Film Photography

Discuss cameras, settings, composition, or anything related to photography - cactus or other subjects.
User avatar
SnowFella
Posts: 1762
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:27 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Film Photography

Post by SnowFella »

Has it's drawbacks though, from memory you do loose some light and the DOF is razor thin!
DaveW
Posts: 7076
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 pm
Location: Nottingham, England/UK

Re: Film Photography

Post by DaveW »

DOF is solely due to magnification, not the means to obtain it whether tubes or macro lens, and by extending a lens you always loose some light since in actual fact the effective f-stop alters. This is not noticeable in normal photography as the f-stop alteration is so small. The f-stop written on a lens is only theoretically correct at infinity since as you focus closer and the lens extends it effectively gets smaller since the light has a longer "tunnel" to pass down, meaning a dimmer image on the film/sensor.

The loss of light was more obvious in pre TTL-metering days with macro lenses using a hand held light meter, when with magnifications past a certain point you had to apply an exposure correction factor. In the old days these used to come on a leaflet with the macro lens, but no longer since they assume TTL-metering on modern cameras will correct for this anyway. Therefore not something you need to bother yourself about these days with TTL-metering, but for those who are interested:-

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/37551692" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Unfortunately there is no way to gain extra depth of field at a set magnification and effective f-stop than by focus stacking. Stopping the lens down too far also makes diffraction effects noticeable:-

http://www.ophrysphotography.co.uk/page ... action.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://fstoppers.com/studio/fstoppers- ... appen-6022" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
JamesEG
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Somerset, UK, Zone 8b

Re: Film Photography

Post by JamesEG »

Up to now I've done macro images by reversing the kit lens that came with my camera, it has some good results but is very impractical as I need to be holding the lens in place in front of the camera. I should be able to find an adapter for reversing the lens but I have never got round to it... This method also has the issue of a very shallow DOF, but the main problem is light, to get a wider DOF I lock the aperture at around f/8-f/11 but this then requires a flash and since I don't have any other flash than the build in one so I've had to construct a reflector using paper and aluminium foil, otherwise there's a shadow on the subject from the end of the lens as I have to get really close, this also tends to cause whatever I'm trying to photograph to run away!
DaveW
Posts: 7076
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 pm
Location: Nottingham, England/UK

Re: Film Photography

Post by DaveW »

Depends on the lens and camera make, Nikon lenses used to stop down when removed from the camera and reversed and the aperture still set with the aperture ring, but I believe Canon's open up? The apertures of Nikon's lenses with a proper aperture ring could be set the required aperture when reversed. Being a macro photographer I hate the modern lenses without proper aperture rings since the makers seem to presume they will never be used without direct electrical contact with the camera, or even reversed for better quality at higher magnifications:-

http://www.school-of-digital-photograph ... rture.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can use tungsten light indoors for extra illumination since digital auto white balance will usually make the corrections, unlike colour film where you need the appropriate filter on the lens. Why do you always need flash though, the hover fly in my earlier post was taken by available light with a hand held camera? I have lost the EXIF data for that shot now, but I usually hand hold that 180mm lens for insects with the camera in shutter priority mode set to 1/160th second and let the aperture take care of itself. The rule of thumb for hand holding used to hand hold no slower than the focal length of the lens in use in fractions of a second to avoid shake, meaning a 60mm lens 1/60th second and a 200mm lens 1/200th second, but no lower than 1/60th of a second in any instance off a tripod since the rule does not work for wider angle shorter focal length lenses.

Obviously it was a sunny day when I took that insect and I believe the camera was set to ISO 100, which I generally use for best quality as it's the base ISO on my camera.

http://photography.tutsplus.com/article ... photo-8053" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://expertphotography.com/understan ... ple-steps/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can find the required reversing rings and adapters on EBAY usually.

Avoid casting a sudden shadow over your insect as it will often take flight. I usually approach from the opposite side the sun is shining from to avoid this, but still approach slowly and if it starts to move stand still until it settles again:-

http://www.school-of-digital-photograph ... flies.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good luck anyway!
User avatar
JamesEG
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Somerset, UK, Zone 8b

Re: Film Photography

Post by JamesEG »

Yes the aperture ring opens up on Canon lenses when removed from the camera, but I can lock the aperture blades by holding the depth of field preview button and removing the lens simultaneously, but then the only way to change it is to put the lens back on the camera.

I normally need the flash because I tend to use an aperture of around f/8 to improve the depth of field which makes focusing easier, as it has to be done by moving the entire camera, and because I need to use slightly higher shutter speed to avoid the image being blurred. Using a too high ISO tends to add too much noise to the image as well. If it's bright enough outside I can sometimes take photos without the flash. Turning on the built in flash also makes the screen brighter and so the live view is easier to see, manually holding the reversed lens in place makes using the viewfinder quite difficult!
A. Dean Stock
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:41 am
Location: 40 south 7440 east Kanab, Utah (Johnson Canyon)

Re: Film Photography

Post by A. Dean Stock »

I used a lot of film over the years but after digital got good I gave film up entirely, both in the genetics lab and for pleasure. I trashed all my film camera backs, not just because digital was easier to use but also much cheaper. There will always be people that prefer to tinker with film. My dad was a horseman and up until his passing at 97 years of age he still preferred horses to automobiles. Just depends on what you got used to and how attached you are to a particular way of life.
Dean
Albert Dean Stock,Ph.D.
DaveW
Posts: 7076
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 pm
Location: Nottingham, England/UK

Re: Film Photography

Post by DaveW »

Progress only happens when we old ones die off. Once you are trained as an apprentice in your trade the ways you were taught always seem to be best, mainly because to learn new skills you have to start again from scratch, therefore in effect become just an unskilled labourer again until you master the new. However there will always be a few youngsters who wish they had lived in a past age since it seemed more desirable and less complex than the present one, or are indoctrinated by the old in that the old ways were best and you are not a proper photographer until you use monochrome.

That is why monochrome still has it's adherents, because they long ago learnt the techniques it required so will always maintain it is more creative than colour, even though they personally see in colour and none would want to loose their colour vision and become colour blind. As the old saying goes "if colour film had been invented first would anybody have felt the need to invent monochrome?".

Products arise from the technology available at the time. When new things are invented they either fail and disappear, or if better kill off previous technology. You have to have your head firmly stuck in the sand not to realise digital has now largely killed off film and film is still continuing to decline to what will be miniscule usage in future. When the market for film, chemicals to process it and equipment to take it declines past a certain level few firms will bother to produce them.

There are even photographers still coating glass plates with wet collodion, but no doubt film users look upon them with the same puzzlement that digital users look on those still using outdated film techniques. Being slow to change from traditional film production to digital almost bankrupt Kodak, therefore never believe any film producer who says they will always produce film and support film users, because their shareholders will never allow them to subsidise it's production and insist the factory space is put to more profitable use.

http://studioq.com/wet-plate-collodion/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are even people who still dress and walk around in Victorian clothing, but the rest of society simply regards them as eccentrics.
Post Reply