Filmtown: Leica IIIf and Fuji Provia 100F

I've had very good experiences using Provia 100F with both SLR and rangefinder cameras, and scanning them for digital processing. The grain is very tight and the colors and contrast are strong. I have experienced the blue cast problem, although it mainly shows up in the evening when the light is in fact blue. The only downside of shooting Provia, especially with a rangefinder, is that 100 ISO is pretty slow for indoors, available light, etc... just the things that a rangefinder is best for.

Here is a shot using Provia 100F and a Leica rangefinder (click for larger size)

A couple years ago, I was able to pick up a IIIc on ebay favorably. This one was made the year I was born, making it "special":-) I keep it loaded with B&W film and occasionally grab it for a Saturday adventure. the film primping is not quite the challenge you describe and I completely agree with the "feel" and the history of the camera. One interesting note is that it took 40 man hours to build a series III Leica. have fun, dale

I started serious photography with my father's IIIF/collapsable Summitar 50/2.0 in the 60's and later bought a 1958 M2 that I still use, with 15/35/75 Voigtlander lenses as well as a 50/2.0 Summicron. One CLA in the early 90's has seen it through 51 years and it works like new. Your photos with the IIIf are great! I haven't used slide film in longer than I can remember, but I may try it again after seeing your photos.

Thanks for the article on the IIIf. I've been the owner of a IIIc since 1968, when my dad gave me his (purchased in Germany after the war) for my 18th birthday.The entire kit consisted of the 50, 90 and 135mm lenses, filters, and everything I needed to begin my love affair with photography. Even though I have other cameras (Nikon FE, Nikon D80, and Rollei), I still love to come back to the Leica. You're right, Josh- the camera is a far cry from most of today's offerings. It is, to me, an elegant piece of vintage mechanical engineering and design( the insane film loading notwithstanding).I've had the camera refurbished once(for about $200), and it still works perfectly. One of the things I like about the camera is the portability- with the the 50mm lens collapsed, its quite compact ( I actually took it in a month-long backpacking trip- it just slid easily into the pocket of my bag). Another is the quiet shutter. It is a great camera for discreet photography. Mostly, though, the Leica is just fun to use. I don't think its entirely a bad thing to have to work for a photo once in a while-having had a digital camera for the last few years, I sometimes forget that there was a time when every frame was precious, and metering was done outside the camera! This camera will always be my sentimental favorite.I just wish that I worked as well at my age as this camera does at its age...

Rue Foyatier, Paris - 1977

After college, I came back to Batimore, where I got my first engineering job, and where I lived for four years, until 1975. Pre-Urban Redevelopment downtown Baltimore at the time seemed pretty boring to me, so I tried to get up to New York City a few times a year for picture opportunities.

On a day trip to NYC in late summer of 1973, I bought a Leica IIIc at Olden's, along with a Canon Seranar 50mm f/1.8 lens. With 2 or 3 rolls of Plus-X in my pocket, I was suddenly a Leica photographer, in the company of Cartier-Bresson and Eisenstadt.

That Leica, when I bought it, was already 33 years old, but it was a thing of beauty. Compared to my Nikon, especially with its heavy and clunky Photomic T finder, it was a featherweight, and a pleasure to carry around. For some reason, compared to an SLR, the rangefinder mechanism and all the fine knurling on the various knobs gave it a feeling of watch-like precision. It may be a guy thing, but I found myself often picking it up at odd times and playing with it - not shooting pictures, just looking through the viewfinder and rangefinder (two separate windows in the old screw-mount Leicas!) and focusing it, and dry-firing it.

The Serenar was a really excellent lens, but I had really wanted a Leica lens so as to be more "authentic." A year after buying the camera, I purchased a near-mint collapsible Summicron 50mm f/2.0. I wasn't disappointed, as this turned out the be the best lens I've ever owned prior to the digital age. Besides its amazing optical performance, it was also a better physical match for the small camera than the heavy Serenar. With the Summicron collapsed, I could slip the whole package into a coat pocket.

Most of what I took with the Leica was black & white. After several years of experience developing and printing B&W during college, I wouldn't let anyone else develop or print my negatives. During those first post-college years, my darkroom was a tiny hallway between the bathroom, bedroom, and living room in my one-bedroom apartment. There was a door to each room, so I just closed the ones to the bedroom and living room, set up a table in the hallway for my enlarger and trays, stuffed towels under the closed doors to block out stray light, and I was in business.

In 1975, I moved to NYC. I bought a M3 DS (double-stroke) in 1978 or 1979, I can't remember exactly when - I guess it's just too painful - again at my favorite little camera shop, Olden Camera, just off Herald Square. I think it was something like $350 or $380, and that included a screw-mount-to-M-mount adaptor for my 50mm Summicron. I don't think I could touch that same camera today for under a thousand dollars. Maybe I shoulda invested in Leicas instead of the stock market.

The funny thing is, as beautiful and precise and fondle-able that camera was, I just don't remember taking a whole lot of pictures with it. I don't think I have a single photo that I can put my hands on right now that I could definitely say was taken with the M3. Don't ask.

It turns out that every one of my favorite photos from that period of my life were taken with that old IIIc. I've included one of them, and here's the story behind it.

In late December 1977, my IIIc and I found ourselves in Paris. I was standing at the base of Rue Foyatier, the oft-photographed stairway that climbs up the Butte Montmartre in Paris, ending near Sacre Couer basillica, the highest point in the city. It was a soggy, overcast day, and I wanted a somber, lonely look. I waited for a person to include in the scene, and this solitary lady obliged me by starting the long, schleppy climb upward.

In 1980, I got married, and we bought our first house and started a family in short order. Photography as a passion was displaced by other priorities, and sadly, I sold all my cameras, including the Leicas, replacing them with a new 35mm P&S to keep up with the new baby.

After more than 20 years, I got back into photography in a big way several years ago, shooting all digital, all the time. But every once in a while, I still check eBay to see what Leica IIIc's are going for...

A IIIf was my first serious 35mm camera. When you get accustomed to it, it's quite an easy camera to use. I've never found it necessary to cut the long leader, although it's probably safer for the camera's innards. I still use the IIIf, as a carry-around camera (very compact with the 5-cm collapsible Elmar or the 3.5-cm Summaron) and, oddly enough, indoors with flash -- I use a Vivitar 283 on a bracket, with a diffuser. The slow synch speed (1/30 sec. on my IIIf) nicely captures the ambient light, which I like. I also find the rangefinder very effective indoors. Of course those old lenses produce what you might call a vintage effect, which you may or may not like. The vintage look certainly doesn't detract from Eisenstadt's or Cartier-Bresson's photographs, though!

from the first test roll on a LEICA IIIf, 50mm summitar lens
I bought the camera on craigslist from an antique furniture collector who had picked it up on an estate sale near PA. He said he had it for a year or two and never took it out of the box, but added that the estate he bought it from belonged to some filmmaker. Never found out who....

only issue that cropped up on the test roll was some spots, the usal suspect the shutter curtain, infact that led to a very interesting discussion here on the Photo.net rangefinder forum
http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00PPO5 it sure is a marvel of camera making.

Leica III field photo

In the first archaeological field party I personally directed (1963)--a survey of the Milford Reservoir in north-central Kansas, one of our field cameras was a Leica III. It was an equipment locker camera, and I don't remember precisely which model of the III it was, but it did have a collapsable lens. Strangely enough, I don't remember then having all that much trouble loading it. Since I do remember a Kodak Signet from the previous season as one of the most awkward cameras I've ever used, it may just be that I was basking in that "Leica" glow.

Just recently, I got a extremely "rare" Swedish military Leica from the ex-Soviet Union, that is of an undetermined model designation (née Zorkii). Loading it, despite its dubious heritage, is exactly the thrilling experience that Josh describes. Somewhere on a web site, someone claims to be able to load a LTM Leica in 30 seconds, but even by the most generous interpretation, that cannot include trimming the film leader.

Much as I like the Leicas, I'm still more of a Contax person, although my copie of that--aside from my Contax S or D-- are of equally dubious origins.

Jack sure is a cutie.

An ABLON is not necessary for triming the leader as you suggest. But the real advantage is the arrowhead end which is used to form the point on the end that fastens the film into the spool slot for the Leica film cassettes. The point has to be centered mid line on the film , the correct angle needs to be made so the cuts meet the sprocket holes in the correct place, and you have to do this in the dark with 100 feet of unprotected film hanging off the end of your bench. I can`t do it with the lights on reliably, let alone in the dark. When you make a few bad cuts and have trouble clearing the point from the spool after developing the film, you will realize it is best to do it right. I paid for the ABLON.

The pointed or arrowhead end is not on the generic templates so that is not an option either.

The camera is indeed a joy to use if you want something retro. Small, quiet, light, and goes into a large pocket. It also attracts some attention and a few questions from passerby.

I unfortunately have not had the pleasure of using a Leica before, but I am now just getting used to a rangefinder through my Yashica GSN.

Provia 100F is such an amazing film though, as a relatively poor 18-year student, I recently came across a plethora of expired Provia 100f in 35mm & 120/220. This is honestly my favorite slide film and perhaps my favorite film ever next to Tri-x 400. During the daytime the limits are endless, skateboarding, portraits, landscape, this film rules at all of these.

While I realize my meager two year involvement in photography has not been much, my recent discovery of Provia 100F dramatically altered my view of photography and pulled me into film instead of digital.

Nigel

After being digital for five years I went back to film in a big way. I loaded up a Mamiyaflex with some Fuji Provia 100F and started snapping away. On that first roll I had some good photographs (for me), and it has me hooked. I enjoy the "look" of film and will continue to use it in conjunction with the digital ease. Thanks for keeping up with this series on film, I enjoy it.

The great thing about the 111f is the way it feels in the hand and its handling in general; as has been said it is a little treasure, the perfect size and weight. The M series can't compare in this regard. Since picking up a nice 111f, in 2006, I use it almost all the time. I have a 1.5 Summarit, which contrary to legend is a very useful lens, and a collapsible summicron, as well as a 3.5 summaron and two hektors. I have taken some of my best images with this magical little friend. Of course I also use a Kodak Tourist and Signet 40, and a bunch of screw mount Pentax.

The other non-metal material in the IIIf would be the insulation materials in the flash sync circuit. But that's it. I've done my own CLA's on my IIIa, which is an even simpler camera than the IIIf. It's simple but clever.

The beam-splitter in the rangefinder is a half-silvered mirror. It literally is silvered, and as the silver tarnishes from sulfur compounds in today's smoggy air, it gets less and less reflective. As that happens, the secondary image vanishes. It's very easy to replace, I got a genuine new-old-stock Leica replacement, and it's aluminized rather than silvered, and should last for the rest of my life.

The reason that film loading didn't seem hard in 1963 was that film leader tails were longer then. It was some time around 1980 that Kodak switched to the runt leader that's now standard. Saved 2 inches of film per roll, somebody must have gotten a big bonus for that idea.

All the screwmount Leicas are wonderful "bring everywhere" cameras. I wore a IIIa with Canon 35/1.8 lens on a recent vacation to New York city, and it was just not a burden at all.

If you are a '50mm photographer', shoot silver b&w, and have adopted the Elder Esthetic (aka classic look, olde skoole), then, look no further, this is your system camera. The rest of your system will include many other 50mm lenses, including another Elmar 50, at least. Tired of the same old same old with the Elmar or cron, why just mount the Summar and suddenly, the world is new.

I may be the only person who likes the knob rewind rather than the fussy little plasticked pop-up levers on most other cameras and the little flush or deepset button on base plates (which never gets mentioned in such comparisons of rewinding). If you have problems with your fingers (as I do), the knob rewind is a blessing.

Cutting leader can be tedious. I use curved cuticle scissors and will cut as many rolls as I can bear at a sitting. Get it over with. Loading the right way isn't bad, unless you are in the field and clutching the baseplate in your teeth. Secure the leader under the slot in the takeup spool (this slot actually is a slot, unlike some flipback cameras little slit cutouts, and yes, I'm looking at you, Pentax), check to see if it is in straight, drop the casettes in, push down on them to seat them, and you're good to go.

It's a great carry everywhere camera -- but heavy for some girlie pockets -- with a collapsed 50.

I use my IIIf lots and as God and HCB intended, hyperfocus and sunny 16.

It is the un-black finish camera. Polish up that chrome! It is also God's own crumpet catcher, the cute puppy, the Jag XKE of cameras.

Re: the ABLON, while they may be overpriced for what they are, you can find them in slightly-beat, but perfectly functional, condition for around $20 U.S. You can also purchase modern knock-offs in the same price range.

After a lot of DSLR work, I am rediscovering the joy of sauntering with a comparatively small M6 and one or two lenses. Dealing with films' quirks and possibilities is a refreshing exercise, and I continue to be surprised at finding large prints (say 20x30") from 35mm more pleasing than from my Nikon D3, warts and all. This from a guy who considers everything smaller than 2 1/4" a toy format. The following was shot in Rome last month on Fuji Provia 100F (RDP III) with a 35/2 asph. Summicron.

I had a IIIc with 50mm F3,5 Elmar from 1947. I loved it and used it for about 20 years, but recently passed it on (I have an M4P) for someone else to love. Here is a shot taken with it on Neopan 400: http://www.pbase.com/mark_antony/image/62439570.jpg

In 1956, at the age of 13, I went off to school with a Leica IID that my father loaned me. He was a serious amateur, as I am now. As I recall, he said something like, "Here, you'll need a camera." He'd taught me to expose, process, and print images since I was ten, and I assumed that all fathers had dark rooms in the basement and cabinets full of Leicas and Rolleis.

So I left for school with the IID and a collapsible 50mm Elmar 3.5, worrying that I would be out-gunned by the gear carried by all the other students. Not to worry! There was a decent dark room at the school and I became one of its primary users, and my photographs were used in a wide variety of school publications.

After a couple years of using the IID, my father decided I should branch out a bit within his collection of gear, so I left the Leica at home for a semester and used his Rolleiflex 3.5. Within a few weeks I was begging for the Leica again.

Years later he gave me the IID to keep, along with a 50mm Summarit 1.5 and a 90mm Elmar. I bought a Canon copy of a Leica IIIF, complete with a couple of Canon Serenar LTM lenses, and I used those bodies as my "system" for decades. Now I shoot with an M6 and and M3, plus MF and LF -- but several times a year I go shooting with the LTMs.

While I do have the Leica template for trimming film leaders, I have never used it. Eyeballing the slice has always been sufficient. The trick is to be certain that the leading corner of the cut portion of the film is rounded off so it doesn't catch on the film gate.

pines, Cecina, Tuscany

I wanted to post a picture taken with Provia 400, just to compare... I am a fan of 400 speed films - yes I do like grain, but I also like the versatility of a 400 speed film, especially as I use medium format that has a max aperture of f.3.5. The colours, I agree, are lovely and crisp, even if a little on the cold side, which in the case of this image I prefer. Anyway, this is a straight scan of the Provia 400. I haven't yet tried it or the 100 with my new (well, old) leica (it's a 1937 IIIg), but that'll be my next experiment.

Marine, Korean War Display at Quantico, VA

What can I say? Just more fun to use.

Leica Mount 1941 CZJ 5cm F1.5 Sonnar on the Canon P, handheld at 1/15th. Kodacolor 400

for a much less frustrating vintage LTM experience, i suggest the lever-advance V and VI series canon rangefinders. in addition to having swing-open backs with conventional film loading and proper rewind cranks, these cameras are small, quiet and functional works of art designed in the bauhaus style. they are all metal and built every bit as solid as contemporary leicas; some say more so. they have an integrated viewfinder/rangefinder with adjustable magnification. prices and availability are comparable to the IIIf.

I love the color rendering of the Summitar lens - my favorite and only lens on my IIIf RD. Here's one in B&W:

Feeding The Chickadees

After trying a brick of Provia 100 I decided I would stick with that film, almost exclusively, and learn it inside-out. While I never really disliked Velvia, the colours (as others have mentioned) seem a bit too much for my taste.

Funny thing is, since I started using a DSLR, about 2 years ago, and got up to speed with computer editing software, I seem to punch-up the colours until I get velvia-like results. I think I have been doing this just because I can...and I am now getting over it (or so I would like to think) ;~))

I still shoot 35mm kit with Provia 100 but I also enjoy the excitement that comes along with trying a new film...haven't found the "digital equivalent" for that feeling yet. So, lately I have been shooting Provia 400 and Astia as well as the Kodak and Ilford chromogenic B&W films.

I enjoyed your article Josh. It prompted me to drag-out my binders and look over all my E6 stuff. Keep them coming!

The photo was shot on Provia 100 - pushed one stop.

Cheers! Jay

Hello Josh.

I would be very interested in a Filmtown on the Agfa Clack and what contemporary film(s) would be a good match.

Friends of my family came out to Australia, after the war, and I have ended up with their Clack. Its simplicity baffles me sometimes!

Josh: the first Leica I ever used was my Dad's model II, with f/3.5 Elmar. I was around age 12 or 13 when I started using it. Later I used his IIIf for several years. I no longer have either, but I have another II, with nickel Elmar; and a pair of IIIcs. I do use the IIIcs, along with the Leica M cameras I mostly use today. In fact the IIIcs will go with me to France next month. They are small and light, and make good walkaround cameras with my tiny Cosina-Voigtlander lenses. I use the 25mm, the 28mm black "pancake" Color-Skopar; and the 35mm f/2.5; all with Cosina accessory finders. I also use the 50mm collapsible Summicron.

I find it is only necessary to trim away seven or eight sprocket holes when preparing film for a thread-mount Leica. That's been enough to prevent a misload. Eight sprocket holes equals the length of one frame, and that seems to be enough.

I use both Velvia and Provia 100F. I do like strong, punchy color. After all, a photo is an interpretation of reality; an abstraction. So why worry about colors being "natural," unless we are taking portraits? But I've also experimented with using Astia for contrasty outdoor shots. I think it may have a bit more latitude in that situation. And in direct sunlight, the color still seems vibrant enough. What do you think?

I think my reason for buying a used IIIf (actually a IIIb transformed into a IIIf) was part romantic (Leica history; HCB and others used them; also it was a classic camera of its time) and part practical (desire for a virtually indestructable camera body, one that could take modern LTM type lenses).

Most of my photographic equipment is manual exposure or simply manual with external lightmetering. Using a manual M6 camera, I could focus more rapidly than a friend using an autofocus camera (at the time, c1995), although no doubt this would not be possible today. In any case, much of my photography is slower and methodical, trying to create compositions as much as responding to them. The IIIf, for all its inconveniences (poor VF, double window for RF adjustment, slightly difficult to manipulate shutter speeds, film loading, virtually impossible to calibrate shutter speed with a Calumet shutter tester, etc.) is a decent camera.

Most of my rapid shooting is done with a more modern silent camera, like the Mamiya 6, with Tri-X or HP5, but I often will put a slower film in the IIIf (Pan-F, Acros 100, T-Max 100) and shoot more slowly with it. Accessory viewfinders and Cosina Voigtlander lenses are an excellent match and allow fine results. I don't have much faith in the older Leica lenses. Have tried an uncoated Elmar 50 and the rendition is at best fair, but maybe I have a particularly poor lens.

The use of the Leica film cutting template is I think unnecessary - you can simply eyeball the form and cut the film leader quickly, with a pair of scissors.

july 4 parade in Roundrock, TX

Provia is a great film. It's almost as saturated as Velvia. Great colors and sharpness.

I still have no idea why people cut the film before loading. I never had a problem. Is there some advantage or does it make people feel special?

I see excellent scans on this page. Where did you have them made, or what scanner did you use? I have had bad (dark, lifeless) results getting slide film scanned: is it because the places I went to used a minilab scanner that is optimized for negatives? Would it help to expose more than the box sensitivity suggests?

Ahh - what a delightful collection of memories.

My first Leica was a III with 3.5 Elmar I bought in 1983 for GBP 80. I still have that camera and take it out to shoot when I feel the need for a nostalgia top-up. Normally it is loaded with monochrome 400 ASA films, but last week I began my first colour reversal film - Kodachrome 64. I suspect in its early life (mid 1930's) most Leica photos were taken without the benefit of an electronic exposure measuring aid. For exposure measurement when I decide not to guess, or use the F/16 - ASA speed rule, I use a German exposure meter - the Gossen Profisix system unit - as big as many cameras these days.

I am not expecting the Kodachrome results to match those from my M6 (itself a 24 year old), but I am expecting them to show some character.

Personally the abiding memory of this camera is its compact size with the collapsible lens, making it easily coat pocketable. Oh yes and the viewfinder the size of a keyhole. Personally I have never found the Model III particularly hard to load; I have also found there is no need to replicate the film tongue shape accurately, as long as the first inch of so is of a width to fit the take-up spool.

As evidence that I am not a Luddite digital hater, I am using digital for most pictures, with an EOS 5D and the Leica inspired Canon G9 (see the Canon website). I really miss the instant confirmation of image that digital gives when I shoot film.

Jamie's blue eyes

Using Leica with Fuji Provia 100 F is great idea. I tried Leica M6 with Kodak Ektar 100 and Elitechrome slide film. Now looking at photos made with the Provia 100F I found the similarities to Ektar 100. They both give the blue cast and bluish - purple skin tonalities. Personally, I like a lot these casts. So I will have to try Provia 100 F for the portraits.

Now you got me to try Provia 100F - and slide film in general - for the very first time. I've only shot BW and a bit of negative color up until now; we'll see how this goes. As I understand, the exposure latitude is just about nil with slide film so if nothing else it'll be a good test of my metering skills.

The intrepid men in their flying machine - Leica IIIa with Kodak E100 GX film

I have had my father's Leica IIIa which he bought in 1935/36, since my 16th birthday, more than 45 years ago. I use it regularly if infrequently, now, as well as his 1958 M3, and my own R4. But most of my photography is through a DSLR Canon 50D, with and without leica lenses. In February I ran a couple of rolls of Kodak E100 GX slide film through the IIIa, using an equally antiquated light meter - here's one of those images: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=8883357 It is such a joy to hold and use such a compact piece of beautiful miniature engineering...

Provia is by far the best slide film on the market. Scans extremely well, is bold enough to make K64 look monotone, but versatile enough to take people photos. It pushes well, and is just a joy to use.

Every now and then I try Velvia or 100VS or something a bit more punchy and I always regret it. I always had problems with Velvia, and it simply cannot be used in high contrast situations while Provia does reasonably well when the need arises. The other thing with Provia, is it seems to have less processing issues. I very rarely get back a roll that I think was bad processing, while Velvia and 100VS seem to make me wonder if it was the processing.

I'm glad this stuff is still readily available, I cannot really imagine a film being much better than Provia 100F for many situations.

Attachment shot with Provia by Leica M6. I like both Provia and Velvia but have settled on Astia as my general go-to transparency film. Scans beautifully.

Changing screw mount (LTM) lenses easily.

If someone mentioned this, I missed it.

Before inserting any screw mount lens, set lens to its closest distance.

That way, you are not fighting the cam that works the rangefinder.

As much as I would like to own a genuine Leica, the Russian knock-offs can be had (from eBay among other places) for a fraction of the price and essentially the same experience.

I have a FED 2 (d) and a Zorki 4, both of which have the added benefit of normal film loading and combined VF/RF. Coupled with Jupiter 8 and 12 (50mm f/2 and 35mm f/2.8).

I do use them regularly when playing tourist - the process does shape the outcome as the photos always seem different than the DSLR ones shot at the same time.

Canon A-1, 50mm f/1.4

Provia in 2004 in Copenhagen, Denmark. JR

Thanks Josh, for another great article. I've been shooting mostly in T-Max 100 , with occasional forays into sensia 100. All this on 35mm, but I just bought a Mamiya rb67 and am looking around at 120 film. I still will shoot that with mostly T-Max, I think, but for colour I was thinking of Velvia, just cause I've seen so many others writing that they use it. Does anyone know of any photo shoot-outs using slowish colour films? Btw, that picture of Jack, Beth, and the horse is really nice, it looks like Jack is uncertain about the big animal and is checking to see if Beth is concerned about it. Kurt

Scottish Daily Express Picture Editor

Josh. Picture Editor Scottish Daily Express. Leica 11 lens Hector F2.5 Year 1959/60. On the phone checking my request to ‘take a few shot in the news room’ Shoot first ask later was a bit …… The Leica 11 ,Leica 111 . Three M2s, lenses 21 to 200. All in working order. Bill Paris.

By the time I acquired a IIIf, I already had an M2 and old eyes and glasses, so my opinion of the useability of the IIIf was somewhat compromised. But it's still a jewel of a camera and capable of first class results. But I like the M2 much better to shoot with.

My first camera WAS a rangefinder though, a Konica I from my Dad and it too was a little jewel which had a collapsable non interchangeable lens and Leica like build. It's probably why I have an enduring love of rangefinders and the Konica wouldn't have existed without the Leica. These days my main camera is an M8 (can't afford the M9 and the M8 is a great IR camera).

Josh,

Enjoyed your article on the Leica lllF and Fuji Provia 100F. I will most likely go to digital this year for my commercial photography due to no processing of E-6 in Kansas City as I need faster turnaround times to clients. I remain very loyal to Provia 100F and my Mamiya RB67 for my fine art... I've been shooting with Provia now for approximately sixteen years and find the results outstanding with this film.

Since I'm new on photo.net and have never posted an image, I'll give it a try with one of my images I shot in lower Antelope Canyon using Provia 100F.

Regards!

Nice article!

Here are 2 images digitised (with a digital camera, so some degradation) from an M6 and a 28 mm on the French coast.  The colours from a Fuji RM Sensia although grainy are quite pleasant.

The M6 loading is an improvement on the III but is still quite quirky.

Here is the second image, details as in previous image.

Fuji has announced that Provia is no longer available in 220 rolls.