Blogosphere

Recommended reading

Tree-climbing days
Kodak Signet 40, Kodak Gold 200, 2011

💻 I’ve mentioned a number of times on this site that Indianapolis was built on swampy land. Stephen Taylor gives us a good deal of history about two Indianapolis swamps in particular. Read Fletcher’s Swamp and Bacon’s Swamp

💻 J. P. Cavanaugh doesn’t usually do movie reviews, but he did one this week — of a movie released in 1948. Read Mr. Blandings Builds A Classic Movie

📷 fupduckphoto owns a 15mm Pentax K-mount lens, and shows us what it can do. Read Pentax 15mm lens

📷 I’ll share my results from my first roll of 120 Kodak Gold 200 soon. Andy beat me to it, and he says he thinks the stuff looks like Portra. Read Gold 200 in 120

📷 Andrew Morang finally broke down and bought a Kodak Retina IIa, and pronounces it good. Read 1950s Optical Excellence: Kodak Retina IIa Camera

Sign up for my monthly email to get an insider view of what I’m working on! Sign up here.

Standard

8 thoughts on “Recommended reading

  1. Andy Umbo says:

    I’ll wait for your appraisal of Kodak Gold 200…none of the “Golds” in the old days looked anything like any of Kodak’s professional portrait offerings, which all had much softer contrast and color. The “Golds” I was used to looked more like a slightly less “juiced” and more “normal” contrast Ektar.

    As many of us said over the years, the reason professionals shot transparency was not only for the sharpness of the film, but the result wasn’t open to interpretation in the printing process, or in this case, the scanning process. If the printed piece in a magazine or newspaper didn’t look “right” it was likely the pre-press house didn’t match the transparency. Hard to make any kind of judgments when you’re not looking at original film, without making a print or a scan.

    • Sneak preview: my first roll was not as saturated as what I’m used to from 35mm KG200.

      Yes, print film brings so many variables into the equation. Even C41, which is the same process everywhere it’s done.

  2. Peter Paar says:

    My camera collection includes 23 Retina’s and the IIa is the one I use. I believe it to be one of the best rangefinder 35mm cameras ever made.

  3. The 15mm lens that fupduck described was originally develop as a SMC Takumar thread mount lens. My wife bought a 28mm Takumar in 1978, and a red brochure came in the package. A yellow insert sheets states,

    “Note: Since this operating manual was printed, Asahi Pentax has developed a new interchangeable lens – the SMC Takumar 15 mm ƒ/3.5.

    The aspherical, ultra-wide lens is, like other lenses listed on page 7, completely automatic.”

    If it did have aspherical elements, it was part of a rare optical brotherhood back in the 1970s that included the famous Leitz Noctilux and the Nikon Noct-Nikkor. These latter are seriously expensive now!

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.