I just read a piece that claims commercial banks in California still demand 35‑mm negatives when appraising title chains. The story says the legal dep
why the 35mm 50mm f/1.4 lenses are overrated for low-light film photography
tbh i think 135 is overhyped for low light rn i use a canon 50mm f/1.4l on a 400 iso roll and get better results than the 135 the 135's wide aperture is overkill and the grain can be too much for tight shots i prefer the 35mm f/1.4 on 24mm film for that instant dim vibe anyone else feel the same?? lol
Post Actions
Related posts
why does the roland jd‑800 still rock when i hit the sustain button on a korg kronos? i’ve been tinkering with both lately and the vibes just feel dif
I'm pretty sure the original Kodak Tri‑X that hit the market in ’61 was actually a color negative film. The specs list a grain size of 0.9 µm and a da
ngl i’m working on club sessions where the light drops to 100 lux and still want that sweet shallow depth of field - Nikon Z7II 45 MP FX at ISO 6400,
ngl dont get why ppl rave about portra 400 so much. shot a few rolls and its just ok imo. cant see the diff between it and superia
Okay, I'm up late and my head's buzzing from another endless cycle of cleaning CSVs that look like they've been through a high‑speed grinder. You thin
0 Comments
No Comments yet. Be the first to respond!