Film – Dave's Place

Street Life

“I play the street life
Because there’s no place I can go
Street life, it’s the only way I know
Street life”
Street Life: Crusaders (1979)

I’m a child of the fifties so my teenage years spanned the 1970s and my musical tastes, whilst wide, tend to coalesce around music from that decade. I’ve always enjoyed this song, no more so than when I saw the Cissy Stone Band performing it live at The Oasis Leisure Centre, Swindon. These days you will often find me walking the streets where I live, photographing the urban environment, this is my street life and one of my happy places. But other people walk the streets too and whilst I normally rise early to avoid them there are occasions when I cannot.

Street photography is a genre that, for the most part, I enjoy looking at. It’s a genre though that I rarely work in myself. However, two unrelated circumstances combined to set me out with camera in hand recently on a mission to “shoot some street”. The first was banally domestic, the wife wanted to visit the open market in Huddersfield, whilst the second was a discussion I had with a couple of friends (hereafter known as the BOFs) about zone focusing. One of the things we discussed was using zone focus on the street for candid photography.

Let’s start with a definition of street photography: a genre of photography that records everyday life in a public place. I say “a” definition because there are plenty but this one will do for our needs I think.

For my Saturday morning outing I took the Canon VT paired with a 35mm Jupiter 12 lens. A wide lens to be sure but one I’m comfortable with in general terms. How I’d fare using it for “street” was another story although I have used my digital Fuji X100T with its 35mm equivalent lens for street, albeit in tourist hotspots like London. I loaded the Canon with a roll of Fomapan 200, a film I’m growing to like immensely in 35mm. A couple of spare rolls in my pocket and I was ready.

Ready for a Full English – well you can’t photograph on an empty stomach!

Café Culture: and in two of the three images I’ve been spotted!

I said earlier that “for the most part” I enjoy looking at street photography. I should expand on that a little as it influences both how I shoot and how I edit my images. I do not enjoy looking at images that are exploitative or intended to mock the individual. When making candid images of strangers on the street I do feel we have a responsibility to these unknown people not to make them look foolish, not to laugh at or encourage others to laugh or mock and certainly not to take advantage of their circumstances simply for a picture. Always treat others as you’d like to be treated yourselves is a very good maxim by which to guide the photographer’s eye I think.

On the full negative there is a lady sat facing the couple on the left of the frame. She balances the composition as she is looking into the frame and cropping her out does weaken it in my eyes. However, I’ve inadvertently caught her with an “unfortunate” expression on her face and by my own standards therefore it’s either crop or ditch the image.

I do take this responsibility seriously, choosing not to make some photographs and also when editing later I remove any negatives where I feel my standards would be compromised if I used the image. At the making and editing stages I apply the same basic principles. My maxim … if in doubt ditch it.

The original is a horizontal image but the inclusion of a child to the right of the frame meant that I cropped it vertically as shown; capturing identifiable images of children is another red line for me – a definite no.

Following the advice to find a spot and wait … not sure these are overly interesting but they fulfil the brief of capturing everyday life in a public place

I like images which invite the viewer to construct a story around what they are looking at

For this outing there was a motive beyond simply making some candid photographs. There was a desire to try a different technique and add to my store of knowledge and tool kit of techniques. In our discussions one of the BOFs had drawn our attention to a YouTube video in which the topic of the “sunny 16” approach to metering was discussed. It was a rare example of someone using the system and explaining what aperture they were setting based on what they, and the viewer, were actually looking at. Rather than rely on dry written descriptions the author, Roger Lowe, was showing and telling (link at the foot of the page). It’s one of the best explanations of the “sunny 16” and most importantly how to use it that I’ve seen and inspired me to actively use it on Saturday. I’ve used it at need in the past but these days with a meter on my smartphone I rarely need to call upon the technique.

Tricky, rather harsh, light but the “sunny 16” proved up to the task – of course it’s all down to reading the light correctly, remember the photographer makes the image not a technique or “rule”

I under exposed this by around one perhaps two stops … printable in the darkroom and recoverable as a digital scan

Very tricky as the windows appear dark but it’s the reflection you are photographing. I looked at the light on the subject (not the reflection) and opened by one or two stops to photograph the reflection. The latitude of the film certainly helped – for this one the door is partially blown but I’ve included it here to illustrate the point

Another aspect the BOFs discussed was zone focusing, something all three of us do from time to time but not something I’d typically use for urban photography. When making candid photographs though there is not always time to manually focus before the opportunity slips away or before the subject spots you and the moment is lost. Note, manually focus, very few of my film cameras have auto-focus and with the rangefinders I typically use manual focus is absolutely the order of the day.

Plenty of time to actually focus manually for these subjects

So, serendipity at play again. I had the opportunity courtesy of the wife’s shopping trip, the inspiration through the BOFs conversation and the example of watching Roger Lowe’s practical demonstration. All I needed to do was put it into practice.

Easier said than done!

With Fomapan 200 I have been slightly over-exposing the film by rating it at ISO 160. For the “sunny 16” method I need therefore to set a shutter speed of 1/160th or as near as practical. I plumped for 1/125th. For the most part this was the shutter speed I used all day although in some instances I dropped it to 1/60th rather than open the lens right up. One thing that I was concerned about was how slow this shutter speed was, easily enough to handhold and get sharp images but many of my subjects would be moving and up close. I’d normally have opted for around 1/500th second and so with hindsight I was wondering if I should have loaded a faster film. Next time I probably will because I have lost a few frames to motion blur but on the whole I “got away” with 1/125th on the day.

With the ISO baked-in due to the film stock I had loaded and the shutter speed pre-determined my only way to control exposure was via the aperture ring. It was here that I almost regretted my lens choice as the aperture ring on the Jupiter 12 sits inside the lens barrel rather than around it as is more normal. It’s slightly less practical and you can’t change aperture without looking into the lens barrel. With the Canon 50mm lens that I usually use the aperture ring is located around the barrel and with gentle click stops I don’t need to remove the camera from my eye to change aperture (so long as I know what aperture it’s currently on).

That aside however, my main concern was focusing. It’s a comfort thing I guess but I’m used to focusing manually and, allowing for the aperture, controlling what is in focus and what is not. A wide angled lens makes this slightly less problematic but nevertheless after two rolls of zone-focused street photography I remained concerned about focus until I got the negatives on a light box.

One roll of the two, both look similar and my fears about focus and exposure were out to rest once the negatives were out of the tank.

There we have it. Two rolls of “street”, both zone-focused and “sunny 16’d” for the most part. I found the hardest part was deciding upon exposure but this was partly a comfort thing. My cold-shoe meter was, reluctantly, left at home and I only used the phone metering app a handful of times to double-check my decisions. Each time I went with my “sunny 16” estimate. Zone focusing was less of a concern, although I was nervy about subjects being in focus I have used zone focusing a lot recently and understanding the characteristics of the Jupiter 12 lens also helped. Ironically, the thing I worried about most was the thing I knew best!

Sometimes a person in the right spot just makes the image … it’s not an image of them but the image is weaker without their presence

Again, a small element but the people strengthen the image

During this excursion I went wide and got in closer than I’ve typically done in the past. Previously people would be an incidental part of the image but I set out today to make them the subject.

I was pleased with this on two counts. Firstly it’s an interesting image that sets the scene and shows how busy the market was. Secondly, the two techniques of zone focusing and “sunny 16” combined to create this image … had I stopped to focus/meter then I’d have missed the opportunity

One of my favourites from the trip. Plenty of interest, layers of depth to the image too. From a technical aspect, sharp and well-exposed.

Did I succeed? You be the judge of that and I’d welcome any advice or guidance in the comments section below.

LINK to the “sunny 16” video

Seeing the Ful picture

No, not a typo!

The #believeinfilm community on Twitter is a constant source of support, encouragement and inspiration. Recently a few folk within the community have been exploring the joys of the Enigma Ful-Vue (see … not a typo!). Neil T (@funkyuk) very kindly sent me a recent acquisition of his as a gift and within a few hours of it arriving I knew I would have to try and put a film through it … asap!

The camera has a fixed shutter speed of around 1/100th sec assuming it’s working of course and a fixed aperture of f11 or thereabouts. A light reading showed that a slower film was needed, ideally ISO 50. I was straight down into my cellar and in my box of oddments found an expired roll of Ilford PanF+ in the requisite 120 format. Bingo! Combine the film with Rodinal (1+50) and I would be giving myself the best chance of success.

Assuming the camera worked!

I checked through the little red window on the back to ensure no film already loaded; there wasn’t, or if there was it was fully wound on. Using the knob on the side I unlocked the film transport system and looked to slide it out of the camera body. It wouldn’t budge, like a recalcitrant biscuit tin lid it was having none of it. Ten minutes of gentle coaxing saw very little movement but eventually it did slide out. Begrudgingly.

Loading was straightforward after that and I was soon in the back yard for the big test. Of course, having made my 12 snaps I had to immediately develop the film and with the time fast approaching for me to start preparing the family’s evening meal I was hard pressed to finish in time. But finish on time I did and as I started peeling and dicing onions I had the satisfaction of having seen a roll of 12 good looking negatives hanging to dry.

So, the next job is to give the Ful-Vue a good clean and then take it for another spin!

Reflecting: the Holga interlude

It was only a matter of time before I took the Holga toy camera along to sample the delights of the restaurant windows. Here’s the four frames of Ilford Delta 100 that I exposed on my way past.

There we go. Four images exposed and shared without any unnecessary words!

Reflecting

I wrote recently about my ongoing exploration of the work of Saul Leiter (1923-2013). In terms of my own photography I’ve been working on images taken through glass or more precisely, compositions whereby the reflections in the glass are an integral part of the image. I’ve incorporated myself in many of these too thus adding reflection selfies to the mix. One location has been a particularly fruitful source of images.

There are actually three large windows to play with

To crop or not to crop

To the left (possibly below if you’re on a mobile device) is a sheet of 10×8 photographic paper. I laid a strip of 35mm negatives across the top from which you can see that the 35mm negative needs to be enlarged by a factor of over 35x to fit on the paper.

With such a large surface area to cover it makes sense to use as much of the negative as possible without cropping in and losing valuable real estate.

I do like to get things right in-camera but am no purist as at the end of the day the final result is the most important thing. As we’ve seen though the enlargement of a 35mm negative to a 10″x8″ print is quite a jump. So, when printing the negative below my initial thought was to print the full frame.

Left, the test wedge and right the first print

Now, this image is 100% reflection in a restaurant window. There are no external elements, everything is on or beyond the glass frontage of the building. Once I had the first print on the desk in front of me my eye was constantly being dragged to the top of the frame. Firstly, it’s bright so naturally attracts the eye. Secondly, that part is sky as you can see and the filth on the window rendered as a not-so-nice texture on the print. I decided therefore to crop the image to eliminate both distractions. I could of course have burnt in the sky but with that jagged roofline the pragmatic choice was to crop.

In the end I think the pragmatic decision to crop also gave a stronger composition too so win-win.

Sometimes I will find myself in a situation where I cannot make the composition I want directly in-camera so then I compose with a view to cropping later. The scene below is a case in point although I did include the whole negative when making the first full test exposure just in case. I was using a Bronica SQ-A which produces negatives 6cm x 6cm on 120 roll film. These are considerably bigger than a 35mm negative so the enlargement required is not as large, nevertheless I try to avoid cropping where possible.

Taken expecting to crop, I did however print the full negative before deciding my gut instinct was sound

So, there we have it. Two images strengthened by cropping, one a 35mm negative and the other 6x6cm on medium format film. What’s your thoughts? If you are a digital worker does the question of cropping become a moot point owing to the large sensor sized in modern digital cameras? Perhaps cropping considerations are greater for us folk who still insist on printing in a darkroom*.

for transparency I also use digital cameras and print on an inkjet printer from time to time which includes film images that have been digitised with one of my digital cameras. I therefore embrace all three “camps” – digital, hybrid and traditional.

35mm Lucky Dip – Adox HR-50

The third roll of film in my 35mm Lucky Dip was a gift from Jevon and it wasn’t until AFTER I’d used the roll that he expressed his view:

Best of luck. I have rarely managed to get a clean negative but when I have the detail is phenomenal
Jevon C

He’s not wrong of course!

I used the roll on a wander around my local patch with Andy (@Holga_Pics) and sadly the weather was rather overcast and wet; indeed we got a good soaking once we reached the farthest point of the walk from the sanctuary of my front room.

There’s a few on the roll where I’ve clearly misjudged the exposure and these have very blocked up shadows but where I’ve got the exposure right the negatives sing almost. Looking at them on a light pad the detail, even in the 35mm format, is incredible. The base of the film is also exceptionally clear which perhaps enhances this perception when the sheet of negatives is laid out on the light pad.

I’ve “scanned” the roll with my mirrorless camera and also printed one negative in the darkroom so far (more will follow) and the negatives have been very easy to work with in both scenarios.

Printed straight at grade 3 … I’m going to reprint at grade 2 and also dodge a little detail into the windows particularly above Andy’s head.

The darkroom print above, consciously printed a little darker to emphasise the wet conditions, has lots of detail and also lots of potential for further manipulation (tinkering with images didn’t start with Photoshop you know). This was a straight print and when I look at the negative it’s clear that there’s more detail in the shadows. I don’t want to change the overall mood of the finished print but I think there’s room for a little more detail in those shadows; it’s certainly available in the negative as the comparison below shows. The digital version has been fully processed to bring out detail in the shadows.

So, would I use this again? Short answer is that I’d have no qualms about using it. So long as it’s exposed correctly it will reward you with loads of detail and extremely sharp negatives. However, it is a 50-speed film and this couple with its lack of tolerance of poor metering doesn’t lend itself to my style of handheld, urban photography on the hoof.

This time, pleased as I am with the outcomes, I can at least say that it has not deflected me from my “three film” goal. That said, if Jevon wants to send me some more …

In the meantime here’s a few more digital versions from this roll.

The only image here taken with the Jupiter 11 (135mm) lens – all the others are Jupiter 12 (35mm)

The film captured a full range of tones … the key is careful metering

Probably my best exposure … detail throughout in a very contrasty scene

I know my favourite … what’s yours?

Thoughts on LTM rangefinder cameras

I was asked recently by a reader if I could compare the various 35mm rangefinder cameras that I’ve been using over the past few months. I guess it’s important at the outset to say that I’ve only been playing with a small subset of the genus rangefinder. Specifically, the few that I’ve been using all use the Leica Thread Mount (LTM) 39mm screw thread lenses. In addition my reasons for using these cameras is partly aesthetic and partly the pleasure of using such tactile cameras. I doubt if anyone uses these cameras for convenience, ease of use or simplicity of operation.

The first 35mm rangefinder camera that I bought was a Russian copy of the German Leica cameras; the so-called Barnack Leicas that came before the M-series bodies. The Zorki 4 is slightly larger than the Leica III cameras I’ve used but still sits relatively unobtrusively in the hand. Like all of the cameras described here it is not a light piece of kit but whilst cruder in terms of build quality and therefore operation than the Leicas it is still a satisfyingly tactile experience. The Zorki 4K is basically the same camera but it has what we now consider the more usual wind-on lever rather than a knob for the purpose. I have both the Zorki 4 and 4K and definitely prefer the 4K with the lever wind-on.

One common feature of all of these cameras is that the rangefinder/viewfinder are generally calibrated for the standard lens. For the Zorkis I use this is 50mm. My Chroma Glass lens has a 24mm field of view and as this lives on the Zorki 4 I have a matching, and cheap, auxiliary viewfinder that sits in the cold shoe. I also use a 35mm lens and for this I have a Russian-made turret viewfinder that offers a range of focal lengths. To start with, using one window to focus and another to compose the image is a little awkward but I found I very quickly adapted to this new way of working. Some, like my Canon VT and VL2, have an adjustable viewfinder that caters for both 35mm and 50mm lenses.

One word of caution with these old Zorki rangefinders. Quality control was not always the best in these Soviet-era factories where quantity often trumped quality when considering manufacturing success. You need to be cautious when purchasing from that well-known auction site therefore that the model you choose has at least been CLAd and preferably film-tested by the seller. It’s worth paying a little bit more for this reassurance.

Leica, or more specifically the so-called Barnack Leicas, was the manufacturer everyone was trying to emulate. With good reason. I have played with the Leica IIIb and the Leica IIIf and from a purely tactile and pleasure of use perspective they are probably the most satisfying 35mm cameras I’ve ever used. Period. They are however bottom loaders and need a specially cut leader to ensure that you don’t foul the shutter curtain during loading. To someone raised on back loading cameras it’s quite a shock to the system. It’s also a right royal pain in the backside if I’m honest. Loading a new roll of film stood on the canal towpath was not a pleasant experience. The Horizon S3 Pro is easier to load and that’s saying something.

But, having got that particular elephant out in the open I have to say that the Leica IIIf that I own is an absolute joy to use, film loading aside. That aspect will get better with practice, I loaded a film sat on a wall outside a church recently, but it will never be as straightforward as a back-loading camera. The shutter release is silky smooth and fires with the quietest of sounds. I genuinely enjoy the sound of this shutter releasing. The camera body is small, despite its weight, fits in the palm of my hand and can easily be dropped unobtrusively into a pocket. Pair it with a collapsible 50mm f3.5 Elmar lens and you’ve a pretty potent kit in your hands that easily slips into a pocket.

Canon also joined the fray producing Leica-clones but I have never used these. Instead, after chatting to Jon and spending way too many hours online I opted for the Canon V-series. These cameras move the concept on and some would suggest they are a bridge between the Barnack style of rangefinder cameras and the Leica M-series. I have the Canon VT de luxe (VTDM) and the Canon VL2. The T stands for trigger and the L for lever. V is the Roman numeral for five, thus these are so-called Series 5 cameras.

The trigger film advance was a revelation for me as I’d not used one before. In truth I’m not sure that I’d known about them before purchasing this camera. The trigger folds up into the base of the camera when not in use and it took me precisely six frames to become accustomed to using it instead of a lever to wind on. The trigger mechanism does add to the height of this camera though so it’s not as small as the Leica IIIf. Indeed, the Canon VL2 whilst slightly smaller is also larger than the Leica.

That said the Canon V-series rangefinders are a joy to use. Being the more usual back loaders they are also easy to load on the hoof.

The final camera I bought was a FED-4 rangefinder. This was the cheapest of the set, slightly bigger and definitely a little rougher around the edges. It’s big selling point for me was the built in light meter. It’s uncoupled but very easy to use; move a dial to align the needles then read off the settings on the dial and transfer them to the camera. My meter appears to work very well which is a bonus. The viewfinder however is not as clear or as easy to use compared to the Leica and Canon models. If I’m honest, whilst still enjoyable to use this is the least used of my rangefinders.

A quick summary.

The Barnack Leicas are the smallest of this small collection and exude quality, they are the most expensive but are a delight to use (apart from film loading). The Canon V-series are well made, score on ease of use (especially film loading) and purchasing one is a little easier on the wallet compared to the Leica III models.

The Zorki 4/4K are considerably cheaper, less well made in general terms, but they are still great fun to use. Care is needed when purchasing to ensure it’s a decent copy but if you get a good copy you’ll be very happy. For those on a very tight budget the FED-4 is definitely worth a look and of those I’ve discussed here is the only one with a built-in light meter albeit an uncoupled one.

So far I’ve just been talking about camera bodies but the lenses are also a factor and an important one too. As yet my knowledge is not yet advanced enough to comment with any confidence but camera bodies are in essence just light tight boxes designed to hold film and lens in the appropriate relationship to each other. Film and lens choice might arguably make more difference than the camera body. I have native 50mm lenses for the Leica (Elmar f3.5 collapsible) and Canon (Canon f1.4) bodies but also have a set of three Soviet-era Jupiter lenses, a 35mm, 50mm and a very recent acquisition a 135mm. Thus far I’ve been very happy with the look of the images I’ve been able to create with this modest set of glass.

It’s hard to draw a specific conclusion as I’ve enjoyed, indeed continue to enjoy using each of the cameras mentioned here. To my mind, the most practical of this small selection would be the Canon V-series but, film-loading aside, the Leica III are, for my tastes, the most satisfying for actually taking photographs with.

Reflections … a lighter moment

My recent POST struck a chord with a few of my photographic friends and I ended up posting self-portrait images in this style on three consecutive days to my 365 project. I don’t want to post any more at this stage as I’ve more reading and exploring to do, not to mention thinking and reflecting. Not since having a box of Bill Brandt’s darkroom prints in front of me have I been so taken with the work of an individual photographer.

However, I needed to go in to Halifax today and as always I popped a camera in my shoulder bag. It happened to be the Canon VT de luxe as one of my objectives was buying a wrist strap from our local camera shop. A roll of Kodak Double X was loaded and a yellow filter popped on to the 50mm f1.4 lens. My aim was some gentle “street photography”, something I’ve not done seriously for a while.

Well, you’ve guessed I’m sure. Shop windows, reflections, potential for multi-layered images … it would have been remiss of me to turn down the opportunity!

So, two new images for my nascent collection. I will return to the photography of Saul Leiter at a later date but thought I’d park this small collection here as a line in the sand.

My experiences using the KMZ FT-2

I’ve already written several times about this camera. I have talked about the camera itself, cogitated on my first experiences using a loaned KMZ FT-2 and of course written about loading the film into the cassettes and into the camera itself. To conclude the series I am going to reflect on my first few months with this camera and what I’ve learnt.

Perhaps I should start by saying that this camera can be a fair bit of work. For a start, as we’ve already discussed, it needs two special film cassettes (I only have one) but even with two, loading is a bit of a chore. I borrowed one with both cassettes before buying my own. Firstly, film has to be transferred from a standard 35mm cassette into a special cassette, in the dark. This then needs to be attached to a second special cassette, in the dark, before being loaded into the camera … in the dark. I made a video demonstrating this aspect. To make it more helpful I made the video … in the dark (not).

Let’s skip the using of the camera at this point and jump ahead to unloading the film from the camera … in the dark. I simply dump the camera in the changing bag, pop in a pair of scissors, tank and reel and take the film directly from the camera onto the reel and into the tank. From that point on its business as usual as the film is standard 35mm film. With negatives the size of three “normal” 35mm negatives however there’s only two per strip in the filing sheet.

Now, if you like using a camera one-handed then this one isn’t for you. Similarly, if you like to “run ‘n’ gun” then this one isn’t for you. Shaped like a brick and weighing in at just over 1kg in its case this isn’t a camera you carry about just-in-case you might need it. With just 12 frames (assuming you respool a 36 exposure film) and an awkward loading/unloading regime it is best used when you’ve a definite plan in mind. Not that I take my own advice there of course! I tend to pop it in my shoulder bag alongside my main camera for the day although do occasionally make a trip with just the KMZ FT-2 or, more often, take it partnered with the Horizon S3 Pro.

I’ve never thought of these panoramic cameras as being for specific subjects or situations. My approach has always been to proactively look for compositions that work well in the format. Over time my hit rate has improved and one thing I’ve learnt is that a straight, long, thin, linear subject only works occasionally. In general it is better to look for compositions where the viewer has a choice of where to let his eye be led. Urban images at intersections of two, three or more streets are usually more effective (see below) than a straight-on view of a row of houses for example. There’s exceptions to every “rule” however.

In truth, the principles that apply to other formats also work with the panoramic form. Don’t be afraid to turn the camera on its side to create long, thin and tall vertoramas.

I’ve found that leading lines work very strongly in this vertical format, really dragging the viewers eye up through the frame.

Presenting these vertoramas as diptychs or triptychs works nicely too.

The speed of the exposure is determined by a spring which pulls the lens turret around. Brakes are used to vary the speed giving the four shutter speeds found on the FT-2. At 1/400th second when all the brakes are off the camera physically bucks in your hand from the force. Pop the camera on a tripod, set it to 1/400th, cock the shutter and watch the whole thing shudder when you release the shutter. Which explains why I believe the best results from this camera come from using it on a tripod. That said, I do tend to use it handheld, especially when photographing urban locations such as my own local patch.

Book-ending subjects can work well too, as in the example above where a very simple scene has been bookended by trees which give added context and hold the viewers attention in the central portion of the frame.

One thing I’ve not mentioned is that as the film wind-on and cocking of the shutter are two distinct operations the opportunity for double, triple, whatever exposures is the photographers for the taking. The one below is three or four exposures for example.

Don’t be frightened to crop as there’s plenty of real estate available.

In summary, it isn’t the easiest camera to work with but I’ve never been afraid of working for my images. Despite everything I’ve said about its idiosyncrasies it is however great fun and worth the effort in my view – your mileage may vary of course!

The 37 Club

I’ve been digging around on the internet for background information on the Nikon L35 AF that I was using in Salford Quays recently. Lots of opinions on the noise the camera makes, vignetting of the lens and the lack of manual controls. But none mentioned a big positive in my eyes – 37 frames per 36 exposure roll! I’ve just developed five rolls of black and white film, four Tri-X and one Kentmere 400, and every roll has 37 frames. Bargain! Did some of the other reviewers not get through a whole roll I wonder? [takes tongue out of cheek]

On the subject of vignetting, yes, there is a slight vignette but its not obtrusive and in my case I often add a more obvious vignette myself. The image below is un-processed apart from inverting the “scan”. There is a slight drop off in light at the edges but it isn’t objectionable to my eye.

Processed – I enhanced the vignette for effect

Another thing that gets mentioned, albeit generally positively, is the +2 exposure override function. As I’ve mentioned previously its easy to use and the lever is well positioned. With the benefit of hindsight I found that in most cases it wasn’t needed, even though I made liberal use of it. I suspect that for portraits, especially closer in than I typically get, this function will repay its deployment but for the urban photography I practice it’s simply nice to know that it’s there. Overall I found the cameras exposure to be pretty good. Possibly a tad over at times but none of the negatives from this trip are problematic and as I’ve already noted my “scanning” might be a factor. Certainly the negatives look fine on the light pad.

Left – metered negative and conversion
Right – +2 negative and conversion

In the example above the automatically derived exposure is pretty close whereas the +2 is definitely over-exposed. In both cases though the negative would be usable, especially in a hybrid workflow. My take-out from this is that for general scenes such as these I really don’t need to bracket as I was doing last week on occasion.

The other thing mentioned regularly is the filter ring. This point and shoot accepts proper screw-in filters and automatically adjusts the exposure accordingly. Neat. I only had a red filter with me but left it on for the whole of one roll to see what happened. The camera didn’t miss a beat and I’ve a nicely exposed sheet of 37 negatives … did I mention 37 frames from all five rolls?

So, there we go a few more thoughts on the Nikon L35 AF, and another blog post squeezed from a two day trip with one point and shoot camera and a pocket full of 35mm film.