u/alazu

Some recent film scans from a Philadelphian who was in Montreal last month visiting family. You've got a beautiful city.

I've got a Minolta X-570 that recently (within the past two years) had a full CLA from Garry's Camera Repair which included light seal replacement. I bought it from someone else who had no issues with the camera, and my first roll had no issues either.

However, my second roll had 4 or 5 photos with this sort of white vertical band that you see on the left side of the photo. It's only 4 or 5 photos out of a roll of 36, and the banding is always on the left hand side but not necessarily the same spot. As you can see in these two photos, one is practically all the way to the left of the frame while the other has a gap between the white band and the left side of the photo. There's a few other photos that I could show, but they show my family's faces.

I feel like I usually see red/orange light leaks, but mine (or at least I assume they're light leaks) are white. Is there a reason for this? The light seals look perfect, clearly newly replaced and without any gaps or fraying. Is my only recourse to remove the seals and replace them myself?

A lens (MD 50mm 1.7) that I got in a bundle with a few others has an aperture that doesn't seem to make a perfect hexagon shape. It's more noticeable when stopped down and in the third picture you can see that the aperture blade in the top left of the image almost seems to have some separation between it and the other blades.

Is this a deal breaker? I'm not sure how much it would affect the photo quality/light hitting the film. I already have a MC Rokkor PF at 50mm which I love, so it's not the end of the world, but I do prefer the way that the MD looks on my X-570 (not to mention the smaller profile). I tried opening and closing the blades a bunch of times to see if it would smooth out but it didn't. I don't have any experience in lens repair.

Saw it listed by my local (online) auction house and the top bid was $35. I knew that was a wildly low price for what looked like an FE in very good condition, so I threw a $40 bid down and it held as top bid through the end of the auction. I swung by and picked it up from the auction house today and it's in really in pristine condition. Potentially could use a light seal replacement, but we'll see if it affects the first roll whenever I run that through it.

I've only ever shot Minolta cameras for 35mm, but this thing sure feels really nice. I just finished reading the manual, and it just seems like a really well built, capable camera. Excited to try it out. Lens is a Nikon series E 50mm f1.8, which from what I've read was their budget line. It's also in great condition, though.

(Excuse the bad photo from my 8 year old phone's camera)

Two photos in Philadelphia (home), one on the way to Montreal, and 3 in Montreal

Comparison shots between my FD5 and a 35 mm film camera (Minolta X-570 shooting Kodak Gold)

First roll of film (gold) through a CLA'd Minolta X-570 and I noticed a soft blue glow along the right edge of the frame of this photo (bottom edge after rotating it). I'm unsure if it's a light leak, some sort of shutter capping (although I think that's almost always black/grey, not blue), or simply some bizarre lens flare from the bright sunset light coming through. Any help would be appreciated.

I'm not certain if this is allowed, but I think it's a fun comparison between the two formats. I really like how they both look.

I prefer the composition of the Olympus because I didn't have a macro lens on the film camera so I couldn't get too close to the flower.

Crazy how nice the 2 megapixel digicam from 2000 can look with the right lighting and subject. I love how soft it makes things look

I've been shooting film for a few years now and I've really enjoyed it, but I want to improve and I'm not sure how. I'm upgrading to a CLA'd Minolta X-570, so I'm hoping that my metering, exposure, and focusing improve as I learn this new camera. I feel like my composition could be better. I often find myself asking myself if the photo I'm about to take is "worth taking."

All of these photos were from a roll I had developed a few days ago (all taken in my home city of Philadelphia). I like them all just fine, but I'm looking for areas to improve upon.

Fun comparison between my FD5 and a Minolta SRT 101 shooting Kodak Gold 200 (50mm Minolta lens). The film camera is about 30 years older. Perspective is obviously a little different, it was a casual experiment.

I've been using the same three lenses on my SRT 101 for the past few years now, and they all work well. I finally pulled the trigger and purchased an X-570, and with the camera the seller included three lenses. The only problem is, they're the same three focal lengths as my three lenses. This begs the question: which lenses do I keep?

I'm including images of each of the three sets. My current lens is on the right in each image, and the new lens is on the left. Part of me is wants to keep the Minolta lenses of the 28 mm and 135 mm sets, but both new lenses open to higher apertures.

I'd really appreciate any thoughts that you all could give me.

It may go without saying, but I'm always shocked at how sharp my basic 50mm MC lens is. Taken on a city sidewalk in the cold, a photo of one of those convex safety mirrors still has pretty impressive detail even when heavily cropped. I'm sure the photo quality will suffer when I post it here, but you get the point. They were just making some great lenses over there.

First time shooting with this camera. It's kind of clunky in a fun way. I really wish it didn't use SmartMedia cards. I'd say it gets the most out of its two megapixels though. Looking forward to getting some better shots with it.

They were shot with a Minolta SRT 101