I confess I’m a sucker for a searingly sharp close up of a flower or decaying texture against a soft dreamy background.
But the sharpness is only part of the appeal.
In truth, it’s the textures of the background that allure me most.
Here are some of my favourite photographs where sharpness was not paramount – or in some cases barely in evidence at all.
The Tamron 35-70/3.5 creates surprisingly painterly bokeh, whilst hinting just enough sharpness of definition to counterbalance it.
The Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35/2.4 is one of the sharpest, if not the sharpest lens I have ever experienced. But sometimes its not needed, and the bokeh it produces takes centre stage.
The sharpness of the Minolta AF is close to redundant here, with the disappearing wire mesh becoming the central subject.
As I recently talked about, one of the great appeals of the Pentacon 50/1.8 is that stopped down it can be very sharp, but at larger apertures its increasing softness can be highly endearing. Especially with this much sunlight streaming through.
Up close the central stalks are pretty sharp – and the ML 50/1.7 is an excellent performer. But they’re overcome by the background. I couldn’t resist all those dewdrops one early sunny morning.
This cheap flimsy pocketable Pentax is plastic even down to the lens, and could never be described as anything approaching razor sharp. But its vignetting and flare created the kind of image that would have come out very bland with a high quality lens on an SLR.
This must have been shot close to wide open with the large fast 58/1.4 Minolta, as nothing is sharp, just varying degrees of dissolving light.
The Yashica ML here produced the kind of swirl a Helios 44-2 would have been proud of.
Along with its Zeiss stablemate the Flektogon 35/2.4, the Pancolar 50/1.8 is as sharp as anything I’ve used. But here that wasn’t required, instead its background rendering was put to use.
Looking back through the last year or so of my photographs to write this post has been a great reality check, and amusing to see how many images I make that don’t need any kind of sharpness from the lens.
Lens Love is an ongoing series of posts about the vintage lenses I’ve used and loved most.
The dry technical data and 100% corner crops of brick walls can be found elsewhere. What I’m more interested in is what specifically about a lens makes me love using it, and why I believe you should try one too.
First up –
Pentacon 50mm f/1.8 M42 mount
What I love
Close focus. The Pentacon 50/1.8 focuses down to a touch under 0.33m. Most 50s flounder around 0.5m, or 0.45m if you’re lucky, so the additional intimacy with your subject offered by the Pentacon makes it stand out. There’s a whole world of photographic opportunity available that is beyond the vast majority of 50mm lenses. This blog is about hunting for beauty, and most often I’ve found the beauty is in the tiny details.
Colours. Some lenses just seem to deliver better colours than others, and the Pentacon 50/1.8 is a good example. Vibrant and alive, but without being garish, the colours have delighted me time and time again, on film and digital cameras, straight out of camera. None of the images in this post have had any post processing.
All metal build. From an era where lens makers had either not discovered plastic or were unconvinced about its place on such a fine object as a camera lens, the Pentacon is satisfying metal. Impressively though, despite the reassuring build, it’s surprisingly light (sub 200g) and compact.
Sharpness. I’m not the biggest fan of clinical, almost sterile sharpness, but the Pentacon is in my eyes very capable in this area once you stop down a little. Which still allows for a more dreamy and artistic kind of approach when used at wider apertures. Or sometimes both of these extremes in the same photograph.
Availability. Every other Praktica camera for years, possibly decades, came with this 50/1.8 (or a variation branded Meyer or Pentaflex) as its standard kit lens. Which means today, even allowing for those thousands that must have been long since broken and discarded, there are still plentiful supplies for us. Most often they’re still attached to one of those hefty, non-nonsense Praktica heavyweights they haven’t been parted from in 30+ years.
Affordability. As with any lens, price varies depending on the seller’s knowledge and demands, and you will find the Pentacons selling on their own fully working for maybe £50 or more. But be patient and maybe a little lucky and you can still find them for under £10, and far more easily under £20. Even £30 for a clean, fully working example I would still consider excellent value for a lens this capable.
Adaptability. The familiar screw thread of the M42 mount graces probably more lenses than any other in history. Because of this, plus the simplicity of the mount, it means M42 lenses can be easily adapted to a huge range of other film and digital cameras. I have used M42 lenses on classic M42 bodies like Spotmatics and Fujicas, as well as with adapters on Pentax K, Contax/Yashica, Minolta AF and Canon EOS film bodies, plus Pentax K, Sony Alpha/A mount and NEX/E mount digital cameras. As most examples of the Pentacon have an Auto/Manual (A/M) switch, just slide it to M, and you can manually stop the aperture down using either Aperture Priority or Manual mode on your camera. The adapters tend to be very affordable too, from £5-10 for most.
What about the downsides?
There’s much to love about the Pentacon 50/1.8. There are two main downsides to consider. Well, maybe one and a half.
First, they’re not always in excellent, fully working order.
The main issues I’ve encountered have been stiff focus and faulty aperture blades. The former, depending on how stiff, can be lived with, and sometimes a little extra weight in the focus ring aids accurate focusing. But if the lens is unscrewing itself every time you try to focus, it’s not very usable. This can be fixed of course, and the lens relubricated, but this would likely cost twice what the lens would cost to replace, so weigh up your options.
With some examples, the aperture blades are stuck open, so wherever you turn the aperture ring to, it’s wide open at f/1.8.
Again this can be fixed, but again consider the repair cost versus finding another. If you find a cheap Pentacon Auto with excellent glass but stiff focus and/or stuck aperture blades, considering how good they are (in my experience), it might well be worth a CLA. £10 for the lens plus £40 for a CLA is still pretty good value, considering you’d then know you had an excellent lens that would last for potentially years to come.
The other, less obvious, downside is the competition.
Most specifically its German counterpart, the Zeiss Pancolar 50/1.8. In their day, the Pancolar was the more expensive option for your Praktica L or M series camera, and these days the cost differential is probably even greater.
The lenses are tied on close focus, general feel and size, and adaptability. The Pancolar, in my experience, just has the edge in sharpness in the final image, though I haven’t shot the two head to head in identical conditions.
If money is no object, buy the best and newest Multi Coated Pancolar you can find. It’ll likely cost £100-150+.
But for 95% of the performance (maybe more) at 10% of the cost, the Pentacon is amazing value.
A final note about variations.
The older examples I’ve had generally have more straight edged aperture blades, so you get bokeh highlights like this –
This is great if you like that sort of thing, and often I do.
But if you want smoother, more rounded bokeh, especially in the highlights, go for a later version which produce images more like the following. Notice the far more rounded hexagons on the far right.
Aside from different versions of the Pentacon (generally, later ones shout MULTI COATING on the front and the lettering around the focus scale is green and white, earlier ones use red and white fonts), I’ve also had a Pentaflex Auto Color 50/1.8 which is as far as I can tell identical to the earlier Pentacons, again with the straighter aperture blades –
It comes down to what you find, and your preference in the starkness of your hexagons!
Overall I would highly recommend the Pentacon 50/1.8 in any of its variations.
It’s arguably as good in the final image as any 50mm lens I’ve used, is excellent value, and with that close focus is almost peerless at this price and availability.
Go get one!
Have you used a Pentacon 50/1.8?
Let us know in the comments below.
Thanks for reading. Please share this post with others you feel will enjoy it too.
Before I discovered film, my main photography experience was with camera phones, then a Nikon Coolpix, which I shot 1000 photographs a month with for seven months.
Shooting film over the next five years – aside from its own unique pleasures – has gradually, yet radically, transformed how I approached and enjoyed digital photography too.
Here are the major reasons why –
1. Thoughtful composition and frugal shooting.
Using the Coolpix helped hugely to hone my composition. But I would still go out for a 30 minute photowalk, blast off 200 images, then spend four times longer editing through the photographs.
Something didn’t seem right about having 17 almost identical shots of the same dew dropped cobweb then agonising over which to keep and share.
The pleasure of being out taking photographs was starting to be tainted by the thought of all the time I’d be spending afterwards poring through them.
Shooting with film, where capturing the same 200 images would be prohibitively expensive, taught me to be far more particular and careful about what I saw through the viewfinder before I released the shutter.
(A very simple trick I still use with film and digital is to ask before I shoot “Is this really a worthwhile photograph?” Often I decide it isn’t, and move on.)
This in turn translated to how I now use my Sony NEX mirrorless and a100 DSLR cameras.
A 90 minute photowalk these days might yield 50-70 shots, around the same as a couple of rolls of film.
Which means way less time hunched over a computer sifted through images back home.
More time out in the field (often quite literally out in a field) and less time editing and post processing is a hugely positive outcome for me.
2. Choosing aperture and depth of field.
Using film SLRs taught me plenty about the effect of aperture and distance on the depth of field.
Being able to see what the camera saw through the viewfinder was key to this – even without any study or research, you can experiment with changing aperture and focus and seeing with your own eyes how it changes what you see in the VF.
Prior to this film experience, I was just on auto or program with a digital camera, letting the camera decide everything but the composition and focus. Sometimes I lucked out, like the cobweb shot above. But I didn’t know why, or how to intentionally create the look.
Being aware of depth of field helped me discover some of the unique delights of many lenses like the Helios 44 series for example.
Now, in terms of depth of field, my digital shots feel far more controlled and taken with intention, not just at whatever aperture the camera decided was best.
3. The delights of vintage lenses.
As I wrote recently, using vintage lenses is one of the top three reasons I love film photography.
These days, with all kinds of adapters available, you can mix and match vintage lenses with modern digital cameras and enjoy the best of both worlds.
The quality, feel and distinctive look of vintage glass, combined with the convenience and low cost of digital is a delicious combination.
Cameras like the Sony NEX (E mount) and Canon EOS (EF mount) are very easily adaptable to a dozen or more lens mounts at very little expense. Most adapters I’ve invested in have cost between £6-12.
So the lenses I fell in love with using film cameras I can continue to use and explore further with digital.
Which, with the almost instant feedback of digital, has allowed me to get to know each of their unique characteristics in more depth and more quickly.
The facts are simple. If I’d never got into film photography, and using classic SLRs and lenses, I’d probably just be using some standard bland DLSR 18-55mm digital zoom on auto or program mode the whole time.
Yes, with this set up I might well still have chanced upon a photograph I liked now again.
But having the knowledge and intention behind the photographs I now make with digital cameras, is vastly more rewarding, and that only happened because of the laste few years of film photography grounding.
How has shooting film influenced your approach to digital?
Please let us know in the comments below.
Thanks for reading. Please share this post with others you feel will enjoy it too.
Preset aperture lenses are different from standard lenses with a single aperture ring and set click stops.
Here’s how they differ, some of the reasons I enjoy using them, and why you should try them too.
First, how they work.
There are different variations, but the feature common to them all is you preset not the exact aperture, but the minimum aperture the lens will stop down to.
There is either via a separate aperture ring, or the main aperture ring is spring loaded and pushes in or out then rotates. This ring dictates the smallest aperture the lens will be at when the main aperture ring is turned all the way in the opposite direction from being wide open.
Here are examples of three minor variants.
With the Helios 44-2, the outermost part of the lens with the red dot is fixed. The next ring in, with the numbers on, clicks to the various standard stops. Above you can see it’s at f/8. The next knurled ring in adjusts freely between the maximum aperture (f/2) and the preset minimum aperture (f/8 in the picture above).
So you can adjust it as precisely as you wish, without needing to be at whole click stops like f/4, f/5.6 and so on. More on why you might want this later on.
The Takumar is similar, but slightly more clear in its design. Again the outermost part with the red dot is fixed. The next ring where you can see all of the numbers sets the minimum aperture, and moves in clicks (and half clicks where you see the white dots). Then the next ring in, also numbered, moves freely between the maximum f/2 and minimum, in this case f/5.6.
The Takumar is a little easier to use for those used to setting an aperture number, as you still line up a specific aperture number with the red dot if you wish to.
The Jupiter-37A has just one aperture ring. Again the outer part with the white dot is fixed. To set the minimum aperture, you push the numbered ring in so its up against the large knurled focus ring, then turn it to the aperture required, then release the ring. It’s spring loaded so it pops back to the rest position as above.
Then the same ring rotates freely between the maximum aperture (f/3.5) and preset minimum aperture (f/5.6 in the picture above).
In practice, choosing and setting the aperture works as follows.
Say you want to shoot a lens at f/8. So you set the preset aperture ring to f/8, then open the lens wide open.
At the lens’s maximum aperture (wide open, so when you look into the lens from the front you can’t see the aperture blades at all), you have maximum light entering, so it’s easiest to compose and focus with the camera.
When you’ve focused, simply turn the main aperture ring all the way down until it won’t turn anymore. Then you know you’ll be at your preset aperture (f/8 in this example) and can take the picture at that aperture.
Preset lenses give photographers a fast way to stop down a lens to a preset aperture, without having to count click stops, or take your eye away from the camera to see where you’re moving the aperture ring to.
Originally preset aperture lenses were superceded by lenses that offered set click stops (at f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6 etc) plus open aperture metering.
With these lenses, you set the aperture ring on the lens but the aperture blades remain wide open (again letting in maximum light for easier focusing) until the instant the picture is taken, at which point they close down to the set aperture via a lever or pin on the back of the lens being depressed by the camera.
But for those of us using film and digital cameras with vintage lenses via adapters, open aperture metering isn’t an option anyway, we have to stop down manually. This is where the preset aperture lens comes into its own.
What I like even more than the convenience of being able to close down in a split second to my preset aperture, is the fine adjustment it allows.
I shoot Aperture Priority (Av) 90% of the time or more. This is because I love to control the depth of field of the image.
Also, because I rarely shoot moving subjects, shutter speed is of little importance to me.
Photographing a decaying door or ancient gravestone or still flower looks exactly the same at 1/30s or 1/4000s.
Varying the aperture though – especially at the close distances I like to shoot at – has a dramatic effect on the final image and its depth of field.
With standard click stop aperture lenses, most have only full or half click stops. The actual number of the aperture I’m using is again pretty irrelevant to when I’m shooting Av mode.
But what if, in terms of the look of the photograph, the depth of field is too shallow at f/4 and too deep at f/5.6?
With a standard click stop aperture lens, you’d have to choose one or the other (or, with some lenses like for example a Yashica ML 50/1.4, you can find the halfway rest point between two click stops).
With a preset aperture lens, you simply turn the aperture ring until the image looks precisely how you want it to.
It’s irrelevant whether it’s f/4.37 or f/5.13. What matters is how it looks.
So, in practice, I often preset my aperture at a stop beyond what I think I will need. Then I have that scope for fine tuning.
For example if I think I’ll need around f/5.6, I’ll set the preset aperture to f/8, then open it up.
After composing and focusing, I’ll stop the lens down until the image I see is exactly as I want it. It might be shade past f/5.6, a little before, or bang on. I have that ability to find precisely what looks most right for me.
And, after all, isn’t that how all of us photograph anyway – point our camera at something then adjust our position and the lens aperture until what we see in the viewfinder is what looks most “right” to us?
Another advantage of preset aperture lenses, is not directly due to their preset feature but seems connected.
My favourite preset lenses tend to have more aperture blades, and ones that close down whilst staying very rounded. The result is smoother bokeh highlights, like this –
With a standard lens, the majority have six blades, and are very straight edged.
So the bokeh highlights look like this –
You can imagine how the first image would have looked it taken with the second lens.
Let’s directly compare two lenses.
The first three images show my Cosina Cosinon Auto 135/2.8 at f/5.6, f/8 and f/11. Notice how the (hexagon) shape made by the (six) blades is already angular at f/5.6 and becomes even more so as you stop down further.
The next three pictures show the Jupiter-37A 135/3.5 at the same apertures – f/5.6, f/8 and f/11. You’ll notice how because of the greater number of aperture blades (12!) and the way they close down, it’s almost perfectly circular, even at f/11.
This smoother, more circular shape makes for smoother bokeh, especially in shots with multiple light sources where each one takes the shape of the open aperture blades in the lens.
Which preset aperture lens(es) I recommend
I love all three of the lenses featured in the first images above and would recommend any without hesitation. The Helios 44-2 58/2, Asahi Takumar 105/2.8 and Jupiter-37A 135/3.5. All are M42 mount and all are fantastic regardless of being preset aperture.
The fact that they are preset lenses just makes them, for me, even more enjoyable and controllable when shooting my preferred Aperture Priority mode.
If you don’t already use M42 lenses, then I recommend getting one of the three above plus an adapter for whatever you do use. It’s probably the most easily adaptable lens mount.
I’ve shot M42 lenses on Contax/Yashica, Pentax K, Canon EOS and Minolta AF film cameras, and Pentax K, Sony NEX (E mount) and Sony a100 and a350 (Sony/Minolta A/Alpha mount) digital cameras. Adapters exist for probably a dozen other camera mounts.
This post is the extension of that – How I use manual vintage lenses with a DSLR.
For the purpose of the following explanations, let’s go with my Sony a100 DLSR, plus a Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Flektogon Flektogon 35mm f/2.4 M42 lens.
Other lenses – especially other M42 mount lenses – follow a very similar process in use.
Initial set up
First, I ensure the M42 > Sony adapter is on the camera, then screw in the lens. I set it to minimum focus, as most of my photography tends to be up close.
The camera I try to set as neutral as possible.
I use ISO400, which gives a little more noise/grain in the final image than ISO200 or ISO100, a personal preference, and a leaning towards the grain I love with shooting film. I don’t like digital to look too clean and clinical.
Also, a higher ISO means in lower light I can shoot at smaller apertures without resorting to too slow a shutter speed and the increased potential of blurred shots.
I shoot RAW files at the maximum size (10MP with the a100), set the colour to “standard” and all the other colour, contrast, saturation and sharpness settings to neutral/zero.
For metering I go with centre weighted, which I’m most used to from shooting film cameras.
White balance is usually daylight as I only really shoot in daylight and this seems to give most consistently realistic colours, to my eye. I’ve found auto white balance can be a bit erratic with the a100. I turn off any other “enhancements” like noise reduction.
These settings I adjusted when I first got the camera, and now don’t need to touch them.
It’s not something I have to (or feel the need to) fiddle with every time I pick it up.
I want the camera to be as simple to use as possible.
So after this initial set up, the only adjustments I make shot to shot predominantly involve just two settings – the aperture and the focus.
Talking of focus, it’s worth mentioning here to check your diopter adjustment. It can make a huge difference to how easy (or not!) it is to focus with a manual focus lens on a DSLR.
Look through the camera towards a bright light source with the lens set to infinity (or even better, no lens). Note how sharp and clear the central AF rectangle in the VF is.
Adjust the diopter up and down until you get the clearest picture. It should be quite obvious when you have the right setting, as moving a couple of notches either side will make the image significantly more fuzzy.
If this is a few notches out it will be very difficult to focus accurately.
Initial set up covered, let’s move on to using the camera shot by shot.
With film cameras, whilst sometimes I like to go meterless and Sunny 11, 95% of the time I use Aperture Priority mode (Av) mode. It’s the same with the a100, though it’s marked A on the mode dial, rather than Av.
My default aperture is f/5.6 with a lens like the Flektogon, and indeed any reasonably fast lens.
This gives me, most of the time, the kind of depth of field I like, plus as a rule the lens is likely to be performing better (sharpness, colour, contrast) two or three stops down than at its maximum aperture.
The viewfinder (VF) on the a100 is bright enough in good lighting to be able to focus at f/5.6. If I need to be more precise with focusing I will open the aperture to the maximum of f/2.4, focus, then stop down to the required aperture.
To make stopping down easier, use the Auto/Manual (A/M) switch found on most M42 lenses.
If the aperture you want makes the VF too dark to focus, and/or you don’t want to be stopping up and down a lot, make use of the little switch like this –
Set your chosen aperture, ensure the switch is on A. Look into the lens and you’ll see the aperture wide open, ie you can’t see the blades.
Compose, focus, then when you’re ready, flick the switch to M, so the blades close, the camera can automatically set its shutter speed, then shoot.
Switch back to A, ready for the next shot.
Shot to shot, step by step, this is my process –
Find something interesting to capture.
Compose and focus.
Adjust aperture, if needed, to adjust depth of field, either manually stopping down or using the A/M switch.
Half press the shutter button so the camera’s meter activates and shows the shutter speed.
If shutter speed is ok (not maxing out, or not too slow a for hand held shot), press the shutter button all the way to take the photograph.
I do tend to check the screen most shots afterwards, for one main reason.
Whilst with fully auto lenses like the excellent Minolta AF series, the a100 seems to meter very accurately, with manual vintage lenses it tends to slightly underexpose.
I have found by setting the exposure compensation (the button is marked AV +/-) to +0.3 as a base setting, most shots come out well.
As with any photography, when the light is tricky, you may have to compensate.
With digital we have the blessing of the screen to check, then adjust the exposure compensation a little if needed, and retake the shot.
If you’re really concerned about precise exposure (I’m generally not!) then use the Exposure Bracketing mode most DLSRs have to take three shots then pick the best exposed afterwards. The a100 cleverly shows the three exposures it will take on the sliding scale in the VF and you can still use this in conjunction with exposure compensation too if you wish.
Personally, I’d rather get it right with trail and error using the Exposure Comp feature than have three of every photograph to look through at home.
And that about it.
Hopefully, as you can see, after my modest initial set up, using the a100 with M42 lenses is very similar to using my Contax or Canon EOS film cameras with the very same lenses.
Set to Aperture Priority mode, compose, focus, adjust aperture, half press to check shutter speed, shoot. Repeat as required.
For me this provides the ideal balance between the pleasure of handling and using vintage lenses, yet the camera being invisible enough and the process simple enough, to not get in the way of me enjoying the exploring and the picture taking.
Hopefully this has encouraged you to try a DSLR with manual vintage lenses, or if you have already, how it can be reduced to a refreshing simple process, despite the many buttons, modes and switches at our disposal with these devices.
Do you shoot vintage lenses on a DSLR?
Let us know your experiences in the comments below.
Thanks for reading. Please share this post with others you feel will enjoy it too.
Film photography is one of the greatest joys of my life.
But how much of this pleasure can be experienced and enjoyed equally via a digital sensor, rather than on 35mm film?
To explore this, let’s start with the five biggest reasons I love film, in reverse order.
5. The look of film.
4. Using vintage cameras.
3. Using vintage lenses.
2. The immersive experience.
1. The freedom.
So (how) can each of these be recreated with a digital camera?
Specifically, I’m going to be talking about the digital camera I have come to enjoy using most recently, the Sony a100 DSLR, launched around 2006. I picked mine up this year used for a shade under £60.
Let’s look at each reason in more depth, and see how much the digital experience fulfils the needs I’ve found film photography satisfies.
5. The look of film
Film is unique in its look, and the warmth, grain and vibrant colours of film cannot be equalled, in my eyes. Also the sometimes unpredictable results add an extra variable and delight. Shooting expired film, for example.
This being said, I’ve found a handful of film presets for LightRoom that, whilst they don’t recreate entirely the look of film, do give a softer and more endearing feel to my digital photographs. Often these have me smiling almost as much in the final image.
Plus, using the same vintage film lenses on digital bodies help get closer to the overall feel of shooting film. More on those later.
4. Using vintage cameras
No digital camera can compare to using an all metal and mechanical classic 35mm film camera like an Asahi Spotmatic F. Or the seductively smooth wind and shutter release of the wonderful Contax 139 Quartz. Not to mention its amazing, big bright viewfinder.
What I can say about my Sony a100 is it’s as close to a film camera as I have used, in that I enjoy the handling, plus everything is at hand.
The viewfinder is very usable – even with vintage, manual focus lenses, and its technology is intuitive and doesn’t get in the way of the experience of seeking and finding beautiful things to photograph.
3. Using vintage lenses
This reason has been absolutely pivotal in me learning to embrace and love digital photography. Discovering that adapters existed to shoot my old lenses on digital bodies was probably the biggest game-changer in my photography adventure.
My favourite vintage lenses (which are mostly M42 mount Takumar and Zeiss) can be used very easily on the a100, in the same Aperture Priority (Av) mode I use 90% of the time with my film bodies.
The delicious quality and handling of the Takumars, and the biting sharpness and close focus of the Zeiss Pancolar 50/1.8 and Flektogon 35/2.4 are just the same on the a100, meaning half of my pair of hands is just as happy as when using them on film.
Yes, there is the crop factor of 1.5x, meaning a 50mm lens for a 35mm film camera gives an equivalent field of view of around 75mm on the a100 with its APS-C sensor.
But I have a range of focal lengths that fits my needs with the 35mm Flektogon (52.5mm field of view on the a100), 50mm Pancolar (75mm), 55mm Takumar (82.5mm), 58mm Helios 44-2 (87mm), 105mm Takumar (157.5mm) and 135mm Zeiss Sonnar and Jupiter-37a (202.5mm).
Plus, because the digital sensor only uses the central part of the lenses, where they deliver their optimum performance, you’re eliminating all of the outer edge weaknesses the lenses may reveal on 35mm film.
Also, since exploring Sony Alpha cameras, I’ve also bought three mid-80’s vintage Minolta AF lenses.
These lenses share the same mount (which Sony inherited when they bought the photographic arm of Konica Minolta on the mid 2000s), so fit straight on and are usable with all exposure modes.
I’ve been blown away by their performance, colours and sharpness, something I would not have experienced had I not gone down the Sony route and stuck purely to M42 lenses.
2. The immersive experience
Using a film camera with a large bright viewfinder like the Contax 139 Quartz literally sucks one into the VF. Everything in the world except what’s in that rectangle is blocked out and forgotten.
Add the experience of focusing and adjusting depth of field (DOF) whilst using that larger than life VF immersion, it becomes a major highlight of my favourite film cameras.
The a100 can’t claim to have as big or bright a VF as the cream of my film cameras.
But it’s more than adequate to provide a very similarly immersive experience, and with a DOF preview button for native lenses (and of course the manual stop down of vintage M42 lenses which provides a constant DOF preview anyway), again it provides those same visual reward and engagement whilst shooting.
Or in other words, I still forget everything else but what’s in that little rectangle.
Which brings us on to the final, and most vital experience film photography brings me.
1. The freedom
Being able to grab a camera and head out to the sticks and wander around for an hour or two, hunting out beauty, gives me a huge sense of freedom and escape.
I’m very fortunate to have all I do have in my life, but this need for escape is still strong.
Packing a camera with me, with its immersive experience (see no4) via vintage lenses (no3), enhances that hunt for beauty further and deeper, and helps me see and appreciate things I might not otherwise notice.
And so, we come to the title of this post, and the revelation I had – that the top three of the five most important reasons I love film photography are almost (say 95%) as rewarding with my digital Sony a100.
No, when shooting with the Sony, I don’t have film, its emotive nostalgia, tactile experience and unique grain and feel, or the pleasure of using a smooth highly crafted mechanical machine like my Contax 139 Quartz.
But I’m not giving these up, just using them alternately, in conjunction with digital.
Plus digital, with its instant feedback and cheaper ongoing cost (as long as we don’t get caught up in forever chasing the latest and greatest digital wonder and its ever increasing cost – as I said my little a100 cost me £60 used, about the same as my Contax bodies) offers some benefits film can’t.
I’m still a die hard film lover.
But thanks to using the same vintage lenses on my Sony a100, I’m loving digital more than ever before too.
Combining the two is allowing me to create not only a consistent experience, but also, I hope, a coherent and congruous body of work, which transcends which camera I used to make the pictures.
What are your favourite reasons for shooting film and digital, and how much do they overlap?
Let us know in the comments below.
Thanks for reading. Please share this post with others you feel will enjoy it too.