Well yes and no.
Yes i’m checking out a “new” lens i have, but no im not taking photos of brick walls and newspapers to pixel peep corner sharpness and other crap like that.
A few guys i know have started using alot of older manual focus lenses on their DSLR’s with terrific results. I’ve always been interested in doing this myself, but have never got around to it. That has now changed. Why shoot with old manual focus lenses on a DSLR? Well….

• Its a way of using some of the greatest lenses ever made (ie. there a massive variety of lenses to try),
• They’re generally smaller, lighter, and cheaper than modern lenses,
• Many have unique characteristics and draw nicer than modern lenses,
• Build quality that still shits over most modern lenses,
• Trying something different for the hell of it.

As you can see, theres several good reasons to consider using older lenses.
From using film cameras recently, i’d already built up quite a selection of Zuiko lenses for my Olympus OM bodies. Luckily, Zuiko have made some of the best lenses in history (no you cant dispute that its a fact), so i got a cheap adapter off ebay to start using them on my DSLR.

I’m not going to keep rambling on, so i’ll cut to the chase.
This afternoon i attached my newest Zuiko, a humble and underrated 100mm f/2.8 that cost me $55 including postage from the U.S. The light was going down, and the wind was pretty strong, but f/2.8 is still pretty respectable even if it’s not exactly “fast”.
Here is what i came up with shooting wide open at f/2.8 at 200ISO. There is no processing whatsoever, its straight from the RAW. No sharpening, no level/colour adjustments. I’ve also included a 100% crop of the image. **click images for full size, the resized ones can look a little soft**

100% crop

Shooting with a manual focus lens on the 400D isnt the best combination you can think of. The viewfinder is pretty small, and it doesnt have a focus screen designed for manual focus lenses. You can buy them and they’re relatively cheap, but i probably wont bother unless i upgrade to full frame. I’ll definitely be using my other manual focus lenses form now on though and im looking forward to using the 100mm for some portrait work.

Well now that my film scanner is dead i’ve been shooting some more digital lately.
Tonight my dad was working on his latest sculpture. It’s a commissioned work for one of Australia’s leading golf clubs. It’s quite an adventurous project actually. Golf is generally a conservative sport, especially when played on private courses which adhere to strict rules and tradition. Having a naked golfer at the entrance to you club isnt something that alot of people would be comfortable with. The club and members are making quite a bold statement and representatives from the R&A (golf’s governing body) loved the idea so much they’re footing most of the bill and are coming back over from Scotland for the unveiling which should be next year.
Anyway, i just got a couple shots of him tonight to check out the lighting conditions etc. I’ll be taking some black and white film shots at a later date.

Click the images for a larger view, especially the second. I just stitched two shots together for some fun. No real post processing done at all.

I developed my first roll of 120 film yesterday and i already think im addicted.
Actually, thats a pretty silly thing to say. My negatives are still hanging up by themselves looking pretty because i have no way to scan them. They might not turn out brilliant, but im now addicted to medium format viewfinders, and really like the whole process (i’ve been borrowing a friends RB67). But thats a whole other story.
Anyway… Scanners… Yet another thing to spend money on =/
The film scanner i’ve been using up to now was something i bought a while ago before i was into photography, it’s well over 5 years old now. So it was just a fluke that it had film scanning capabilities that came in handy.
With film scanners you have two main varieties (for those who dont know). Dedicated scanners that you feed slides and negative strips into that dont do anything else besides scan film. Then you have the more conventional flatbed scanners that have film scanning capabilities.
Dedicated film scanners generally offer the best quality, but can be quite expensive and only take 35mm film.
The flatbed scanners are generally cheaper, offer decent quality (especially for web viewing and smaller prints), plus can take medium format film aswell.
So at this stage im leaning towards a flatbed scanner as i dont want to spend over $300, plus i need something that can take 120 film. I’m currently looking at the Epson 4490, Epson V500, Canon CanoScan 8800F, plus a couple others. I’m just trying to find some trustworthy reviews and personal opinions, as the manufacturer specifications are quite often misleading.
It’s actually bit of a pain in the ass finding the right scanner in my price range. The reality is none will really bring out the best of film, the full dynamic range that actually makes it superior to digital. So it’ll always be bit of a compromise. As long as it’s better than what i already have i’ll be happy!
Anyone want to buy me a drum scanner?

Only have a couple shots to put up for the moment.
I shot a roll of TriX400 at 800iso. Normally thats fine, but i developed it in Rodinal, and the grain wasnt very nice in some of the shots, which isnt helped by my scanner which is on its last legs. It was the first roll i’d taken in a while and got a few shots that i like.
Actually, there was a whole series that i really liked, but i wont be uploading them here just yet.
The shots below were taken at my Dad’s graduation show, he just finished a Masters of Art. I’m very proud of him as he’s never actually studied at uni before, but did so well they’re asked him back to do honours. I’ll make another post later on detailing his work a little more.
These were just a few random shots taken on the night. Nothing amazing, but i have to get into the swing of things again.

Well after seeing Tim’s test on noise reduction software, i thought i’d try one out myself. I’d never really compared different NR(noise reduction) processes before, instead i’d just basically given up high iso photography. I have to say, after mucking around with the software a little bit, im not so worried about using high iso settings on the DSLR anymore. I was quite impressed.
I only had 3 methods of NR which included DPP (Digital Photo Professional), Noise ninja, and “Camera RAW” with photoshop. I tried all on the same photo which i’ve taken a 100% crop sample of. I tried to include a mix of textures in the sample.
View the image below at it’s largest size and you immediately you notice each process produced quite different results.
The original photo was taken indoors with dim light. The digital noise isnt that bad really, i have other photos that are worse, but i chose this as it had several different textures and is common of the iso noise i get.
Camera RAW seemed to keep the most “faithful” colours, but blurred pretty much everything. Some detail was lost particularly in the edges, which gave an overall soft look to the photo. It seemed to get rid of both noise and grain which are two different things really. By getting rid of some grain it lost a bit of sharpness and detail.
DPP was a little less full on when it came to removing the grain. It still has quite a bit which helps keep some overall sharpness. To my eyes it has a nicer contrast and colour too. I’d never used DPP before, but it looks to be quite effective.
Noise Ninja was again different. I downloaded the 400D (Rebel XTi) NR profile from the manufacturer website and gave it a go. It appears to be bit of a mixed bag. I like how it’s kept some edge sharpness, more than the other programs, but it makes the skin look like plastic. Some people might like that as bit of an airbrushed skin shortcut, but its not to my tastes. The colour has again changed from the original, probably the most drastic out of all. It was also introduced some of its own fragments to the image which look a little messy, this might be treatable in the setting panel which i didnt play around with (i just used standard setting for all).

After looking at the 3 noise reduction programs, i have to say i quite like them all in one way or another.
I’d never used DPP before, but i liked how it treated the image. It still has some grain, but removes most of the digital noise which is what i want most. It had nice contrast i thought, and the colours looked fine too. The only downside is that theres not many options for individual settings. So fine tuning is pretty much out of the question. (It almost seems as though it was bit of an after thought with the DPP software, but thats another story).
Noise ninja seems very powerful with a large range of fine tuning options. I think once i play around with it i’ll be able to reduce the plastic skin look. The colours looked quite different from the original too, but thats probably another thing that can be fixed also. The program seems to need a bit of fine tuning which is to be expected i guess. But the whole idea is to minimise hours infront of the computer, if i have to play around with NN each time i use it, i’ll probably lose interest. Thats just a personal thing though.
Then theres Camera RAW which seems fine, but would probably be my last choice. It just seems to give bit of an overall blur to the image, which isnt all that useful.

I guess it all comes down to personal preference. If i can get Noise Ninja sorted out, i’ll use that the most. Otherwise i’ll go with DPP and its simplicity.

Yeah, it seems like i’ve only been posting b&w shots lately.
Thought i’d mix things up and post a couple colour shots i took a little while ago. I’m pretty wild.

Well i finally got around to developing the first roll from my new Bessa today.. What a bloody disaster.
For the first time ever i had trouble loading the film onto the spools. It kept getting stuck, and would crease and bunch up.. I started to loose patience so decided to chop the film randomly in half and load the rest of the negatives on the other spool. By that time i was thinking about chucking the whole film out. I wasnt in the best of moods. But i eventually stopped having a sook and put the Fujifilm Acros in Rodinal at 1+50 for 14 minutes. It turned out ok i think, not perfect though. Temperature was about 16 degrees which probably didnt help.

I went back to the Opera House again. I know its touristy, but i think its one of the more interesting structures in Sydney. I really likes it’s angles and curves and scale. Its very unique. I’m going to keep going back there trying to shoot some non touristy compositions.
Oh, and i had the 35mm on for all (except the last) of these shots.

Here’s a few more taken in the city:

Now this last shot was taken with a Russian Jupiter 8, 50mm f/2 lens from 1962. I only took a couple test shots with it, but wow im impressed. I’m really surprised how nice it looks wide open at f/2. It has really nice bokeh and bit of a natural “glow”. I think it’ll take a little while to get used to it, as it can render some areas a little bit too grey. But i’m going to keep practicing to get the best out of it. It’s by far the most unique looking lens i have. Oh and it cost me nothing which is extra nice
I’ll be using it with some colour film also.

I bought this pretty interesting book for $3 the other day.
Its just called “Tokyo” and was published by The Tokyo Metropolitan Government, printed in 1970. It seems to just be a tourist souvenir book, or something sent out to encourage travel to Japan, im not quite sure actually.
What i do know is that it’s full of some really interesting photography. Mostly comprising of black and white images (with the occasional colour slide shot), Its full of street photos and what appear to be pretty candid daily scenes.
It’s quite interesting in that it’s bit of a time capsule as you can see lots of old cars and buildings that have completely changed (by the time i visited last year). I really like old photographs of daily life.
Another thing i noticed, is that amongst all of the “material” changes in Tokyo such as buildings and cars and technology etc, the b&w photos of people dont look all that dated, i dont know if thats a good thing or not, quite interesting though. There’s also a couple of photos of protests and general civil unrest which seems a bit strange to put in a tourist book, its referred to as “explosion of the student power” in the captions.
I just realised how hard it is to take photos of books (cameras are alot easier Tim :p ), but heres a few shots anyway. Oh, i almost forgot, there appears to be no credit given to the photographer/s of these photos. Nothing at all, which seems strange.

That guy on the right looks way too happy.

Have been stuck inside doing assignments all weekend, but managed to find one distraction i couldnt resist.
I stumbled on some old negatives of mine when i went to Europe with my family years ago. I was in year 10 or 11 at the time, and just started a photography class at school. The only real reason i did the class was because we had to choose an art subject and i didnt want to have to draw or paint… Yeah, um, i dont know how i’ve ended up studying graphic design now..
But anyway, the class quickly became my favourite and i would borrow a camera from school every weekend. When my parents told me we were going overseas to visit relatives i immediately thought about photo opportunities, so i arranged to borrow a camera from school.
These were the days when i didnt care about what camera or lens i was using, i dont think i ever actually knew, i’d just pick up whatever was available and loaded it with film. That was another thing, film, i couldnt care less what it was. I’d just load canisters with whatever was in the bulk loader at the time and try to squeeze 40 shots worth of film on them
I quite like the thought of not worrying about the camera im holding or the film in it. It’s almost a more “honest” way of taking photos. Not stripping quality back for the sake of getting a “lomo” look, or going out of your way to use a manual camera to have “full control”. It was purely about capturing an image. Finding the shot with whatever you have in your hands.
It all sounds nice until i remember a few things. The lens i did use for alot of shots was the biggest piece of shit. The left side was out of focus compared to the right so closeup images suffered pretty bad. The film advance lever wouldnt always engage too, so i’d get overlapped images, or just weird spacing in between shots on the film. Then i remembered how i use to put the negatives in the holders when they were still wet. Some shots that would of been half decent are now covered in dust that has dried to the wet negative..
I like to remember a more “romantic” view of taking pictures when i was younger, but i think it’d be hard to completely go back to the way i used to do things.
I’d like to think i enjoy the entire photography process more, as opposed to just the shots themselves.
Well, thats how i justify the money i spend on cameras atleast…

Here are some of the shots that werent covered in dust. This set was taken in Italy. I quite like them even if they arent perfect. It also helps to have something interesting to take a photo of too.

Well, that’s a bit dramatic actually..
The other week i got some Fuji Neopan SS (100iso) as it was super cheap, and i’d never heard too much about it. Felt like trying something different. I decided to shoot a test roll this wee as i couldn’t really wait to use it on something special, i just wanted to see what it’d look like. I was half way through the roll when i noticed something wrong. My camera was set at 400 ISO =/
I initially got annoyed with myself, but then thought it’d be a good opportunity to try and push process the film a little (i’d never tried it before). So i shot the rest of the roll and started looking for some recommended development times. To my astonishment there were hardly any… Well, there were dev times for 100ISO, but nothing for 400.. I started looking at times for other developers but found hardly any info at all.. Thinks weren’t looking good.
After hours of searching i thought i’d just give it a go making an “educated guess”… Actually, it was more of a plain old “guess”.
Somehow, it worked. As you’d imagine i was pretty happy about it all. Actually, it produced some of the nicer results i’d got.
Here they are. Fuji Neopan SS developed in Rodinal at 1+50 @ 21C for 18 minutes, pushed to 400 ISO.

I dont know what happened with this shot, but thought it looked kind of interesting anyway..