Is 35mm Film Any Good For Landscapes?

[@justininfrance]

Why is it the Brits seem to make the best photography channel content? Maybe it is the down-to-earth, no-nonsense practical approach, and they are not so desperate to flog you stuff and become media stars. I'm subscribing and I haven't shot film for 14 years!

[@jakubszymanski8123]

Totally agree with that :) And they have so so beautiful places there.

[@KM-qd4kf]

Australians too. They get to the point & aren’t gimmicky?

[@robertmorneau4974]

@@KM-qd4kf I am so in agreement with you. American "upstarts" always start out with "Hey guys, what's happening?". So sick of it! Nick Page is the exception.

[@KM-qd4kf]

@@robertmorneau4974 always sound like they have to sell you something even if its their own raging egotistical personality. I watch videos to learn something or for pleasure, not to listen to some idiot thinking they're entertaining me. Mind you when Yanks do it well they do it it very well. Sadly it is infrequent

[@cameronkrause4712]

maybe you are just imagining things- you're completely silly aren't you?

[@Skidoo22]

Brilliant, sober presentation with zero ego. Unlike some of the other youtube photographers who's motivation appears to be money. Thank you.

[@grainydaysss]

Inspiring! I use 35mm for landscape quite a bit, thanks for the tips!

[@3farrelkeane805]

hi jason

[@Noah-lj2sg]

Yoooo

[@andrewelliott4436]

In 2006 I exhibited 4'/5' FOOT (20 sq feet) prints at Durham University - off 35mm FP3/D76. You can find details of this on the DU website. The camera was a 1950's Contaflex. Exhibition was called "Steam and Coal in County Durham."

[@JP1050x]

I visited a National Geographic brand fine art gallery recently, and the’ve started to sell huge “Peter Lik type” acrylic mounted prints from their most iconic journalistic collections. It’s amazing what a modern serious print lab can do, enlarging 35mm film images. The print gallery is truly stunning in person.

[@klausphotobaer5754]

Pretty impressed by the outcome wich again proves that film is a class of its own, no matter the format. You either love or hate how film does render colour and texture. For me personally it emphasis my love for film. Great video and great shot ! 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Klaus, I also like the way film looks regardless of any technical drawbacks compared to digital. I find the latter too smooth and don't enjoy trying to make it look like film.

[@dirtywater5336]

I was surprised just how clear it was in the very large print. When you said "only when you start poking your nose into it", that reminded me of something a photographer friend of mine in the UK once told me; "If people insist on examining the picture's grain instead of its content, they are missing the point of the photograph"

[@SteveONions]

Very true but sadly that’s how people Judge images today, sharpness and lack of noise have replaced composition and mood as the most important attributes of a picture. I enjoy using a variety of cameras and film to suit the subject whether that be a a Holga or large format, ultimately I want to impress both myself and non-photographers.

[@dirtywater5336]

I suppose that's because back in the film days, it was just accepted that grain was there and so everyone just looked past it to the image itself. We are spoiled these days with the image quality coming out of digital cameras. Fifty years from now I see photogrpahers arguing about the image quality of our 200 megapixel cameras. Some things will never change, I'm afraid

[@jrosedds42]

I'm not sure what took me so long to find your channel but I'm sure glad I did! Practical, to the point, and makes me want to shoot and print more than I do.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Joel.

[@pepeg.luthier566]

You have gotten my admiration and respect with your comments and your demonstrations. I now like you and will keep watching your videos.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Pepe.

[@RewDowns]

Always go with the Audrey Hepburn! ;)

[@davymike761]

This is how a review is done! Absolutely wonderful!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Davy.

[@whitecurtis225]

Thank you for another inspirational video. And proof it's not the camera but the person behind it. Truly the best

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Curtis.

[@kameleddinetaibi6797]

amazing and yes of course film is a thing of art you can't replace or mimic it and of course the glasses play an enormous role as well and thank you sir

[@y34r]

amazing photo steve, even i'm still trying to get back to film photography again and will probably shoot only portrait styles but your video is very educational!

[@Rocking_J_Studio]

As a film shooter, I really enjoy your videos, but especially this one. I too shoot everything from 35mm up through 4x5, but I tend to travel as light as possible when trekking to sites which often times means 35mm. I've never had any problems enlarging images to 16x20 or even 20x24, but I've never gone to a 30x40 using 35mm. I have had 30x40s printed from 6x7 negatives and they're tack sharp! Very nice video! I look forward to watching Robin Whalley's video on sharpening as well. Thanks for providing that link!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks John, I too make large prints from 120 and 4x5 but I was curious about 35mm as I've only gone to A2 previously. I remember a friend having a 40" print made some 30 years ago from Kodak 1000 negative film and even though it was awash with grain it looked terrific.

[@scholzdigital]

Awesome! Answered all my questions. Can’t wait for the black and white edition :)

[@relaques666]

I honestly love your approach and all the videos that you put out. They are extremely interesting and helpful. I shoot film and your videos are a gold mine!

[@SteveONions]

Thank you Klás :)

[@LarryManiccia]

Very good test Steve. Thoroughly enjoyed seeing the complete workflow start to finish all the way through to the print. Very impressive prints for 35mm film. Keep up the good work!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Larry.

[@buyaport]

Thanks for this very interesting experiment! One short note: You are absolutely right about 2400 dpi being the native resolution of the Epson scanner. If you choose a higher resolution the scanner has to sort of construct the extra pixels. This can be useful though, if you want to print larger than A4 with your Epson scan. Because if you enlarge the 2400 dpi scan more than A4 you might start to see the pixels, but with a higher resolution (like 4800 dpi) you don't, simply because the pixels are smaller. Of course you don't see more details, but you don't see pixels.

[@SteveONions]

You are right that more pixels allows a bigger print but I prefer to resize in photoshop to keep my original scans as small as possible. I don’t let Lightroom scale the image in the print module if I’m going above A3.

[@ArguelloFlores]

Hi Steve, Thank you for sharing your work flow. What we like in photographs is a bit subjective, sometimes colour, noise/grain, darkness, etc. But you get what you wanted with the film camera. After using only 2 primes, my first zoom was Tamron 28-105. That lens opened huge opportunities when traveling. It was a nice to see your journey.

[@SteveONions]

I’ve got a 28-105 Nikkor which is a lovely lens and covers most situations 👍

[@carlmorrow1]

Great video Steve, amazing results from a £100 camera and lens. Proof that it takes skill to make a good print, not just the latest gear.

[@SteveONions]

Thank you Carl.

[@myoung48281]

It's been years now, but Galen Rowell, 35mm photographer with beautiful images, and large ones at that. There is an esthetic attached to slightly softer imagery with grain that defines it's own genre, and voila.

[@SteveONions]

Very true Mark, not everything has to be sharp and detailed.

[@suheylkarakaya4238]

marvellous, marvellous, marvellous; answered all of my problems. I'm shooting on film, only problem that I had was printing. Now that you've solved it, I can continue :))

[@SteveONions]

Glad you liked it 😀

[@Blue_Newt_01]

Wow. That large print is incredible. Love the quality of the film look. It’s almost like a water color painting.

[@stephenlumsden280]

Thx, was thinking of doing some fomapan 100 landscapes with my contax ii and primes and this has encouraged me to go abead

[@greenbrightly]

This is excellent Steve thanks. Great video. I would love to see the image with black and white film and prime lenses as you suggest.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Neil, I have done another video but I’m not sure if I am entirely happy with it.

[@ScottymanPhoto]

I seldom watch videos twice, but I had to make an exception on this one. It’s both entertaining and informative. Thanks again, Steve! I don’t believe I’ve ever commented on a video twice 🤔

[@SteveONions]

Thanks thanks 😀

[@ScottymanPhoto]

Steve, fantastic video! Thank you so much for your time!

[@SteveONions]

You’re welcome 😊

[@carltanner9065]

Hi Steve, great video :) I've just shot my first roll of 35mm for the first time in 27 years...yeah, it's been that long!!! Been looking at scanning my negatives, so I'll probably invest in a dedicated 35mm film scanner, as well as a flatbed, since I'm also interested in medium and large format film photography as well. It's good to watch your videos as I've picked up quite a bit about the process of film photography as it stands in this digital age. It may not be as common as it once was, especially on a commercial basis, but I doubt film will ever go away. At least, I hope not. Too much fun :) Plus, it's always great to watch videos such as yours even if it's also for the pleasure of watching someone doing something that they love to do. When all is said and done, none of us would be doing it if we didn't enjoy doing it, shooting either digital or film. Why not enjoy the best of both worlds :)

[@SteveONions]

Hi Carl. Glad you are enjoying film again, there is so much to chose from and plenty of excellent second hand equipment available.

[@randallstewart175]

I would love to see this scene shot on Ilford Pan F with a good Nikon prime lens, then (wet) enlarged to 16 x 20 inches. Most people would not believe what quality to can get out of a perfectly shot and developed 35mm negative. Many years ago, I temporarily joined the sub-group shooting 35mm landscapes like this on Kodak Technical Pan Film (long discontinued), yielding an almost grainless 16x20 inch print. After that, I switched up to 6x7cm medium format - same result with none of the stress.

[@SteveONions]

Keep watching Randall as there is an upcoming video made with a Nikon prime and slow. &W film.

[@jsdhesmith2011]

Randall Stewart should I skip 35mm and go strait to Medium Format? I own a couple 35mm film cameras, I shoot landscapes with but just started to scan my own images. My next goal is to make prints, A2 size if I can. I ask about jumping to medium format because I don’t have a camera yet. I want to make serious landscape pictures for my walls but I don’t want to waste time in 35mm if Medium format will be easier. I also shoot digital but I’m tired of going out and shooting with no sense of direction, rather shooting just for the fun of it.

[@JoeUrbanYYC]

I was just wondering this exact question as I was debating taking my F100 or F80 out for some pre-dawn shots of the Rockies. You answered all of my questions with the A2 and the even larger print was a welcome and unexpected surprise! Great video.

[@SteveONions]

Glad you liked it 👍

[@RobinWhalley]

Great video Steve. You've now got me wondering how large I can print some of my 35mm negs from the XPan. I may bring that with me for our next outing. Thanks also for mentioning my sharpning videos.

[@SteveONions]

No problem Robin. I imagine the Xpan could easily go bigger thanks to the extra size and super sharp lenses.

[@DanDorland]

Fantastic video! 4:08 I also own an N80 and its matrix meter has never let me down! Nikon really hit a home run with that camera.

[@SteveONions]

It’s probably my favourite Nikon SLR.

[@philipculbertson55]

I'm amazed at the quality of the 30 X 40, at least as best I could tell on a 13" laptop! I think you are right, the sheer size adds so much emphasis that it minimizes the grain and softness. Great video Steve.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Philip. What surprised me was just how smooth the image was and the grain remained very subtle. It really needs prime lenses to shine though so I'll be doing a follow up including sharp B&W film.

[@charlessterba5665]

i was wondering if my recent attempts at 35mm landscape photography were in vein or not. glad to see that images good enough for larger prints are doable!

[@SteveONions]

Well worth sticking with it Charles, not all images need to be pin sharp and grain free, that would be boring.

[@photoholic6369]

Really really good and interesting video !!! I like the way your videos are turning out ! It is always very informative and very inspiring for me !! And of course , the landscape in your region is alwasy mind blowing :-)!! Thanks for sharing !!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks for watching and I'm glad you enjoy the videos.

[@CraigPrentisPhoto]

Great video Steve. That large print looked amazing from 35mm. I’m so glad I kept hold of all my film cameras while doing the constant upgrades of digital cameras for my paid work. Really enjoyed seeing your workflow from start to finish and glad you went with Audrey Hepburn in the first place.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Craig, I wish I hadn’t sold all mine off back in 2012, I ended up having to buy them all again 😕

[@CraigPrentisPhoto]

That was always at the back of my mind (that I might regret it some day), so I kept hold of the old cameras/lenses. Just on another point, your vlogging cameras - do you use the Yi4K+ for the outside vlogging bits and the G80 for the static studio stuff. Looking to possibly go lighter/simpler set up with a GoPro-type camera. I tried a cheap, knock off GoPro but the footage was unusable and it went back so I expect it's a case of you get what you pay for.

[@SteveONions]

I’ve moved over to the Yi 4K+ for most external shots now Craig but I also carry a Panasonic G80 to give me extra zoom and also for static shots to set the scene. The Yi has an excellent 4K output and sufficient stabilisation to do away with the gimbal and it has the benefit of in built fisheye removal unlike my previous GoPro. Audio is the weak point, the inbuilt Mic is dreadful so I hook it up to a Rode Videomicro. I have a strange issue with audio/video sync but correct this in Premier Pro later. I got the Yi for £18O on Amazon complete with the excellent waterproof case and I’m very pleased with the results overall.

[@CraigPrentisPhoto]

That’s good to know. I’ve seen a few others using the Yi and the footage looks good. I know the audio is a weak point on these GoPro type cameras but I’d be recording to an audio recorder and syncing in post anyway. Thanks for your views Steve, much appreciated.

[@johnbentley1056]

Loved the video Steve. I haven't shot film for along time but always loved its tactile nature. I remember doing a couple of 40 inch prints using Kodachrome 25 and got acceptable results. Interesting when I used 6x 6 slide film I never printed anything large. Great work.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks John. With modern scanning it is possible to bring to life very old images. I’m surprised at how good films of past were.

[@thisis5123]

I remember watching this 5 months ago when I had just ordered the first film camera I’d ever owned of any kind. I’ve been shooting digital and have been a die hard for the last 5 years. Shooting at least 5-10 images a day usually bare minimum. But if you take an average it’s like 100 photos every single day. I’ve got over 200,000 exposures in Lightroom over 5 years if my math is right. Anyways, I’m loving the film so much. I’ve made prints up to 17x25 with my canon printer. I scan with a light box, and backup dslr (5D IV) I have permanently setup with remote shutter release, mounted to a 90 degree tripod, set to minimum focus distance on my 1:1 macro lens. I can easily focus all the way down to the grain and well beyond even with Velvia 50. The main thing I’m liking now is locking exposure in manual and taking multiple row panoramas of 5-10 shots and shooting a given landscape, and merging those to a panorama in photoshop. The result is basically a 4x5 or large format when merged together. When scanned with the 5D it comes out to well over 100 MP. So I get the Benefit of having a sports action 35mm body and if I need to shoot a relatively static scene, I’ll put on a more telephoto lens or step closer and capture the scene over multiple frames to effectively turn it into a large format camera thanks to the hybrid digital work flow.

[@SteveONions]

Sounds like a very good approach to using the smaller format.

[@adrielrowley]

Steve, I was looking for a presentation on one or both of the cameras you built, instead find this presentation. That's amazing it can go that big! I might stir up the water by saying I wonder if a Zuiko lens could do better? It has been shown to produce a sharper image than a Nikkor, even experienced it myself when the battery went flat on the OM2n and forced to use the teacher's Nikon for the studio assignment (the High School photography class only used Ilford). Cheers! Adriel

[@SteveONions]

I think the Zuiko and Nikkor primes are very close Adriel, certainly from my experience with them.

[@ducatitastic]

Great video yet again Steve, that £15 30x40 looks the business.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Michael. They also do it in a matte finish now which should save a lot of pain when trying to keep reflections off the video recording 🙂

[@skyreadersociety6183]

Wales is just phenomenal, makes me want to go there.

[@kiwicit0]

Fabulous content, again. I just love to get a glimpse of landscape photography done in such a variety of technology. You made a comment regarding that some images were not the tonal rendition you would have liked. I wondered what you meant. Perhaps a video on colour theory in a future video?

[@SteveONions]

Hi Michael. As with all mediums, including digital the camera/film determine the initial colour palette and even though I was pleased with the Provia it wasn't true to the colours seen that morning. Often this is a good thing, I like how Velvia 50 turns grey mornings into purple tinged masterpieces but I also want choice so I will probably shoot this locations with a mix of films next time - Provia, Velvia 100 and Velvia 50. Although post processing can work wonders I find the more I mess with colour balance the more unnatural the image looks.

[@kiwicit0]

I love your work. Very inspiring the knowledge you have...it keeps me feeling very humble!

[@timscanlanphotography]

Hi Steve. Cracking video. I must admit I don't miss using 35mm film but it's great to see you making the most of this medium. The Mawddach estuary never disappoints does it? Love the Audrey Hepburn reference ! I'm as shallow as a puddle so it's always Marilyn for me ! The final image you chose is outstanding and easily bears comparison with the digital image. Really enjoyed the video Steve. Many thanks for sharing.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Tim. I often overlook 35mm in favour of my beloved 6x6 but it still has its place.

[@paultaylorphotography9499]

Just getting the bug for film again. Back in the day I shot weddings in colour and sports in mono. I want to put more film through my old kit the digital shots are fine, but the look and fun of film can't be underestimated. Great channel mate.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Paul. What equipment did you use for your weddings and have you held onto it to this day?

[@paultaylorphotography9499]

Steve O'Nions started with an old Minolta x700 but used to get pestered by guests asking what makes me a pro when they have better cameras so my dad said buy a med format with WLF and no one will bother me so I did and they didn’t 📷✊️ I ended up with two etrs and an etrsi which I’ve still got I’ve also got the film bug back shot my latest vid on film now digging out my oly sp 35 📷📷📷

[@SteveONions]

Ooh, the SP 35, very nice - is it fully functioning as I believe they are quite fragile?

[@paultaylorphotography9499]

Steve O'Nions i got mine couple years ago from a vintage place fully restored great nick only used it once or twice then went back to digi bit of late I’m buzzin about film I look at pix from the oly and the contrast and grain blows me away they actually look like photographs gonna put a roll of hp5 through it next week 📷 I’m enjoying your chan mate inspirational stuff

[@scruvydom]

This is a nice video and I appreciate you taking the time to take us through your process step by step. Lovely shots too! That said, I do feel you might be doing a little bit of a disservice to the 35mm format with that Tamron super zoom... I use a plustek OpticFilm 120, which must give scans of a similar quality to your Minolta scanner, and the detail I pull from using some of my modern Nikon glass, like say the 20mm f1.8 with Provia 100 is out of this world. Even my old Nikon primes like the AF-D 35mm f2 and 50mm f1.4 have a huge amount of detail and really lovely microcontrast when stopped down. I mean super-zooms certainly have their usage, but they are never going to compete in detail and contrast with a nice prime lens. I just feel that if you're trying to show of the enlargement limits of the 35mm format, you'd want to do it with the absolute highest quality glass possible...

[@SteveONions]

Totally right Dominic, as I said from the outset it was a cheap consumer camera and lens which is why I’ll be back out with the primes for another video. I even find at A3 a cheap lens is showing its faults whereas I can go huge with a good prime despite the build up of grain (that I don’t really mind).

[@davidburn9472]

Nice one Steve, I really should get out with some of my film cameras more.

[@FranklinGervacio]

Steve, would you recommend getting the Minolta scanner you have over getting a flatbed Epson? I had no idea that such specialized scanner for 35mm even existed for home use. Thanks!

[@SteveONions]

Hi Franklin. If you are shooting a lot of 35mm then a dedicated scanner is a lot better. If you use 120 or bigger you’ll still need something like the Epson but I like to use both 😊

[@FranklinGervacio]

@@SteveONions aw man thank you so much for the speedy reply! For now I only have plans to shoot 35mm because of budget constraints, but I would love a good and fast way to scan at home that would save me money on the long run from having the lab scan it

[@JamesBellLandscapePhotography]

Great video Steve. Thanks for making this. Interesting to see how the prints came out.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks James.

[@tomaszbrys1426]

Very good topic nowadays. Great dose of information. Thanks.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Tomek.

[@MAKE_PHOTOGRAPHS_ANYWHERE]

Nice video. Film cameras are almost given away now a days. Great Deal if you are looking to do landscape on the cheap with limited shots. Steve, I am interested in how Medium Format or Large format compares to your 24mp digital. I heard it depends on the scanners but from what I tested I liked my Medium Format yashica over alot of my digital. This was 10 Years ago.

[@SteveONions]

The scanner is the critical component and I’ve found a good one produces comparable results to full frame. It is so hard to compare the two though as film always has some grain which a lot of people don’t like and digital is very clean. I find that once I reach a certain enlargement size film retains a very natural look but then again you can do a lot more to a digital shot in terms of sharpening and adding structure. It really all depends on the look you want and for me I prefer the texture of film shots. In terms of sheer detail though I’d give the nod to digital unless you start shooting large format film cameras.

[@YSoreil]

Excellent work and video. Impressive shot and print. The largest print I have done so far is 50x40cm from 6x7 Ektar. Ordered a 100x80 of the same file just now to see if I can capture any of the magic you managed to get from the larger print. It sure is wonderful how cheap some of the online printing services are.

[@SteveONions]

The cheap labs have certainly improved Jan and I was surprised at how close the colours were to my original, I half expected them to lose most of the shadow detail too but it is all there.

[@tonyb2760]

Excellent presentation and a really nice result. Thanks for sharing

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Tony.

[@kameleddinetaibi6797]

i have a question for you sir do you think medium format film stil very far in quality and density than medium format digital and what do you think about iMAX 70MM projection versus digital 4K HDR or higher thank you very much

[@SteveONions]

I’m afraid I have no experience with the technology you refer to so I couldn’t give an opinion.

[@jeffdrew625]

Handheld metering! Attaboy!! Hmmm graduated filters...I need to review. Thanks a bunch!

[@Joshbaldophotography]

Thank you Steve. Great video, very informative and useful!

[@wcoyote2276]

You shot some with Ektar 100. I am interested to know if that would have produced a better large image than the one you chose.

[@SteveONions]

I don’t think it would. Ektar is coarser than Provia and I also preferred the slide films colours here.

[@thumper5832]

I think the grain of film is an aspect of the character of an image, whereas the noise of digital is (usually) never pleasing.

[@EXERtheGamer]

I recently came to your videos and well I'm learning a lot printing photos

[@Canadiansasquatchbrewery]

Great stuff! Could you do a video on the scanners you use, especially that Minolta? I'm quite intrigued by it! Cheers!

[@SteveONions]

That’s on the roadmap, 4 scanners compared from flatbed to drum scan.

[@SteveONions]

That’s on the roadmap, 4 scanners compared from flatbed to drum scan.

[@Canadiansasquatchbrewery]

Oh! That will be fun! I cannot wait!

[@Dark_Viking]

Long awaited video. Thank you!

[@SteveONions]

More like this to come Yuriy.

[@Dark_Viking]

@@SteveONions Nice to hear this.

[@gchristopherklug]

I hadn’t seen your channel before this morning and I really liked this video. I subscribed and now I’m going to start looking at your older videos. I really like your clear explanations. I was wondering when you metered that darker bank with your Sekonic, what zone did you place it on?

[@SteveONions]

Hi Chris. I put the sandbank on Zone 5, the darkest usable shadows fell on zone 3 and the sky was about zone 8 hence the use of a 2 stop grad filter.

[@gchristopherklug]

Steve O'Nions you were shooting Provia, which has 5-stop range, right? I haven’t shot slide film in a while.

[@SteveONions]

I’d say 5 stops is a reasonable assessment for a typical flatbed scan.

[@gchristopherklug]

Steve O'Nions Sorry, I wasn’t clear with my question. You said the sky was zone 8 and the darkest shadows were zone 3; that’s six stops. My memory of slide film was that one should try to work within a five-stop range when metering. So, when you said that you were using a grad ND filter to bring down the sky, I assumed you were trying to bring down the sky to get within the useable range.

[@SteveONions]

Hi Chris. I could have used a 1 stop grad filter and still kept within the tolerance of the film but as the sky was brightening all the time I used 2 stops. This left the sky with plenty of detail.

[@Raychristofer]

Good job on this comparison sir. I shoot medium format and 35mm and micro four thirds and it's great to see actual tests of the differences . Believe me I know the amount of time it takes to shoot and edit something like this. Respect

[@SteveONions]

Thank you and as a fellow micro 43 shooter I’m also fascinated by how the 35mm and 120 formats compare. Whilst m43 is cleaner and sharper it does need careful work at A2 and above if it is to avoid a harsh look. Film degrades more gracefully.

[@Raychristofer]

@@SteveONions you got that right, I would almost wager that black and white film doesn't really degrade to me it might even improve with enlarging because the grain still looks natural and organic. But those pixels aren't pretty LOL. when I have time I'll definitely check out some of your other comparisons but honestly medium format for Landscapes I'm really loving it. I did a very thorough review comparing the rolleiflex to the rolleicord on my channel you're more than welcome to check it out if you like.

[@SteveONions]

I’ll checkout your video later. Like you I find medium format ideal for landscapes, as did Ansel Adams.

[@Raychristofer]

I was gonna say dont forget our boy Clyde Butcher but he uses large format now and prints super huge lol

[@SteveONions]

I love Clyde’s work, a real darkroom master. Also loved the Rollei comparison and didn’t realise the later Rolleicords had a fresnel. My Minolta Autocord is a bit dim but wonderful to use.

[@jonford4785]

Just subscribed (just noticed i was number 5000!) and i am looking at getting back into film photography with my Mamiyaflex C2. I have some single exposure backs to use with it that i am excited about experimenting with, with film and paper negs. Really enjoyed this video and looking forward to watching more.

[@eltinjones4542]

Very impressive - would love to try it. Have the cameras and lenses but no scanners unfortunately!

[@SteveONions]

Most labs will do a hi-res scan Eltin or for the best quality you could try Tim Parkin and have a drum scan made.

[@polArtBear1]

Hello Steve. Great video. really interesting. One thing I am curious about is your statement at 6.23 when you mention the real resolution of the epson 700 scanner to be 2400. How do you know that? The official specs for the v700 are 6400dpi, no?

[@SteveONions]

It’s all marketing speak sadly. My own (and many others) tests show no improvement above 2400. Same for most scanners except top notch Coolscans and Minoltas that published honest figures. That said, 2400dpi from a 120 negative is very impressive and makes for superb A2 prints - bigger if it is a good original neg or slide.

[@polArtBear1]

Thanks Steve, that's interesting. I've only started scanning my negs recently (just picked up 35mm again after 20 years) and have been using an epson v100 I just happened to own for everyday scanning tasks (marketed at 3200dpi). Naturally I was planning on upgrading to a V550 or 600 but now I'm not so sure the difference in quality as stated in the specs can be trusted. I'm limited to 35mm negs and slides of course but maybe I should look at a Minolta instead if I can get my hands on one.

[@SteveONions]

The Plustek and Reflecta models are pretty good with around 3500dpi true resolution. I also use a Crystalscan 7200 that is a step up from the v700 Epson. Watch out with old scanners as most of them are unserviceable if they break, you will be left with a paperweight!

[@polArtBear1]

Thanks for taking the time to answer. Keep up the good work. All the best from Switzerland.

[@c.augustin]

I'm trying to go the other way - using higher ISO film stock to get more (and visible) grain with my 35 mm camera. Not there yet; it requires to look for other "qualities" in the end result than resolution and detail, but this is exactly what makes it a good exercise. Good video, and this Minolta scanner does a good job!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Christian. I also like a grainy look especially for mist and fog.

[@ThatGamingGuyfromthe70s]

Great video Steve and a stunning result.

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Jon.

[@ericsaxton6032]

Wow, what a timely video. I have been thinking of going back to 35mm because my 6x7 kit is so heavy and hard to carry. I’ve been wondering about doing this exact experiment. I really appreciate that you did it. I will be how will my 35mm hear on the next outing. I have Nikon and Olympus primes. I’m trying to figure out which is sharper. Great job on the video!!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Eric. I’ve also shot Olympus in the past and have super sharp 30” prints on Portra 400 from the 100mm 2.8. I will definitely be using my Nikon primes on the next outing.

[@Jakub0107]

Great film! But I have a question to you Steve: What scanner for 35mm do you recommend? I saw that Minolta here but is there any other good choice? I make analog photography but I'm stick with labor scans of 3000x2000px and sometimes it's really not to much..

[@SteveONions]

Hi Jakub. You really need a dedicated scanner like the Minolta range or Nikon Coolscan. I used a Coolscan V for many years and it is excellent. There are a few modern scanners still available new such as from Reflecta but I have no experience with them. There really is a big difference between what a dedicated film scanner can do compared to a flatbed, especially with 35mm film.

[@Jakub0107]

@@SteveONions - thank you for the advice! It will be very usefull.

[@paulcrawley7321]

Great video Steve and a great image. I have just bought a Nikon FE as I have a few manual focus lenses which I use on my DSLR but wanted to try film after watching your channel. I am about to start a degree course in photography at the ripe old age of 51 and the course has B&W film in it's curriculum. Do you have any suggestions/recommendations as to the best or the best in certain situations as it seems to be making a come back, so the best choice is getting harder. Future vid perhaps ;)

[@SteveONions]

Hi Paul. If you are starting out in B&W then you would be hard pressed to beat something like HP5+. Most 400 speed B&W films have less contrast than slower ones and are more forgiving in general, not to mention they allow easier handholding. I'd also get used to one developer before trying others, perhaps ID-11 or HC-110.

[@paulcrawley7321]

@@SteveONions Thanks Steve.

[@geekmas7854]

Thanks for your videos. My english isn't good but I'm learning anyway due visual clear content that makes more easy to understand.

[@SteveONions]

Glad you liked it 😊

[@gazkelley]

Great video Steve. I personally shoot digital for many reasons. Convenience and ease being a the forefront. But shooting film is fascinating and I really enjoy your videos using it. That location looked fantastic, and quite familiar. Was it the Panorama Walk or New Precipice? (Assuming I'm in the right area of course)... Keep up the great work pal. PS, James Popsys recently made a great video regarding print sizes. The key factor being viewing distance as you mentioned yourself :)

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Gareth, the location is indeed the Panorama, I find the Precipice walks are just too far down the Estuary to give a good shot (lovely to walk though).

[@nickbedford]

Great video Steve and I think what's apparent is how beautiful film is by default, regardless of absolute detail and sharpness levels. I would be interested to see how a fine-grained slide film with modern, high end glass such as a Sigma ART lens on an F6 or a Leica / Voigtländer Ultron lens on a Leica film body would fare when subsequently scanned with a high resolution camera such as the Nikon D850 or Sony equivalent. I scanned a friend's grandfather's 50-60 year old Kodachromes on my Nikon D810 and they were simply stunning. I'd guess at least 24 megapixels of resolution and very fine grain within the 36mp raw file. We printed it at A3 and it was as if the image had been shot on a medium format Kodak Portra film. We're talking about 35mm Kodakchrome that was decades old!

[@SteveONions]

You can make some wonderful blow ups from old slides and negs Nick and I also want to experiment using the D610 and a macro lens. I’ll be doing another video with primes and B&W film to see how much better it could look.

[@BarryWardPhoto]

Brilliant video Steve, that large print looked amazing!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Barry.

[@paulcomptonpdphotography]

What a nice print and a great size

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Paul.

[@kevinflynn6306]

A good episode Steve it has been a long time since I did much film 35, but I remember making 16X20 B&W prints in my darkroom that were very good, I used to shoot Plus X developed in D76 1 to 1 and the results were amazing. I was out yesterday with my Bronica and after walking for an hour or so I was quite tired from the weight of the camera alone. The smaller format(if you are careful) can be very satisfying. I used 35mm Nikons at work (film) and shot thousands of rolls that were used for evidence from crime scenes, so they had to be good, sometimes the prints were huge so as to see small details. I think you are correct in saying the prime lenses are better overall. Once again very informative and enjoyable video Kevin PS did you get to try your new tank yet?

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Kevin and I understand your pain (literally) regarding the weight of the Bronica. I took it for an 8 mile walk last week and it does take the fun out of photography after a while. I'll do some more work with the 35mm and primes lenses soon, B&W this time methinks. I finally got round to trying out the SP-445 last week and used HC-110 5ml/1L as you suggested. The HP5+ shot came out really well, very even and smooth - easy to work with in post processing. I was also impressed with the tank itself although I did use a couple of elastic bands to make sure the lid didn't come off during the inversion cycle.

[@thomasbernier2342]

Your videos are just magic Steve ! Been all night on your channel. I've shot 35mm in Vietnam last summer, and i made an 8X12 print that didn't look quite sharp or well define. Does the sharpening in post-process affect that much the final printing result ?

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Thomas. The amount of sharpening you apply depends on not only the quality of the original image but also the scanner. If you have a dedicated 35mm scanner or get a drum scan done then less sharpening is necessary. That said I always push up the sharpening if I am making a print as it is surprising how far you can go before it shows in the final product. Have a go at really oversharpening (it should look terrible at 100% on the screen) and see how a print turns out.

[@terrywbreedlove]

I shoot 35mm and 6x6 and 4x5 For landscapes my 6x6 really has replaced my 35mm. The 4x5 is very particular assignments but the 6x6 is the do anything camera. 35mm and TRI-X film are my favorite street combinations. Having said that with a good fine grain film a good tripod and good sharp lens 35mm can make some gorgeous landscape prints.

[@SteveONions]

I also favour 6x6 Terry for most of my work but do enjoy the lack of weight 35mm brings for longer walks. I also think sharpness is more important than grain/noise (but composition trumps the lot by a huge margin).

[@michaels7889]

This is very interesting. After a few years using high end digital cameras I am now scanning much of my 50 year photo archive using an Epson 850. The originals were printed from time to time for specialist exhibitions and proved very acceptable. But the scans seem to me very rough. I have been using 4800 to get some pixels but the grain levels seem far greater than from those earlier prints. In the past I used mostly Provia100 but also Kodachrome and Agfachrome Professional. The Agfa proves the worst, with a blotchy kind of grain and I am not sure whether this is the fault of the scanner. I doubt that would be improved with a specifically slide scanner (the Minolta is no longer on the market though there are equivalents)? However, what you showed was in a way reassuring. I thought that my camera of the time might have been inferior - Olympus OM1 with Olympus lenses. Modern digital sensors would obviously have responded better to their quality than the film did. Like Saurat I like your presentation, thoroughly professional and not an ego trip!

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Michael. Digital reproduction from film (especially negative materials) is considerably more coarse than darkroom enlargements. It’s also true that digital techniques can make film images very sharp and detailed too. I prefer optical enlargements for most print sizes but once above a certain size they can look a bit soft whereas a scan can be sharpened to compensate.

[@christopherschmidtke4752]

Thanks for this great video Steve! Very informative. Love your channel btw. Keep up the good work! :)

[@SteveONions]

Thanks Chris.

[@Ericbjohnston5150]

How about using specialized resizing software such as on1 resize? Wouldnt that give a much better enlargement?

[@SteveONions]

It could well do Eric, I took a very simple approach in this example but when I re run the process it will be very different. The biggest gain will come from the use of good prime lenses but there is also the scanning stage which ideally will be done on something like a drum scanner.

[@oldusfarticus588]

Well, yeah you can get huge enlargements no matter what type of shot it is.....just think about the finished slide and how it looks when it is projected on a decent screen. The same goes for motion pictures at the cinema, where the film in the projector was 35 mm. As for B&W, back when Technical Pan was still around, the data sheet from Kodak claimed that you could get billboard-sized enlargements from 35 mm when the film was processed in Technidol.

[@SteveONions]

It’s great fun trying things out for yourself and a black and white video will be coming.

[@benjaminfargen]

Great vid...thanks for sharing...go team film!

[@SammySantiagoIrizarry]

Congratulation Steve! Your videos are the Best!!! Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@andrewbarnum5040]

I love doing landscape photography with APS film because of the 1.85:1 ratio. All the film is now expired but still fun to shoot if your subject benefits from the wide aspect ratio. 35mm is good too but lacks the perfect aspect ratio of APS.

[@SteveONions]

Fair point Andrew.

[@dominiquepierre-nina6120]

Having this dilemma at the moment should I buy a 4X5 or a Hasselblad 6X6 for land scape or stick to my 35mm.. Thanks , Dominique

[@SteveONions]

I’d strongly recommend the 6x6 outfit Dominique as it can be used in most conditions and film handling is very straightforward. Large format is great fun but even Ansel Adams favoured the Hasselblad once he got hold of one and reckoned the quality was good enough for nearly all his needs.

[@dominiquepierre-nina6120]

ha yes actually I am having a look at a 500cm tomorrow.Thanks for the reply.@@SteveONions

[@TheLibraryCo]

hope you're able to get your hands on some of the new ektachrome for a review

[@SteveONions]

I wish they’d make it in 120 though 😕

[@robertkeck178]

Great video! You've proved what I've always suspected: The old analog equipment cant still be used for excellent images. I'm very interested in your doing a B&W video along these same lines, especially in medium format.

[@SteveONions]

Definitely going to repeat this with B&W Robert. I have made very large prints from medium format too, it could be a good comparison.

[@jamesdickson3144]

Great video Steve - on the subject of scanning, can I ask what scanner you think is best (+ affordable) for scanning 120 film..?

[@SteveONions]

Ahhh, 120 scanning James . . . .there is no ideal solution sadly, it is going to be a compromise. In an ideal world I'd say go and get an old Nikon 8000 or 9000 Coolscan as these were the benchmark for home scanning in their day. Sadly the ones that remain are very expensive and worryingly parts are hard or impossible to find. You could go for a Reflecta (or similar) that are available new but still pricey at around £1800. I settled many years ago on the Epson flatbed range for many reasons and although the quality doesn't match the aforementioned models it can easily produce very sharp A2 prints. The true optical resolution is around 2400 dpi and the files need a lit of sharpening but with practice very large prints can be made. You also have the option of sending off your best work for drum scanning which will deliver the absolute maximum quality from your originals.

[@jamesdickson3144]

@@SteveONions thanks Steve, on this basis I think I'll leave it for the lab to do..!

[@ramvasudev2024]

Of course 35 mm is good for landscapes! Galen Rowell used to do it all the time. Should check out his work.

[@SteveONions]

Very true Ram, one of my favourite photographers and I also agree with his lens choices such as the 70-150.

[@thevalleywalker]

Cracking episode Steve. Coincidentally I have just picked up a Canon Eos A2 film camera on Ebay and intend to do just that - shoot 35m landscape film. Your choice of location is a place that is fabulous. I drove through Barmouth on Thursday afternoon on my way back to South Wales. Wish I could have had time to get up onto the panoramic viewpoint but had spent too long on Llandanwg beach and was pushed for time. I did manage to stop on the side of the road and catch a few images of the sand patterns which looked fab. That area is somewhere I need to spend more time on my trips up north - there really are some gem locations nearby. The massive print certainly had impact on the screen and I was wondering how it might look in black & white, the shapes n pattern from the water and surrounding hills suited the mono format I reckon? Thx for sharing.

[@SteveONions]

I love the whole area around the Mawwdach estuary Alan and have also shot the sand patterns from that handy lay-by just outside Barmouth. I've only ever taken a few B&W shots from the panorama (I don't like converting colour images if I can help it) and think it would suit Winter when the skies are moody and the lighting much more dramatic. Worth me taking some HP5+ next time methinks.

[@swansong007]

One of the best things i have done in 2019 was to buy a medium format Mamiya RB67 pro SD. The 2nd best thing was to discover your channel and subscribe to it. Have a great 2020 Steve, Im looking forward to more of your content. (31/12/19.)

[@SteveONions]

Thank you 🙂

[@jamilor]

Just out of curiosity, why did you scan first with the Epson V700 and then scan the specific frame you wanted with the Minolta 5400? Why not scan your film straight with the 5400? Thanks for the video!

[@SteveONions]

The v700 is considerably quicker as it can digitise 24 frames in one run. Using the Minolta I need to swap the film strip every 6 frames which is time consuming.

[@jamilor]

@@SteveONions I appreciate the reply!

[@Erumesson]

Steve, thank you very much for this video. I've been asking the same question about how big can prints from 35mm slide film go. Maybe the Velvia 50 would give better details and smaller grain, but the increased contrast could complicate things. Based on the surprisingly good results of this experiment, do you personally plan to use the 35mm slide film more for your landscape photography? I'm really looking for the next video testing the B&W film and big prints.

[@SteveONions]

I will certainly consider 35mm more favourably in future although medium format remains my go to system. If I want to obtain better results with slide film I’ll need to consider drum scanning as the shadows are hard to recover even with my excellent Minolta. Colour negative is a good way to go for home scanning as is B&W but lenses are even more important so I’ll be packing the primes on the next trip.

[@jasonjonesphotography610]

Hi Steve can you tell me where you had the very large printed do you have a link? Thanks

[@SteveONions]

Hi Jason. I had it made by Truprint as they allowed files up to 100Mpix unlike a lot of sites that limit you to 20Mb file. www.truprint.co.uk/personalised-gifts/photo-prints/poster/40x30#!/pdpview

[@jasonjonesphotography610]

@@SteveONions thanks I'll give that a go :)

[@timteevin4517]

For the panoramic look try a 6x9 med format. You probly already have. Right?

[@SteveONions]

6x9 is good Tim and I also like using the 6x12 back on the large format.

[@markharris5771]

Great video, you answered my main question regarding scan quality, which I'm always happy to take larger than I take my black white 35mm images in the darkroom. I'm happy to take my v800 images as large as my 5DIII images, which is A3+ as large as my printer will go, but my darkroom B&W I only take to 8x10. A phenomenal print at the end Steve, absolutely gorgeous and I’m looking forward to some more experimenting. On that subject, do you watch Shoot Film Like A Boss? He is another man who enjoys doing interesting experiments. As always a great video and thanks for all the expense you went to to make this one.

[@ThatGamingGuyfromthe70s]

I was going to ask about print size from darkroom printing. I have started wet printing at home recently and i find 35mm b&w to be good upto A4, i love the look and process but any larger and they dont hold up well. It seems digital prints from film can go larger showing more sharpness/details. I initially thought it was my darkroom equpiment and shoddy technique, whilst this still may be the case it reinforces my first thoughts and has re-evaluated my expectations for darkroom prints. I think shooting digital has spoilt me somewhat with the ease at which larger prints can be achieved.

[@markharris5771]

Jon Burtoft I have a friend who says if the neg is sharp enough, with fresh chemicals and paper he can get a 16”x20” but I haven’t done it. There’s also a natural crop because 8x10 is a different ratio than the 2x3 of the negative, Steve has far more experience than I have though. I did do some darkroom stuff with my brother in the 70s, but it was due to Steve's inspiration I went back to film and took much more interest in it.

[@SteveONions]

I used to go up to 20x24 in the darkroom Mark, even from 35mm but they didn't hold up so well - I typically settled for 16x12 in the smaller format. With the digital workflow I can retain a lot more fine detail but have to be careful not to ruin the tonality. I've not seen Shoot Film Like a Boss but will checkout his channel tonight.

[@SteveONions]

Sharpness does suffer quite quickly in the darkroom Jon unless you use a bigger negative, some of the effects can be hidden by stepping up the contrast but there are limits. What I do miss from the darkroom is the smoothness of tones, especially from the diffuser heads.

[@acidsnow5915]

what an interesting video! i love film photography and i am always happy to see video like this thanks for sharing, really enjoyed watching this :D

[@SteveONions]

You're welcome.

[@NefariousDoings]

Enjoyed this video! It's a question I've been thinking about recently and I've not used 35mm seriously for landscapes for years. It'd be interesting to have seen results velvia 50 which (as far as I'm aware) is the best for resolution. Though the differences are probably marginal. Drum scanning it would've also made an interesting crop if you just happened to have the cash to burn! Just to see how it compared when getting the very best. But then again I'm guessing the whole point was to to test the film/scanner you use normally. I was pretty amazed by that huge print though and a bit of softness did not harm for me. Anyway, great channel.

[@SteveONions]

Hi Matthew. I doubt there would be much difference with any of the Fuji slide films, I even recall reading that Provia has the smaller grain. You’re right that drum scanning would make the biggest difference, it is far less noticeable in negatives where a good home scanner can get close. I’ll be doing the test again with much better lenses and B&W film where I know I can achieve a very sharp poster print.