Nikon N50 / F50 shooting Kodak UltraMax 400

I didn't shoot film for years. Didn't really plan to. Not that I don't like it, because I love film, but I just didn't have an opportunity to do so. When I saw that Nikon F50 with a 35-80 for 20 bucks, I just bought it. Ordered a new battery on amazon and a couple rolls of Kodak Ultramax 400

2023

The F50 is a low end Nikon SLR from 1994, and besides the fact that you can swap lenses, it basically is just a glorified point and shoot.

It has some stupid scenes modes, PASM modes, basic AF, TTL metering, 4 stupid buttons instead of wheels, NO diopter adjustment for the viewfinder (that sucks), no DOP preview button, no remote, and easy film loading: there is really not much to say about that piece of plastic: exposure is right, AF is right too: set it in Aperture priority mode, frame, shoot.

The viewfinder is large and clear enough, it handles well even if the plastic is a bit slippy. Just worth 20 bucks with a cheap lens.

The Kodak UltraMax 400 is the "new" Gold Max 400. Well, it is just the same with a new name in my opinion. Nothing special about that film: it's not bad, not good, can handle mostly any situation, behaves well at developing and behaves well at scanning. It's cheap and versatile. that makes it quite a good all-around film.

It turns out my F50 works as intended, exposure is right, no light leaks, AF is good: nothing to report.

Actually, the camera model and the film don't really matter. Any camera in working order will take well exposed and focused images. And any film will make good images too. The differences in films are supposed to be basically: sensibility, color balance, grain and curves. But in the end, all that remains after you scan it is basically the grain, sensibility and in some measure the curves.

Even with software technologies that are supposed to get the colors from the neg, you won't really get it. On top of that, since you're very likely to adjust your photo in LR or another software, the original colorimetry will mostly be gone.

What is really important is the process of shooting film. But that is not the topic here: slow, deliberate shooting, being limited to 36 exposures in a roll, waiting for the film to be developed, scanning it, etc.

It's just fun and different, something I enjoy from loading the film to scanning and working on the negs on my Mac. If you have some spare change just give it a try: buy some used working camera, a couple rolls of film, and shoot.

You may also like

Sony RX100 m3: all you need from 24 to 70mm

I got this little camera for $200 a couple years ago and didn't write about it yet.

Birding with a cheap Sigma 135-400?

When it comes to birding, the common advice is to get a camera with low noise, fast AF, fast burst, big buffer and some long lens, preferably a super fast telephoto. It is indeed good advice, but you'll have to pay thousands of dollars to buy that gear, even on the used market. What if you want to shoot birds on a super tight budget? You'll still need some camera and lens. Maybe consider buying some older inexpensive gear?

Shooting the Minolta Maxxum / Dynax 7D in 2022

The short lived most advanced Minolta DSLR was released in late 2004. It became later the foundation for Sony's A-mount cameras. It featured the first in body stabilization in a DSLR, a 6MP CCD sensor and loads of controls. This camera is a photographer's delight. The body feels right, the controls are great and natural: coming from a film SLR, you just feel at home with the Minolta 7D. And You can use all the now often cheap quality Minolta lenses, as well as the more expensive Sony A-Mount lenses.

Shooting the Sony Alpha 77 mk II in 2022

I wrote about the A77. But what about the noticeably more expensive used A77m2? You’ll have to pay $600 to $800 to buy a used one in good condition. Is it worth it? The A77m2 came a few years after the A77. in my opinion, the improvements are mostly marketing stunts. Despite a lot more AF sensors, a so-called new AF system, better video and a bigger buffer, I keep thinking the A77m2 used isn’t a very good deal.

Fun with the DXO ONE in 2023

In 2015, Dxo decided to sell a tiny camera that connected to the iPhone. They used the 1inch 20MP sensor from the Sony RX100 m3 that I really love a lot, 32mm equivalent lens that is pretty bright: F/1.8 and shoots RAW.

Tokina 12-24 DX adapted on Micro 4/3

Some sample photos taken with the Tokina SD ATX pro 12-24 F/4 IF DX ASP Nikon F-Mount on the Olympus EM1.

Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF APO

How good can be a Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF lens from 1990? Simple answer: definitely worth 89 bucks BUT there are lots of BUT...

Shooting the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in 2023, 2024 and later.

One month ago, I was fed up with travelling with camera gear. Air travel became a miserable experience: arguing with check-in people, Unpack all that expensive shit at security, having gear damaged in the plane when frantic fellow passengers trow their hard cases in the overhead bins. I want to travel light: then a classified caught my eye: EM1, grip, charger, 2 batteries and 45-150 for 300.

Sony alpha A200: a Nikon D80 with IBIS

After Sony bought the Minolta photography department, they released the A100 in mid 2006, the A700 in mid 2007, and the A200/A300/A350 in early 2008. Two years after the Nikon D80, we find the same SONY ICX493AQA CCD sensor (wich is basically a slower ICX483AQA that was in the Nikon D200 released 3 years earlier) in what is basically a Minolta body with Sony branding imitating a Nikon D80..

Nikkor Plastic 70-300 F/4-5.6 AF-D ED

This Nikkor 70-300 has been one of the most poorly reviewed Nikkor lens ever.

↑Back to Top