02Pilot
PowerDork
4/17/24 9:29 a.m.
In reply to David S. Wallens :
It's a super simple shutter, so you should be able to get it running pretty easily. Some good repair photos here. The lens is probably a triplet and definitely uncoated, so getting inside and cleaning all the surfaces should be low-risk. The only thing to be really careful with is the mirror - it's going to be first-surface and delicate. You might have better luck getting a replacement cut (there was a guy on eBay that offered this - not sure if he's still around).
dean1484 said:
How long will film keep? I found some rolls I shot many years ago (like 20) that I forgot about. Are they still worth getting developed?
I've discovered a couple old rolls of B&W film, Tri-X I believe, that had been sitting exposed in the camera for 30 years. They produced remarkably good negatives. I suspect the results with color film would be far less satisfactory, but I'd probably still give it a shot. As mentioned, being in a climate controlled space increases the likelihood that they will be decent. Baking in an attic or a storage unit? Not so much.
aw614
HalfDork
4/17/24 10:16 a.m.
David S. Wallens said:
Cool. We have a full-service lab like five minutes away. Free plug: Reformed Film Lab in Ormond Beach, Fla. Processing, printing and scanning are done right there.
It’s been 20+ years since I have shot film. Back in the day, of course, we had no choice. (And in college and high school, we processed and printed our own film, too.)
I forgot how slowly it goes–manual focus, manual exposure–but definitely enjoyed the outing. It was a more immersive experience on both sides of the lens.
We have Coastal Film in Tampa, which have done a great job of hosting several film events along with developing my film and even repairing a few of my cameras. They fixed my Minolta CLE's RF alignment and cleaned up the viewfinder. Right now my Pentax 110 that I scored at the Webster Flea Market is being looked it. It works, but for some reason the film doesn't seem to advance on it or advances really weird. Sucks, it was a good price and a full kit too.
Though after using both Mechanical SLRs and Rangefinders, I find myself preferring rangefinders, I don't seem to miss focus as much as I do vs SLRs, even on the dimmer viewfinder Canon and Zorki rangefinders I've used.
In reply to 02Pilot :
Cool and thanks for the info. The X-Pro3 has made me love the “looking-down” shooting pose. I think it’s better for street photography, too.
In reply to 1988RedT2 :
I have several undeveloped rolls here in the office, too. How old? Old. What’s on them? No idea.
My parents got married in 1966 and left for Australia from the reception. It was a few years before they got back, because Australia was a lot further away then. My grandfather was the photographer at their wedding.
When my grandfather died in the 90s, we discovered a couple of rolls of undeveloped film from the wedding as we were cleaning out the house. We had them developed and my parents got to see new pictures of their wedding. Based on my father's film preferences, I'm going to guess it was likely Kodachrome 64 slide film and it was in remarkably good shape.
Yup. Get those old rolls developed! Might be some long lost treasures on there.
Just received the scans of the film shot with the Canon A-1. I’m happy with them. Hope to see the ones shot with the F-1 soon–like maybe even today.
This was shot with Fujifilm Superia 400. Scans are low-res as this was a test roll as I was mostly concerned with exposure and whether I remembered how to shoot film.
Also, I think I started this roll more than a year ago. Just realized we no longer have that rose bush out front, while I removed the JDM plate from the 911 a while ago.
Like a dope, I almost checked the meta data for the date the photo was taken. 
Really, for the full film experience we should have to come over to your house to flip through the pics. Shooting on film and then scanning seems like you're taking a shortcut :)
Speaking of film I have a D700 that for some reason takes photos that look like they are film. From my understanding it is a different sensor and software for the sensor that was only used in that camera. I should take it out and compare it to the D750 my wife has and see if the raw images really are that different.
Anyway back to our film Cameras. Now I want to get my A1 out and give it another try.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
If you all want to come over, guess we could do that. Or, like back in the day, my dad would break out the slide projector.
In reply to dean1484 :
Totally get that A-1 out there. So glad I got my serviced.
I have a shoot tonight and think I’m going to bring the K1000.
02Pilot
PowerDork
4/19/24 3:03 p.m.
David S. Wallens said:
In reply to Keith Tanner :
If you all want to come over, guess we could do that. Or, like back in the day, my dad would break out the slide projector.
We did that too. I have probably 1,000+ Kodachrome slides my father took back in the 60s and 70s, most still in their little cube magazines for the projector.
In reply to 02Pilot :
Yup, my dad uses those cubes as well. Last time I was up there, we did the math: like 12,000 images.
And just got my scans of the photos taken with the Canon F-1. It works. Same deal as before: low-res scan of Fuji 400. Successful test. 
In reply to David S. Wallens :
When my dad passed I collected all his slides. He had a large collection going back to the 60s. Then I found all his stuff from the 50s that he for some reason never showed. I have been slowly going through stuff digitizing them. My dads hobby was photography and painting. I have more than 25k slides to go through. The really cool thing was he dated every slide and put the location and notes about who and what was in the image. A fantastic family history on film.
David S. Wallens said:
In reply to 02Pilot :
Yup, my dad uses those cubes as well. Last time I was up there, we did the math: like 12,000 images.
And just got my scans of the photos taken with the Canon F-1. It works. Same deal as before: low-res scan of Fuji 400. Successful test.
There is just something about the image that you get from film that to me seems more real. More like how my eye sees things. Love to see this!!!
Oh and yes many an evening was spent with the slid projector and the family and or guests. I remember going to family friends with my parents as little kids and after dinner the projector would come out and we would get to see their vacation or summer or what ever. I miss those days.
When my dad was bedridden in his final days, we had his bed in the family room where the TV was. I set up a slideshow on the AppleTV that showed pictures I'd put together over the years - some scanned slides, some digital. It just ran all the time, and a pic would often prompt a conversation or a story. Having a real slide projector wouldn't have worked as well because we would have had to darken the room and it would have needed constant reloading. I have a similar screensaver going on our TV at home that we'll sometimes run in the evenings.
In other words, you can still have family slideshows with digital photos. And on the other side, I've made picture books of some of our trips using Shutterfly and we spent some time last week with my 10 year old nephew going through those :)
In reply to dean1484 :
I’ll never forget the sound of his projector–one of the Bell & Howell cube machines: whiiiiirl click!
We did slides on a recent visit. Fun evening.
In reply to dean1484 :
Thank you and I still need to really go through them–even though we’re just talking about 72 images. I want to take a few and enjoy. (He says, while walking out the door for an autocross.)
In reply to Keith Tanner :
No matter the venue, there is something special about going through old family photos.
Totally rational that my browser history is now full of medium-format info, right?
