"Canon FT QL" Test Roll Photos

[poker]

I recently bought the same model camera I lost back in highschool on EBAY. You can read about it here: Correcting a mistake...

I bought a 1.3v battery and a 36exp roll of Fuji Superia 200 all shot yesterday, the 21st.

My wife brought the roll to Costco for me to get the film developed straight to CD w/o prints for $5.

So here are some shots from my "new" camera, a Canon FT QL with a Canon 50mm f/1.4.

Feel free to give me your technical impressions on these shots.

[poker]

Shot in front of her house roughly at 8PM. Pretty bright sun at that time, huh?

[poker]

FYI, the Canon FT QL has partial light metering where "one-ninth of the total picture area is an exposure sensing area."

I added the histogram on this shot for added analysis.

[poker]

On the original file, the first stepping stone in the foreground is very sharp. The viewfinder on this camera has something in the middle that helps you focus. I don't know what it is called but it is pixelated at first then the pixelation goes away when in focus. It is very handy. Anyone know what that is?

[poker]

New building on campus...

[poker]

This came out very yellow. Overexposed?

This was lit by the sun coming through mom's canvas like curtains.

[poker]

I think the camera was a great buy for me. It corrected my guilt for losing the original one and it brought me back to the old school way of taking pictures, which is an added learning experience.

I know I'll be doing this again but I'll be exploring other types of film. I've always wanted to use infrared film but couldn't in my other cameras. This time I can.

I remember OT saying in one of his post that you don't need the best lens to take enjoyable pictures and shared example photos from kit lenses. I hope this example and Schrackman's Canonet tells new photographers that they don't need the best digital camera to enjoy photography.....an old film SLR goes a long way.

Thanks for reading.

[schrackman]

These are wonderful, Eric. I am really beginning to appreciate the quality of these Canon oldies. I especially like the stepping stone picture!

As for the yellow cast, I got that too on my indoor shots with the Canonet. Have to read the manual a bit more to figure out why that is and what, if anything, I can do about it. The great thing about the digital age is that even if a print turns out not to our liking all we need to do is scan the negative and correct it in PS, then print from a digitial file. Ain't technology great?

Love the pictures. Let's keep them coming! I should have my b/w roll finished and processed by sometime next week.

[poker]

Thanks, Ray. It's really nice to have this camera back in my hands. I just put it in my dad's original camera bag. Fits great and nice to see it complete again.

I'm looking forward to trying out the zoom lens but it needs serious cleaning.

It's ironic. The hardcase for the zoom lens and the wide angle are suppose to protect the lens but over the years, the insulation deteriorated into a powder that is getting into the lens itself.

[poker]

As for the yellow cast, I got that too on my indoor shots with the Canonet. Have to read the manual a bit more to figure out why that is and what, if anything, I can do about it. The great thing about the digital age is that even if a print turns out not to our liking all we need to do is scan the negative and correct it in PS, then print from a digitial file. Ain't technology great?

Love the pictures. Let's keep them coming! I should have my b/w roll finished and processed by sometime next week.

Regarding the yellow cast, it might be due to how the film is handling the indoor light through my mom's curtains. We obviously don't have AWB with these cameras and film is designed for sunlight, 5000k I believe. But I still think my yellow tint shot is overexposed. I'm not sure by how much though.