The Film Thread (Red Ring not Required) A place for Analog Photography Nuts to Talk

Scottboarding wrote in post #18141532
Has anyone pushed Ilford HP5+ to 1600 with good results? I usually shoot it at 800, but I'd like an extra stop at times as I typically shoot street photography so I like the deep depth of field and fast shutter speeds. However by Sunny 16, 1600 is a stop overexposed one stop in broad daylight. Will this effect it too much? I know it can typically be overexposed by a stop or two at box speed, but will that change when pushed two stops?

Just put a roll of HP5+ in my EOS 3, going to rate it at 6400. I'll report the results!

I think I incorrectly phrased it. What I meant was that, by the Sunny 16 rule, any photo in broad daylight will be overexposed by one stop. When I shoot it at 800 ASA, I do f16 and 1/1000 in broad daylight as per the sunny 16 rule. However that's the max of my camera, so at 1600 I would have to shoot at either 1/2000 or f22, but neither my lens or camera goes that far. Basically my question is, will the highlights be recoverable when over exposed by one stop?

I've been thinking about that too! With the EOS 3 you could easily shoot 6400 in daylight, and I'll probably try it one of these days. I use a pentax SV for black and white street photography, but it maxes out at 1/1000 so anything above 800 will be at least a stop over exposed in daylight. Can't wait to see those photos though!

Scottboarding wrote in post #18144045
I think I incorrectly phrased it. What I meant was that, by the Sunny 16 rule, any photo in broad daylight will be overexposed by one stop. When I shoot it at 800 ASA, I do f16 and 1/1000 in broad daylight as per the sunny 16 rule. However that's the max of my camera, so at 1600 I would have to shoot at either 1/2000 or f22, but neither my lens or camera goes that far. Basically my question is, will the highlights be recoverable when over exposed by one stop?

I don't think a stop over will prevent you from recovering highlights (presumably scanning them and editing in LR or similar). However I don't print my negatives, I only scan them as I don't have room for the additional equipment needed. I find that quite often when trying to recover highlights it is at the detriment to the rest of the image. I have also found that overexposing the negatives, as many people recommend to rate the film at half box speed, does nothing to improve image quality. I think it is for people who are printing their work, primarily black and white, who are trying to expose for the shadows and then when printing they can control the highlights. It doesn't seem to work like this when scanning. I have found it best to just rate the film at box speed and expose as normal.

Scottboarding wrote in post #18144048
I've been thinking about that too! With the EOS 3 you could easily shoot 6400 in daylight, and I'll probably try it one of these days. I use a pentax SV for black and white street photography, but it maxes out at 1/1000 so anything above 800 will be at least a stop over exposed in daylight. Can't wait to see those photos though!

I have run that roll through the camera, and to be honest I was struggling to find anywhere dark enough to take a photo! Anywhere with "normal" lighting was too bright! I haven't developed it yet.

A family friend just gave me a Canon AE-1 program with a couple of lenses, one a Canon 35-70mm f/3.5 and a generic 200mm, along with a low price flash, and a few other accessories. Think I'll see if I remember how to do film photography.

ChromeLibrarian wrote in post #18147614
A family friend just gave me a Canon AE-1 program with a couple of lenses, one a Canon 35-70mm f/3.5 and a generic 200mm, along with a low price flash, and a few other accessories. Think I'll see if I remember how to do film photography.

That's a great camera. I started with that body. There are still plenty of places around that do CLAs and you can buy light seal kits on eBay.

I'm not sure this is going to need anything. It looks almost unused...

ChromeLibrarian wrote in post #18147657
I'm not sure this is going to need anything. It looks almost unused...

Actually, I'd love to have my old A-1 back.

You won't really know for sure about the seals till you put some film through it. Sometimes they look ok but they dry and shrink over time. It sure is a looker though. Great shape.

nqjudo wrote in post #18147662
You won't really know for sure about the seals till you put some film through it. Sometimes they look ok but they dry and shrink over time. It sure is a looker though. Great shape.

you can check the seals without running film, just put the camera in bulb mode(without a lens) and flash a light through the rear seams. if you see light you need seals, if not then you're good.

I'm finally scanning a few rolls of film from last winter taken with my Hasselblad 500cm on Kodak Tmax 100.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/MSXW​tV

maverick75 wrote in post #18147784
you can check the seals without running film, just put the camera in bulb mode(without a lens) and flash a light through the rear seams. if you see light you need seals, if not then you're good.

That's a good way to see if the camera is light tight. Also some seals get gummy and sticky when they get old, in which case it would be time to change them. If not, you're Golden.
Good looking camera btw.

thc1979 wrote in post #18144311
I have run that roll through the camera, and to be honest I was struggling to find anywhere dark enough to take a photo! Anywhere with "normal" lighting was too bright! I haven't developed it yet.

We have images at 6400! can't tell how good yet though they're too wet to handle too much. I'll scan a few tomorrow night....

52 minutes in Rodinal 1+50

That's awesome! Can't wait to see them scanned. I think I'll give that a shot in my EOS 3 too

Scottboarding wrote in post #18149282
That's awesome! Can't wait to see them scanned. I think I'll give that a shot in my EOS 3 too

Here they are : https://www.flickr.com …/albums/7215767​3651959080

I am undecided as to whether or not it was a success!