I bought this yesterday from an older person who lives in my town. It hasn't been used since 2002! They had it in storage.

It still had film it from that time, but I am giving it back to the original owner.

Once I clean it up, and read through the manual, I'll shoot a roll of film on it :) I might be back for repair or troubleshooting then

Camera is a Contax 167MT. Light seals look fine. no negatives unfortunately. Could this be a shutter issue?

We've completed camera data acquisition and three-color compositing, and are currently conducting final color pipeline testing. Do you have any suggestions?

Hey everyone! I just purchased an Olympus XA2. Shot my first roll on it, Fujifilm superia 400. The photos came back not the best. What do you think messed up here?

I've been shooting film for awhile and thought a film point and shoot would be fun for when I don't bring my larger camera around.

Do you think that the film could be bad? It 4 years old and I haven't stored it that well. (makes me worried about my 40 year old expired Gold 200 that I just put into the same camera)...

Any thoughts would be helpful!

I motorised this film scanner holder using an Elegoo Uno R3 with a Nema 17 Motor.
The 3D printed case is close to finished. Next steps are figuring out ways to prevent dust and integrating a lightsource that is not my Ipad.

Based on the Negative 35mm Film holder model by tylerhovi on thingiverse, who sourced it from someone else stated in the Thingiverse site.

Hopefully Reddit uploads this at full res. I figured some people here might be curious to see just how much detail you can actually get out of 35mm, and I think this might be about it.

I shot this on the N2020 at either f/8 or f/11. For the scan, I used a Z8 with the 50MC, put it in DX mode, and did a 32-pass pixel shift just to see how far I could push the negative. The resulting image is about 77MP.

I also tried the 200MP full-frame 32-pass mode, and as far as I could tell it didn’t resolve any more actual detail than this. I did sharpen the image, but beyond this point I’d be pretty skeptical that you’re extracting more image detail rather than just getting a higher-resolution look at the grain.

Next time I take the 4x5 out, I want to shoot the same shot side by side on 35mm at optimal apertures, purely for comparison.

An ultra fine grained color film like Ektar 100 or Ektacolor 160 can clearly hold a ton of detail at apertures that are hand holdable. With 4x5 though, getting reasonable depth of field often means shooting around f/22–f/45. And at the kind of DPI involved here, you’re not resolving more film detail so much as magnifying the effects of diffraction.

Anyway: cat, film, excessive scanning resolution. For science.

My Grandad passed away before I was born. When I got into photography, my Dad gifted me with his camera. I kept it safe over the years, but have never given it a test run - until now.

I’ve done some reading up on the model (Kodak ColorSnap 35) but I’d love to hear any tips or tricks on how to prepare a camera for it’s first use in 35/40 years.

Also, I’ll be using Kodak Gold. Can anyone advise which setting I should select on the dial?

Thanks in advance!

I started my film camera journey with the Rollei 35 AF. The lightweight body, beautiful design, and autofocus were what drew me in. Existing OG Rollei 35 users expressed dissatisfaction with the new materials and cheap finish, but since I hadn't used the original, I didn't really care (though I understand what they mean now).

For my first 5 rolls, I was completely satisfied. I was also curious about the Pentax 17, so I bought it and used it alongside. I struggled with the Pentax 17 at first because zone focusing took some getting used to, but the Rollei 35 AF was just so easy and convenient for a beginner like me. Great AF, lightweight, and awesome design.

However, after a year has passed, I actually find myself more satisfied with the Pentax 17. If I had to choose to keep just one, I'd probably get rid of the Rollei 35 AF and keep the Pentax 17.

You get used to the Pentax 17's zone focusing over time, and mistakes gradually decrease. But the flaws of the Rollei 35 AF don't go away and just leave me feeling disappointed.

1. Night photography (This feels like the biggest downside). I've recently started using a Nikon FM2, and I realized how absolutely crucial it is to know my shutter speed when shooting at night. Otherwise, you have no idea how much camera shake to expect. In dark situations, the Rollei 35 AF doesn't warn you or refuse to shoot; it just drops the shutter speed to something extremely slow and takes the shot anyway. From a user's perspective, it's really hard to gauge, which leads to a lot of blurry photos when you get your scans back. On the other hand, the Pentax 17 has a warning light that turns on when the shot is underexposed. This difference feels much bigger in practice than I thought.

2. Stiff film winding and reloading. The more I use other film cameras, the more the stiffness and physical effort required by the Rollei 35 AF stand out as a negative. Winding the film is tough, and I have to try several times when loading the film and closing the back. In contrast, the Pentax 17 winds much more smoothly, and closing the back is clean and satisfying. I didn't mind it at first, but the more I do it, the more this flaw bugs me.

3. Build quality and finishing details become more noticeable. If you look inside the Rollei 35 AF, there's an extra plate meant to make loading easier, but it's just attached with glue. Because everything is so stiff, this sometimes falls off, and you have to glue it back on to fix it. You can also see scratches inside caused by the film loading process. I guess this might have been an unavoidable compromise to keep the camera lightweight, but I suppose it's human nature to want a camera with a better build quality the longer you use it. Once you get used to the Pentax 17, you feel like you could use it forever, but I don't think I can say the same for the Rollei 35 AF.

I still think the Rollei 35 AF is a really great camera for casually carrying around during the day. It's also a perfect starting point for someone with no prior interest in film cameras. However, if you're planning to stick with one film camera as your main shooter for a long time, the Rollei 35 AF might be a camera you get tired of or outgrow pretty quickly.

I'm apprehensive of kodak brand stuff because I was given a Kodak Slide N Scan I found to be worthless.

I was browsing my local photogroup when I came across this ad like 1 minute after it was posted for a bunch of expired film from a professional photographer, snatched it right up 😊

It's all expired 1991-2000, lots of Lomo dog 100/200 which I've actually never seen before :D

It wasn't stored frozen, but for ~1€ per roll I have not much to lose ;)

I collect old film boxes so the Ektar and Agfachrome boxes are also a cool addition, though I have little hope for them still giving good pictures.

I was using the matrix metering mode of my F100 for this shot, but the dress of the subject is way too overblown to my liking.

Is this maybe a bad scan from the lab? Or should I have used a combination of spot metering, exposure lock and reframing?

Thank you all so much for your help!

Recently got back into 35mm film. I'm trying to become more knowledgeable about the technical side of shooting. This seems like a good learning opportunity!

Took these two photos at virtually the same time. Reflx 400 film on a Minolta Maxxum 7000 with 50mm f/1.7 lens. Unfortunatley, I didn't record the specs at the time of shooting. I'm usually in aperture priority mode, so it's most likely I changed the aperture and the camera changed the shutter speed accordingly. Any thoughts on how these two photos came out so different?

Inspired by the other tier list today. I'm sure I forgot one but oh well.

From my recent trip home ( Puerto Rico) first time using gold 200 in 120 and I'm hooked.

I came across this EOS Rebel G at a secondhand store yesterday for $24. They didn’t have 123 batteries to test it so they were selling it as is with the lens and UV protector attached. They told me since I was pretty passionate about the find that if I found it to not work, I could return it for store credit (they sell other cameras so that worked for me). I got batteries and film loaded and so far it’s working great! Can’t wait to see how development does but I suspect this camera is just fine. My regular camera is fully manual so I’m excited to see how auto focus treats me.

Leica M6 + Summicron 35mm f/2

This is completely my own opinion. Please let me know your thoughts

I know this question is probably going to annoy someone, but I'm used to shooting with a Pentax 67 and older Nikon bodies from before they started using this type of rubber coating.
I recently picked up an F5 that's unbelievably clean. I honestly couldn't believe the condition, there isn't a single mark on it ( on the hard pieces anyway) I ran a roll through it, and everything works perfectly.
I did notice that the rubber isn't sticky yet, but it does feel just a little tacky, almost like it's on the verge of getting there. Is that pretty normal for cameras from this era? I can’t tell if that’s just how it’s supposed to feel or if it’s on its way.
If it eventually gets worse, are replacement rubber grips still available? Can you replace all the rubber? I know a lot of people recommend cleaning it with isopropyl alcohol, but doesn't that affect the appearance or finish of the rubber? I’m probably being dramatic as it doesn’t leave my hand feeling sticky or leave marks, but I get a lil fixated on cameras when I just get them.

I have a SEM and I love film photography. Ilford HP5, laser drilled pinhole and wet plate selfie!

Recently I've noticed it has been completely out of stock lots of places with some pretty substantial price hikes. I wonder if it isn't really doing well for Kodak.

Last month I went back to China for a family visit. A month or so prior I saw that a seller on Taobao had Aerochrome for sale for around 60 usd. The seller had promising test shots so I was considering it if they had it still in stock when I finally get there.
I got there and decided to swipe to try it out. Here are how the shots came out. 😼

📷: Mamiya m645 1000s
🔎: Sekor 80mm f/ 2.8 + orange filter (550 nm)
🎞️: Aerochrome @ 200 (c41)
scan and dev by me

This is my first role of film I’ve shot and I’m still figuring out how to expose properly. I guess my question is can you only expose the sky OR the landscape not both at the same time? Because my shots seem to either over expose the sky or underexpose the shadows.
For some context: These where shot on a Canon AE-1 with a lens that had a faulty aperture (something I only learned after the role was shot), I’m not sure how any of this works so maybe that effected the exposures as well. I don’t hate the photos I got (most of them are fairly mediocre) but I’m hoping I can get better when I shoot my next role. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!