Any users of APS?

angelpaaul

angelpaaul

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,277
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
Anyone on here use/own APS cameras?
 
Last edited:
There are a number of APS-C cameras in our house.

Edit - my bad. Do have some film cameras, (4x 35mm SLR and 1x 120 TLR). The APS-C are all digital, missed that this was posted in the film and conventional section.
 
Last edited:
Got a couple somewhere but film is hard to find these days...
 
I managed to pick up a job lot from a local D&P place that was closing down. From memory, it was £1 per 40 exposure film. Gave it to the MiL who could manage to load APS when 35mm was beyond her. All long gone now (films!)
 
I have a bunch of APS camera and some film to be going on with. There were a number of novel cameras which were quite fun. I also did a review of the Monster Adapter that adapts Minolta V mount lenses to E mount which extends their life.
 
In the last year I've shot a few rolls of (very) expired Agfa Star 200 APS film with a Canon IXUS L-1 fully-auto compact. The film speed is probably 100 ISO at best by now, likely closer to ISO 50... and since there's no exposure compensation on that camera, the results were quite underexposed - but I still got useable images from it (thanks to digitising, negative conversion and very light post-processing):

full


A few months back, I picked up a mint and fully-working Nikon Pronea S and lenses (for peanuts) that I'm hoping to try out fairly soon, and I have something like ten rolls of that ISO 200 film in my fridge. As I say, it's probably more like ISO 50 - 100 by now... but at least the Pronea S has exposure compensation. It's a real pity the Canon IXUS L-1 doesn't, as it's a lovely little camera with a decent lens...

full
 
Last edited:
Not having used, or seen any results, how good are they quality wise?

Edit : apart from the sample above
 
Last edited:
angelpaaul said:
Not having used, or seen any results, how good are they quality wise?
Click to expand...

Subject to an equally good (or bad) lens, it's just like half-frame 35mm, if that helps? In 3:2 aspect ratio mode ("APS-C"), the image dimensions on APS film are 25.1 × 16.7mm (from what I've read), while half-frame 35mm is 17 × 24mm... almost identical.

As has already been mentioned, getting hold of film - of known provenance, that's been well-looked-after - is difficult, and even if it's in good nick, chances are it'll be considerably less sensitive than box speed due to age... so you really do need a camera with exposure compensation for best results (and expect to shoot in conditions that would favour slower film)...
 
Last edited:
angelpaaul said:
Not having used, or seen any results, how good are they quality wise?

Edit : apart from the sample above
Click to expand...
I borrowed the Pentax I bought Mom when I took my scooter down to the Isle of Wight, as long as you don't want anything bigger than 7x5 then there not too bad, the Pano' function was quite good, I've still got the prints filed away.
 
angelpaaul said:
Not having used, or seen any results, how good are they quality wise?

Edit : apart from the sample above
Click to expand...


The biggest issue is probably that the actual image is a fair bit smaller than 35mm - hence the "APS-C" label attached to smaller sensors on some digital cameras. This means that for a similar sized print, the negative needs to be enlarged a bit more so any grain or similar looks bigger, as do any focussing or blurring issues. Not really noticeable in normal use (6x4 inch prints) but will show up with bigger prints.
 
ProggyMat said:
A few months back, I picked up a mint and fully-working Nikon Pronea S and lenses (for peanuts) that I'm hoping to try out fairly soon, and I have something like ten rolls of that ISO 200 film in my fridge. As I say, it's probably more like ISO 50 - 100 by now... but at least the Pronea S has exposure compensation. It's a real pity the Canon IXUS L-1 doesn't, as it's a lovely little camera with a decent lens...

full
Click to expand...
This looks interesting. Any good?
 
angelpaaul said:
This looks interesting. Any good?
Click to expand...

I've been too busy to try it yet, Paul - but I'm hoping to use it in the next month or two. In terms of build quality, it's solid enough, but all plastic - including the lens mount - and definitely feels like a late-film-era consumer SLR. Feature-wise, it seems to be pretty good. There's a decent review here:

The SLR that time would Rather Forget

From what I've read, reliability wasn't its strongest suit. I was assured at the time of purchase that mine works perfectly... but since I haven't used it yet, who knows? I paid so little for it that if it's a junker, I won't be too disappointed. The trusting / charitable streak in me assumes the seller was honest (I'll let you know ;))...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top