Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] ( OM ) Kodachrome and lenses

Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Kodachrome and lenses
From: "Brian Swale" <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 22:34:24 +1200
Hi folks,

Just routine stuff; another film back.

I had a roll of 64 asa film developed and mounted. It would have gone to 
Melbourne Australia; cost back here has taken a jump.  Previous one was 
about $NZ20 for a 24 exp roll. This one was just over $NZ30. Add the cost of 
the film; I bought 8 rolls from Midwest Photographic Exchange in Ohio at a 
landed cost of about $NZ12 each; say $42 for the roll (26 actual exposures)  
or $1.60 nz each = $US0.67. This is about double the cost of a 6x4 print. I 
suspect that patronage is dropping and they are upping the price to keep it 
profitable and discourage custom.

A little while back I reported that a MIJ Zuiko 50/1.8 I have, had delivered 
pretty mediocre results on print film. Well, I now think the problem is me. On 
the same subject and at the same time as the other shots I used the MIJ 
with the Kodachrome, and it looks pretty sharp to me through a pocket 
viewer. Have yet to project it on a screen.. 

Next, I finally understand one other reason why Kodachrome is so much 
better than some other films. Remember that Kodachrome has a small 
latitude for a wide range of lighting. This has its strong point too. I 
sometimes 
take photos of bright red dahlia flowers. I just like them. Usually I chose a 
bright overcast day for the photographs. So the illumination is moderately 
even over the whole frame, with a small or slightly bigger hint of directional 
lighting from the sun. On print film the shots are nice -  but somewhat bland. 
Not as bland as digital, but bland.  Kodachrome accentuates the contrast so 
that the shadows and highlights (to the smallest detail) stand out a good 
deal more and lift the shot from ho-hum to one that you might look twice at. 
Makes all the difference.

Finally; one of my pet hates with respect to English language usage. 
Usually one hears "triple" used to mean "times 3"; I much prefer "treble".

My old version of the Oxford Dictionary gives "triple" as meaning "having 
three parts", and "treble" is "three times as great". 

Brian (still in one part)

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz