K14
Well-known
Nice photo Sean. Yes a little adjustment helps on these expired films. What film were you using?
Gary
Gary
seany65
Well-known
@Skucera: Thanks for the remarks. it was rather fortunate having the canal lock where it is, along with the curve of the canalside just beyond the bow of the boat.
Just in case anyone is wondering-No I didn't sink the boat to make the picture.
Or did I?
@k14: It was 'Tudor 200' that expired in 2006. The box said 'made in europe' so I hoped it was made by Agfa, as I'd seen a couple of pics taken using agfa film that was older but still looked decent enough in an ebay listing.
Just in case anyone is wondering-No I didn't sink the boat to make the picture.
Or did I?
@k14: It was 'Tudor 200' that expired in 2006. The box said 'made in europe' so I hoped it was made by Agfa, as I'd seen a couple of pics taken using agfa film that was older but still looked decent enough in an ebay listing.
seany65
Well-known
I thought I'd post a few more 110 tudor film pics done with my 110 slr mk2. As always click on the thumb for big pics:
135mm at about /125 or /250 and about f11, hand-held with very light breeze
The meter seems to have done quite well, but the way I held the camera with my shutter-button-side elbow sticking up and out didn't help much. I've adopted an "elbow-in and 2nd finger trigger" method which I'll be using when I start taking pics again.
I decided to do some that were a little on the abstract side.
mm unknown, about /125 or /250 and maybe f8 or f11
Not as sharp as I'd like, probably for the same reasons as above.
135mm, /125 or /250, f8 orf11
I do need to practice my holding, don't I?
135mm, /125 or /250 f8 or f11, first scan
"Arrggh! What's that vertical line?" I hear you ask. I thought it may be the camera or the scanner so I moved the print a bit to the other side of the scanner and got this
The line seems to be a feature of the scanner at that particular place the print was on.
This last pic is the only one that has had any "fiddling" done-just a bit of lightening of the dark tones and a tiny bit of sharpening. Looking at it now, I think perhaps it could do with a bit of cropping to cut out the white paint on the red bit and to cut off the bit of the boat beyond the red bit.
135mm at about /125 or /250 and about f11, hand-held with very light breeze
The meter seems to have done quite well, but the way I held the camera with my shutter-button-side elbow sticking up and out didn't help much. I've adopted an "elbow-in and 2nd finger trigger" method which I'll be using when I start taking pics again.
I decided to do some that were a little on the abstract side.
mm unknown, about /125 or /250 and maybe f8 or f11
Not as sharp as I'd like, probably for the same reasons as above.
135mm, /125 or /250, f8 orf11
I do need to practice my holding, don't I?
135mm, /125 or /250 f8 or f11, first scan
"Arrggh! What's that vertical line?" I hear you ask. I thought it may be the camera or the scanner so I moved the print a bit to the other side of the scanner and got this
The line seems to be a feature of the scanner at that particular place the print was on.
This last pic is the only one that has had any "fiddling" done-just a bit of lightening of the dark tones and a tiny bit of sharpening. Looking at it now, I think perhaps it could do with a bit of cropping to cut out the white paint on the red bit and to cut off the bit of the boat beyond the red bit.
capitalK
Warrior Poet :P
Timely bump, I just got a Pentax 110 Super 4-lens kit.
Is it worth my time to buy a few rolls of 100 and try to get it developed or am I better off just selling it or putting it on a shelf?
Is it worth my time to buy a few rolls of 100 and try to get it developed or am I better off just selling it or putting it on a shelf?
skucera
Well-known
Yes, a Pentax Auto 110 Super with four lenses will take beautiful pictures. Buy some film and try it out. Remember fresh batteries; if you can see the LED glowing green and you’re in focus, you have a fighting chance. The rest is up to you and your artistic eye.
Good luck, and please post any nice photos.
Scott
Good luck, and please post any nice photos.
Scott
capitalK
Warrior Poet :P
Yah, I think I'd be remiss to not put at least one roll through it.
bmattock
Mentor
I carried a Pentax Auto 110 through my Marine Corps career because it was small and I could always have it with me. Just the standard lens and whatever film I found for it in the places I traveled.
I still have most of the prints and the negatives. Couple years back, I started trying to figure out how to scan them. After a lot of experiements, I finally decided to cut them into single frames and mount them as if they were slides, using Gepe Anti-Newton glass slides to keep them flat (they really curled up badly over the years). I then scanned them in my Minolta Scan Dual IV with Vuescan. Seems to work pretty well. Just a tip for those looking for a good way to scan these.
I still have most of the prints and the negatives. Couple years back, I started trying to figure out how to scan them. After a lot of experiements, I finally decided to cut them into single frames and mount them as if they were slides, using Gepe Anti-Newton glass slides to keep them flat (they really curled up badly over the years). I then scanned them in my Minolta Scan Dual IV with Vuescan. Seems to work pretty well. Just a tip for those looking for a good way to scan these.
skucera
Well-known
Thanks, Mattock. I carried my Pentax Auto 110 during much of my short Naval Aviation career. I was about halfway into NFO training before I saw one of my instructors putting a roll of film in an SLR and asked if it was OK for me to bring my camera. He said, “Yes, as long as it doesn’t interfere with your mission.” I should dig those pictures out of storage.
Scott
Scott
Last edited:
seany65
Well-known
@CapitalK: The only 100 asa film is Lomography "Orca 100" mono film, which is available in singles. Lomo also do "Tiger 200" colour print film. I suppose you could try expired film of which there is usually a decent amount on "PicClick UK", (which is a quick way of searching ebay), although all of what I've seen is 200 asa.
If you're in GB then "Max Spielmann" process and print 110 film. Well, they send it off to some lab or other. The last one cost me £14.99, although they had a young woman in from another branch in Manchester who thought the price they did it for in her branch was higher-for some reason the one near me doesn't have the actual price for it on their price list!
If you're in GB then "Max Spielmann" process and print 110 film. Well, they send it off to some lab or other. The last one cost me £14.99, although they had a young woman in from another branch in Manchester who thought the price they did it for in her branch was higher-for some reason the one near me doesn't have the actual price for it on their price list!
Huss
Mentor
Rollei A110
wwfloyd
Well-known
I had shot a roll of Orca, and was very displeased with the white dots showing in black areas. Had decided it would not even be worth shooting the second roll I had on hand. I eventually stumbled onto web talk that mentioned the hole-y backing paper. SO... the advice for those desiring un-spotted negs, is to put tape over the film door window. Some guys even put the tape on the inside, to make it more permanent. Then, you have to keep track of remaining frames and filmtype, yourself.
Here's an example of consecutive frames with the white spots, mostly on the left center.
Attachments
Huss
Mentor
Yeah those light leaks/dots also happen w Lomo Tiger colour film, not just the B&W Orca film. Just got them on a roll I shot.
The solution as u point out is to tape over the back film door window.
The solution as u point out is to tape over the back film door window.
seany65
Well-known
I've not noticed any white dots on my tiger 200 prints, but then I wasn't looking for them. I'll have a closer look later.
Huss, I take it you decided the pic you posted yesterday looked better in mono? What colour were the plants in the foreground? I've just noticed the thin streak down the middle of the shot that crosses the coats. Is this in any other pic?
Huss, I take it you decided the pic you posted yesterday looked better in mono? What colour were the plants in the foreground? I've just noticed the thin streak down the middle of the shot that crosses the coats. Is this in any other pic?
seany65
Well-known
Sorry to "necro-post", but I've been wondering if the 110 mk 2's lens is actually parfocal or not?
I ask because recently, with not much to do while being stuck in the house, I carefully focused mine while the lens was at the 25mm end and then zoomed in to 67mm while carefully avoiding touching the focusing ring and it does seem to need refocusing a little. I then zoomed back out to 35mm (to make focusing a little easier due to the image being a bit bigger than it is at 25mm) and focused and then zoomed to 67mm and it needed a little refocusing.
Could this just be my example, poor technique (unfortunately not e very distant possibility, lol.), or have I been using it slightly incorrectly due to a misunderstanding on my part of the how this lens really works?
Any help would be appreciated.
I ask because recently, with not much to do while being stuck in the house, I carefully focused mine while the lens was at the 25mm end and then zoomed in to 67mm while carefully avoiding touching the focusing ring and it does seem to need refocusing a little. I then zoomed back out to 35mm (to make focusing a little easier due to the image being a bit bigger than it is at 25mm) and focused and then zoomed to 67mm and it needed a little refocusing.
Could this just be my example, poor technique (unfortunately not e very distant possibility, lol.), or have I been using it slightly incorrectly due to a misunderstanding on my part of the how this lens really works?
Any help would be appreciated.
skucera
Well-known
Which camera are you asking about? The Pentax Auto 110’s zoom is 20-40mm f2.8. There isn’t a “Mark 2” version of the camera, unless you’re referring to the Auto 110 Super. Are you perhaps asking about the Minolta 110, which has Mk. 1 and Mk. 2 versions? Or, are you playing with a zoom lens for a Pentax 35mm camera?
Scott
Scott
seany65
Well-known
Sorry skucera, I should've mentioned it's a minolta 110 slr mk2.
Nearly forgot to add that last night I had the most incredibly genius idea in the past, present and future history of this and every other dimension of the universe:
For those using lomo 110 film who find they have trouble with tiny dots appearing in the picture- Don't black out the plastic window through which you see the frame numbers, Just put a bit of red sticky tape over the window and that way you can still see the frame numbers!
Well, maybe it's not all that impressive an idea and I've no idea where to get this red sticky tape, but if I could find some "red stuff" to stick over the window it may help.
Nearly forgot to add that last night I had the most incredibly genius idea in the past, present and future history of this and every other dimension of the universe:
For those using lomo 110 film who find they have trouble with tiny dots appearing in the picture- Don't black out the plastic window through which you see the frame numbers, Just put a bit of red sticky tape over the window and that way you can still see the frame numbers!
Well, maybe it's not all that impressive an idea and I've no idea where to get this red sticky tape, but if I could find some "red stuff" to stick over the window it may help.
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
Some years ago a friend sold me his Pentax 110 kit for a bargain - all the prime lenses, filters, motor drive, flash, and aluminum Pentax signature carrying case.
I wasn't interested in the zoom - usually I carry the camera and a few lenses in a small belt pouch.
Anyway, some of the Lomo film seemed to have film plane issues - objects closer than the subject were more in focus. If this is a consistent issue, maybe I could insert a temporary shim between the film and the inside rear of the cartridge in order to move the film closer to the lens.
I have some new Fukkatsu 110 film I have yet to try; perhaps it will be better.
I wasn't interested in the zoom - usually I carry the camera and a few lenses in a small belt pouch.
Anyway, some of the Lomo film seemed to have film plane issues - objects closer than the subject were more in focus. If this is a consistent issue, maybe I could insert a temporary shim between the film and the inside rear of the cartridge in order to move the film closer to the lens.
I have some new Fukkatsu 110 film I have yet to try; perhaps it will be better.
skucera
Well-known
Seany, that tape would only help with b/w film, and there are two types used back in the days when pressmen would strip negatives used to photographically expose printing plates: ruby-lith and amber-lith. In our modern digital pre-press age it might be hard to find, but Google can find almost anything.
Scott
Scott
seany65
Well-known
skucera, Thanks for the info.
Using red tape was one of my ideas, so there was a strong chance that it wasn't as good an idea as I'd hoped...
Anyway, I've decided to not treat the minolta 110 mk2's lens as parfocal and zoom in, focus then zoom out to frame before taking the pic. I'm going to focus at whatever focal length I've decided to shoot at.
Pal_K, I've never heard of Fukkatsu film, so I've just done a quick g**gle and it' seems that there was B+W film which came it cartridges tabbed as 400 instead of 100, and there was a colour film that was actually 400 and was tabbed as 400. I'm a little disappointed that it ain't new. I was going to suggest that you not use any tape over the window for the first film just to see if it has the same problem as the lomo film.
The blurb on the website that is selling the fukkatsu film, says "as with all instamatic film it is recommended you tape up the back window..."
I've used a couple of 126 films decades ago and never saw any light leaks. I was wondering if anyone knows if this was a big problem in those days, or is it just the "recent" films that give trouble.
Using red tape was one of my ideas, so there was a strong chance that it wasn't as good an idea as I'd hoped...
Anyway, I've decided to not treat the minolta 110 mk2's lens as parfocal and zoom in, focus then zoom out to frame before taking the pic. I'm going to focus at whatever focal length I've decided to shoot at.
Pal_K, I've never heard of Fukkatsu film, so I've just done a quick g**gle and it' seems that there was B+W film which came it cartridges tabbed as 400 instead of 100, and there was a colour film that was actually 400 and was tabbed as 400. I'm a little disappointed that it ain't new. I was going to suggest that you not use any tape over the window for the first film just to see if it has the same problem as the lomo film.
The blurb on the website that is selling the fukkatsu film, says "as with all instamatic film it is recommended you tape up the back window..."
I've used a couple of 126 films decades ago and never saw any light leaks. I was wondering if anyone knows if this was a big problem in those days, or is it just the "recent" films that give trouble.
Huss
Mentor
skucera, Thanks for the info.
Using red tape was one of my ideas, so there was a strong chance that it wasn't as good an idea as I'd hoped...
Anyway, I've decided to not treat the minolta 110 mk2's lens as parfocal and zoom in, focus then zoom out to frame before taking the pic. I'm going to focus at whatever focal length I've decided to shoot at.
Pal_K, I've never heard of Fukkatsu film, so I've just done a quick g**gle and it' seems that there was B+W film which came it cartridges tabbed as 400 instead of 100, and there was a colour film that was actually 400 and was tabbed as 400. I'm a little disappointed that it ain't new. I was going to suggest that you not use any tape over the window for the first film just to see if it has the same problem as the lomo film.
The blurb on the website that is selling the fukkatsu film, says "as with all instamatic film it is recommended you tape up the back window..."
I've used a couple of 126 films decades ago and never saw any light leaks. I was wondering if anyone knows if this was a big problem in those days, or is it just the "recent" films that give trouble.
The red tape doesn't work. I tried it...
I bought a bunch of Fukkatsu film and it is terrible. I think I got it from Blue Moon Cameras.
Developed a roll, and it looks really bad, like it is severely expired plus has a smattering of heat damage...
Got a bunch of it left in my fridge.