At first I thought it was chromatic aberration, but after zooming in, it just looks like softness. You can see this especially in the first photo of Jessica holding the leaf in front of her face, where the sun hits the top of her hands. This may also vary from lens to lens (it sounds like quality control in those old Soviet camera factories was somewhat lacking).Įxtreme softness around high contrast areas. To be fair, I don't have a lens hood, which probably would have helped. You can see this to a small extent on the second photo. Like, not the good kind, just the kind that can turn your photo of a pretty tree into a polar bear in a snow storm that's also somehow slightly on fire, which makes it a bit tough to shoot on a sunny day. ![]() There are also a few reasons not to buy it.Ĭrazy flaring. If you've never heard of this lens, there are essentially two reasons to buy it: the swirly bokeh, and it's dirt cheap (I got mine off eBay for around $30). ![]() This was actually the first lens I ever purchased, but this was only my second time using it. ![]() So I decided to use my Helios 44-2 58mm f2 with a Canon EF adapter. When we went out the other day, I intended to bring my nifty 50mm f1.8 to match focal lengths with the lens on my film camera, but I couldn't find it. I thought it would be fun to write some of my thoughts about the Helios 44-2 lens I used, since it's a somewhat obscure old Russian lens, and I remember not being able to find too many good resources when I was originally looking into buying it. Some Thoughts About The Lens / Mini Review (Apologies if all the film talk above got you hyped up for some film shots!) I haven't sent the film in to the lab yet, but I'll make sure to do a blog post with the results when I get them :)Īlso, if you're curious about the lens I used (an old Helios 44-2), I put some thoughts about it down below the photos. I used a 50(ish)mm lens on both my digital and film camera, and used the digital camera to test out composition and exposure before taking the same shot with the film camera.īelow are some of the digital test shots. ![]() Oftentimes they're underexposed, out of focus, or just plain awkward, and as a result they tend to lack that signature film look (the good kind, at least).īut thankfully I have a wife who's willing to put on her model hat and help me practice! The other morning we drove up to the park by the local rose garden to try out some portraits. However, especially for my portraits, I feel like my photos never turn out quite how I want. Definitely one of my favorite parts is the unique look, whether it's the soft muted Fuji 400H, the eye popping Velvia 50, or the smooth natural grain of Ilford 3200. I'm not entirely sure what it is about film, whether it's the slowing down and enjoying the process (too cliche?), or just the fact that the cameras look way cooler ( ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ). Search My Twitter Feed Tweets by johnmeadows 15mm/4.5 SuperWide Heliar 20mm 2.8 Nikkor 25mm/f4 Voigtlander Lens 35mm/1.7 Voigtlander Ultron 35mm/f.17 Voigtlander Ultron lens 35mm f2.5 Color Skopar 620 Alberta Beaches Bridge Calgary Diafine Distagon 50mm Eastman Double-X Fuji Neopan Acros Fuji Neopan Acros 100 Hamilton Hasselblad Helios 44 Helios 44/2 High Park Ilford FP4+ Ilford HP5+ Ilfosol 3 Kensington Market Kodak Ektar 100 Kodak Medalist Legacy Pro EcoPro Mamiya RZ67 MIcrodol-X Muskoka N90s Niagara On the Lake Nikon Nikon F Nikon F4S Nikon N90s Olympus Only Cafe Ottawa Petzval Portra 400 Project 365 Pyrocat HD Red Filter Rodinal Rolleiflex Rolleiflex 3.5E3 Rollei Retro 80s Rollei Retro 400S Rollei RPX 25 Rollei RPX 100 Rollei RPX 400 Rollei SuperPan 200 Scarborough Bluffs Scotland Sony A7ii Speed Graphic Stand Developing Taylor Creek Park The Only Cafe Portraits TMax 100 TMax 400 Tmax Developer Toronto Toronto Beaches Trees Tri-X TTC Vancouver Voigtlander Voigtlander 15/4.The past year or so I've really enjoyed shooting film, especially for landscapes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |