Survived the new ct scanners at the airport somehow without glaringly obvious artefacts - I only realised the next day when I remembered they said it's okay to keep the laptop and liquids in the carryon:
FM2n with 40/2 ultron or 50/1.4 ais, mostly portra400, some gold200.
Was the first trip with a film camera, will be taking it on future trips.
After about a year... I'm leaning towards digital being more suited for young kids, dogs, and beautiful scenery. For my tastes anyway. Whereas film is nicer for above 16 years old and sometimes nicer for street but less leeway for corrections (since I get the lab to do it). I don't have kids currently and do mostly city destinations.
On narrowing the focal length down.. 35+50 / 40. Save a lot of weight with that CV 40 on nikon. Very comfortable focal length for snaps...but I also really like the shots with the 35 and 50. Let's see, still early and wasted a lot of time and rolls trying to troubleshoot (manual) focussing issues, which seems to be mostly behind me at this point thankfully.
Posting this just for myself and as proof that I can shoot 4x5. I had toyed with the short-lived idea of selling my 4x5 kit. I know that there is no separation between the trees and it just looks like a garbled bunch of leaves. But it was my first shots with the camera in over two years. Hopefully better shots to come this year.
Cloud75 wrote:
@Yogifi@ love the lego shallow dof shot! I have that 40/2 ultron too, and love it.
Thank you kindly - and I like the lens too, especially on film. I ended up using it the most because the focal length was so practical, and I only took one lens out each day. And it's so compact and has great sharpness.
I wish the the distortion a little less and the "transparency" was a tiny bit higher as it's a little bit crunchy but it's more noticeable when I use it with digital, or see shots with the 50/1.4 AIS. Though that's not as sharp at f2. And a little too tight for everyday for me. I grabbed the 50/1.2 for sharper at f2 but it is a little chunky and left it at home.
I think most of the shots posted above were with the 40mm, and another bonus one in a similar vein to the lego shot with the same lens:
Quite a few times I couldn't shake the thought that the rolls were toast due to the CT scanner. And so a couple more of a cactus for some reason:
"prickly pear cactus". I think they eat those as some sort of fruit.
Another with the 40mm:
And I think this was the 50/1.4 (probably at f4 from the looks of it, not 100%):
Yogifi wrote:
Thank you kindly - and I like the lens too, especially on film. I ended up using it the most because the focal length was so practical, and I only took one lens out each day. And it's so compact and has great sharpness.
I wish the the distortion a little less and the "transparency" was a tiny bit higher as it's a little bit crunchy but it's more noticeable when I use it with digital, or see shots with the 50/1.4 AIS. Though that's not as sharp at f2. And a little too tight for everyday for me. I grabbed the 50/1.2 for sharper at f2 but it is a little chunky and left it at home.
Quite a few times I couldn't shake the thought that the rolls were toast due to the CT scanner....Show more →
I particularly like the first cactus one, with just the ones in the middle in focus.
Surprising that the film doesn’t seem to have been too badly affected by the CT scan, especially the 400. Did any of them look like they had been wrecked?
(We went out through Gatwick () a couple of weeks ago. The staff were perfectly happy to check a bag of eight rolls of film that our daughter had (they did check each one individually though). Unlike Heathrow a year or two ago …. )
Andrew CD wrote:
I particularly like the first cactus one, with just the ones in the middle in focus.
Surprising that the film doesn’t seem to have been too badly affected by the CT scan, especially the 400. Did any of them look like they had been wrecked?
(We went out through Gatwick () a couple of weeks ago. The staff were perfectly happy to check a bag of eight rolls of film that our daughter had (they did check each one individually though). Unlike Heathrow a year or two ago …. )
None of the 4 rolls had anything weird (3 were p400 --- and one of them was INSIDE the camera, last two images above were from that roll). At least nothing shows that I can tell. This is at gatwick also just last month - they have the CT there.
And they did an extra test on something in the bag they scanned through an additional machine too so I thought for sure it was fried as they might have turned it way up or something. I assume I must have gotten quite lucky.
I only learned about the newer scanners afterwards by researching when the penny dropped about the liquids. I walked straight through thinking I'd be safe since I researched old info about iso 200 and 400 film and I didn't think twice. Was a big relief when I got the scans and I know for next time.
No separate bag for liquids = CT scanner, which can do serious damage from the examples I've seen.
I did hear the staff get training about film with the new CT scanners at least. Regarding hand-checking it. But mine was in the bag that you just drop on there now without removing anything and walk through.
) a couple of weeks ago. The staff were perfectly happy to check a bag of eight rolls of film that our daughter had (they did check each one individually though). Unlike Heathrow a year or two ago …. 
)
