performance.

I’m absolutely adamant that the copy I have is not one that underexposed by 2/3rd stop as it’s not one of the first ones (produced in May 2000) but instead it really is one that was probably a pro’s backup or an amateur who never used it or looked after it very well*. Of course this will be born out when I receive the slidefilm back due to its sensitivity to exposure, particularly Velvia. Whichever way I look at it thoug, the EOS 3 is seriously a very good camera.

My Favourites

Now I have comparatively been shooting for a short time, about four years so I’m sure many long timers will scoff at this ‘immaturity’ of opinion but I think it’s quite well founded and reasoned.

Print Film (Negative):

I do use a lot of print film particularly because of my heavy black and white persuasions, but even colour has a place here (albeit only one):

• Ilford Delta 100 For a good, high detail medium contrast and low grain black and white film I find this is a great option. I find personally this is a versatile film for portraits and landscapes.
  
• Ilford FP4 125 This is another great film that I would say for my tastes is better than Delta 100 for landscapes and architectural shots due to my perceived marginally higher contrast. They are however quite similar but different enough in my eyes.
• Ilford XP2 Super 400 A chromogenic (C41) process black and white film which aside from the obvious benefit of processing available everywhere, is fantastic for long exposures particularly at night as it has a very nice grain. It is also very good as a general purpose black and white option and can produce nice portraiture.
  
• Kodak Tri-X Need I say any more? But if you insist – the allure of Tri-X is that distinctive grain that this film gives to anything that it graces. Fabulous for candid street photography and documentary style photographic subjects. That’s the key reason for me.
• Ilford Delta 3200 This is much better than T-MAX 3200 but is still a grainy film when developed at 3200. A life saver for low light photography without a tripod, I have captured some great street scenes in Brighton (which I must scan) with Delta 3200 that I would never have got. The grain is the allure for this and also I find it a very contrasty film which also ticks the boxes for me.
• Fujifilm Superia Reala 100 The first and only colour print film that I actively use and love. This is not far off of being the Velvia 50 of the print film world in some respects in that the colour latitude is great, and the colours are very vibrant. I particularly enjoy this film’s green and yellow hues. I have about 25 rolls of this in the freezer at the moment because I use this as my general purpose colour film for walk about when I’m not in the black and white mood. Low levels of grain too but enough to give character.
   

  This makes a good combination for portraiture (though perhaps a tad too punchy in some cases) but also with a macro lens and flower/foliage photography (one such subject Fuji recommends with this as it happens.)

Colour Slide Film

Check back tomorrow when I’ll run through these

(* : I had concerns it was in good nick because it underexposed and the owner never had it sorted and it languished on a shelf…)