Just shot a roll with old SR7

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

bmoag - 31 Oct 2006 03:02 GMT

I just shot a roll of color negative film with a Minolta SR7 and lenses of
the same vintage (40+ years!). They all still work, not perfectly but
usably! They were my father's.
However: I was really surprised at relatively low contrast and sharpness
compared to what I am used to with contemporary cameras and lenses. Old
Minolta 50mm 1.4 and an even more ancient 100mm Minolta 3.5, but both
auto-diaphragm.
Although shot on modern film the images kind of had the look of what they
used to look like 40+ years ago.
How much is due to the truly lousy processing of local minilab variety (they
processed the film, I scanned it) and how much is due to the real technical
limits of SLR lenses of that vintage (early 1960s)?

Reply to this Message

Starlord - 31 Oct 2006 03:24 GMT

I would say the minilab is at fault, I use a 1968 Topcon Super D and even my
1954 Exa takes good shots.

Signature

The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond

Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html

>I just shot a roll of color negative film with a Minolta SR7 and lenses of
>the same vintage (40+ years!). They all still work, not perfectly but
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> (they processed the film, I scanned it) and how much is due to the real
> technical limits of SLR lenses of that vintage (early 1960s)?

Reply to this Message

Colyn - 31 Oct 2006 04:16 GMT

>I just shot a roll of color negative film with a Minolta SR7 and lenses of
>the same vintage (40+ years!). They all still work, not perfectly but
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>processed the film, I scanned it) and how much is due to the real technical
>limits of SLR lenses of that vintage (early 1960s)?

Sounds like the lab mucked up your prints. I still own and use some of
the same vintage Minolta gear and get excellent results.

-
Colyn

http://www.colyngoodson.com

Reply to this Message

Geoffrey S. Mendelson - 31 Oct 2006 07:21 GMT

> compared to what I am used to with contemporary cameras and lenses. Old
> Minolta 50mm 1.4 and an even more ancient 100mm Minolta 3.5, but both
> auto-diaphragm.

> Although shot on modern film the images kind of had the look of what they
> used to look like 40+ years ago.

> How much is due to the truly lousy processing of local minilab variety (they
> processed the film, I scanned it) and how much is due to the real technical
> limits of SLR lenses of that vintage (early 1960s)?

Most likely the lenses were not multicoated. If there was light coming into
the lens at an off angle, i.e not directly ahead, and you shot without
a lens shade, it could cause the effect you see.

The culprit in this case is probably your scanning, or under exposure
of the film. Try comparing the meter to a known good one.

Geoff.

Signature

Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 Fax ONLY: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/

Reply to this Message

Bob Hickey - 01 Nov 2006 14:42 GMT

> I just shot a roll of color negative film with a Minolta SR7 and lenses of
> the same vintage (40+ years!). They all still work, not perfectly but
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> My lenses seem to be better the older they are.

Take off a lens and shine a flash light thru the back, and if you see any
fungis or dust or discoloration, that's it. Some color films gain contrast
when they're overexposed a stop, and many old cameras have inaccurate
meters. So try another meter and compare. But SR7s are really nice heavy old
cameras and prolly worth an Ebay lens. Bob Hickey

Reply to this Message

<RJ> - 08 Nov 2006 14:16 GMT

I think you've discovered a main prob with film cameras;

"Indifferent film processing"

Reply to this Message

jeremy - 09 Nov 2006 15:31 GMT

>>I just shot a roll of color negative film with a Minolta SR7 and lenses of
>>the same vintage (40+ years!). They all still work, not perfectly but
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> "Indifferent film processing"

BUT, let me pose this question:

Was it any different back in the days before digital was introduced?
Weren't the drug store/fotomat/Clark Color Labs/grocery store processors
producing the same mediocre product that we get today?

It required a premium photofinisher to produce acceptable results--and even
then it was hit or miss because we had to rely upon THEIR judgment of what
constituted an optimal print.

That's why we used transparencies. There was no photofinisher intervention.

Perhaps the OP should consider scanning and editing his own film or trying a
roll of Kodachrome or Velvia, if he wants to see what his camera/lens is
truly capable of producing.

Reply to this Message

Jim - 12 Nov 2006 21:20 GMT

> I just shot a roll of color negative film with a Minolta SR7 and lenses
> of the same vintage (40+ years!). They all still work, not perfectly
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> (they processed the film, I scanned it) and how much is due to the real
> technical limits of SLR lenses of that vintage (early 1960s)?

My Nikon lenses from the era work just fine thank you. Others have
commented on flare caused by lack of multi-coating. Many fine
photographs were taken with uncoated lenses. Most lenses from that era
where much simpler... just a few elements. Multi coating would have
improved these lenses, but it was not absolutly necessary as it is with
today's complex multi-element zoom lenses.

I suspect bad exposure meter (most, if not all camera's from the era
exposure meters are to be treated as suspect at best), bad processing,
or some combination of the two. The SR series were fine enough cameras
that you shouldn't see a significant difference.

Signature

Jim <jen....not....home..remvdots...@....yahoo

Reply to this Message