Scott's Filmstravaganza

Originally Posted by Vixen

I still have my original Konica SLR. It lets light in also. Worse than this. Its a nice paperweight I did try to get it repaired but they didn't do a very good job, so I asked for my money back..... I got it

It's an easy fix honestly

Sent from my SM-N986B using Tapatalk

---

› See More: Scott's Filmstravaganza

Originally Posted by Scott Murray

Time to get out and play. Loaded my very ever first roll of 120 film into my P67. I wonder what my 10 shots will be on medium format. Hmmmm maybe just some test shots first to make sure there are no light leaks.

Possibly load up the film for the first shot and shine a light around the seal, then seal it externally, with tape or something like plumbers putty. Then you should have a few shots without leaks. I bought a few cameras in a lot and they had a lot of duct (also duck) tape on them. Took the tape off and it left behind a residue. Turns out, the duct tape was the best thing to use to remove the residue!

Rob

Originally Posted by BeegRhob

Possibly load up the film for the first shot and shine a light around the seal, then seal it externally, with tape or something like plumbers putty. Then you should have a few shots without leaks. I bought a few cameras in a lot and they had a lot of duct (also duck) tape on them. Took the tape off and it left behind a residue. Turns out, the duct tape was the best thing to use to remove the residue!

Rob

I replaced the light seals in my camera. I was talking about my new P67 that I have not used yet and am unsure of light leaks. Woild rather waste a roll of film and fixing the issue rather than applying a band-aid fix. For a mint Medium Format film camera I am not putting putty or duct tape near it lol.

Sent from my SM-N986B using Tapatalk

Ok so I got my jpegs back from the Lab of my Pentax 67 test shots, low resolution scans. The negatives are being delivered to me.


I am very happy with them, I have noticed a line on the top of the film, hopefully this is from the scanning and not the camera. I will confirm once the negs get here.


All images are using Kodak Portra 160 (120MF), and using the internal exposure meter ETTR.


Please let me know your thoughts, these are also all unedited from the lab. Once I get the originals I will rescan them at a higher resolution and post the results.


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr


Pentax 67 Kodak Portra 16060 by Scott Murray, on Flickr

Scott, I used to shoot Ektar 25 ISO in 120 and absolutely loved it when there was enough light. Fuji Velvia was my choice when the light wasn't enough for the 25. The Velvia had such rich colors that it was a shame to waste it on some subjects.


WM

Originally Posted by Whiskeyman

Scott, I used to shoot Ektar 25 ISO in 120 and absolutely loved it when there was enough light. Fuji Velvia was my choice when the light wasn't enough for the 25. The Velvia had such rich colors that it was a shame to waste it on some subjects.


WM

Have loaded Ektar 100 ASA into my P67 for the next roll.

Sent from my SM-N986B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Scott Murray

Have loaded Ektar 100 ASA into my P67 for the next roll.

Sent from my SM-N986B using Tapatalk

I hope you get some great shots to share with us.

WM

Happy Birthday SCOTT!

Originally Posted by Marilynne

Happy Birthday SCOTT!

Thank you Marilynne.

Lab Scan VS DSLR scan. Can you guess which is which?

DSLR VS LAB NEGATIVE SCAN by Scott Murray, on Flickr

DSLR VS LAB NEGATIVE SCAN by Scott Murray, on Flickr