Author Topic: I just picked up... (Read 842486 times)

Kai-san · « **Reply #4000 on:** January 29, 2020, 08:51:38 PM »

Quote from: Francois on January 28, 2020, 10:44:12 PM

Also, it's a left hand crank... something rather rare in the world of 35mm cameras.

No, the film wind crank is on the right side, what you see on the left hand side is the rewind crank. Now a rewind crank is very rare, I don't know of any other cameras that has this feature.

Francois · « **Reply #4001 on:** January 29, 2020, 09:50:56 PM »

I don't either. I thought the film traveled in the opposite direction to the usual.

Aksel · « **Reply #4002 on:** January 31, 2020, 12:48:53 PM »

Got tempted into a MS Apoqualia-G 28/f2 II in urushi wajima black for my M4.
For someone who loves it compact, and prefers "character" over sharpness this is a winner!

hookstrapped · « **Reply #4003 on:** January 31, 2020, 01:41:11 PM »

My new flash meter -- also a regular incident and reflective light meter, but I prefer my old Gossen analog meter for that.

I tried figuring proper flash power and aperture combinations using guide numbers and distance but this is so much easier, faster, and more accurate. Simple to use -- set the film speed (and shutter speed though that doesn't much matter) and test the flash with the meter at the subject and it reads out the aperture you need to use. If balancing with ambient light, or if you want a particular depth of field, you probably have a target f-stop, so adjust the flash power / flash distance accordingly.

I love it -- a simple to use tool that does its job.

Francois · « **Reply #4004 on:** January 31, 2020, 03:10:19 PM »

I have the older version of the same meter and I must say it is indeed very good.
Over the years the only thing I find that I miss is a spot meter accessory.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4005 on:** January 31, 2020, 03:41:03 PM »

Aksel - that looks great on your beautifully aged M4 - enjoy! And I hope we see some of the results

Aksel · « **Reply #4006 on:** January 31, 2020, 05:08:43 PM »

Thank you! It was my first "proper" camera, bought as a student some time ago, sold to pay rent, and bought back just a few months back.
I just loaded it with a roll of Cinestil 800, and I really need to get around to develop some film soon so.. who knows

Aksel · « **Reply #4007 on:** January 31, 2020, 05:10:36 PM »

Quote from: Francois on January 31, 2020, 03:10:19 PM

I have the older version of the same meter and I must say it is indeed very good.
Over the years the only thing I find that I miss is a spot meter accessory.

Same here, but after a while I found the app on my phone to do pretty much the same job. Swapped it for two bottles of red and never looked back

hookstrapped · « **Reply #4008 on:** January 31, 2020, 05:26:10 PM »

Quote from: Aksel on January 31, 2020, 05:10:36 PM

Quote from: Francois on January 31, 2020, 03:10:19 PM
I have the older version of the same meter and I must say it is indeed very good.
Over the years the only thing I find that I miss is a spot meter accessory.

Same here, but after a while I found the app on my phone to do pretty much the same job. Swapped it for two bottles of red and never looked back

There's a flash meter app???

Francois · « **Reply #4009 on:** January 31, 2020, 10:21:50 PM »

I never thought the camera could be fast enough to properly meter a flash!

hookstrapped · « **Reply #4010 on:** February 01, 2020, 12:39:50 PM »

In my cursory search for "flash meter app" I found a few but they require a pricey plug-in light receiving half-dome unit that looks very vulnerable to breaking off at the base or being lost.

Francois · « **Reply #4011 on:** February 01, 2020, 02:40:00 PM »

That's pretty much what I thought.
While at first I found lightmeter apps to be a good thing, I'm now revising my position.
They all work the same way. They take a picture in a temporary folder and then read the exif data on the file. While that works fine most of the time, the reliability of the readings can be questionned when the phone produces sometimes malformed tags like my LG. When I take multiple readings of the same subject from the same angle in sequence, I can get up to a 2 stop variation.... Not good.

02Pilot · « **Reply #4012 on:** February 01, 2020, 02:53:37 PM »

FWIW, the Android LightMeter app has incident and reflected readings that seem pretty consistent (at least on my phone), and you can tweak the calibration in the settings. I do suspect that a lot of this is hardware-dependent, however. And I doubt very much that any of these will work well with a flash.

hookstrapped · « **Reply #4013 on:** February 01, 2020, 07:09:21 PM »

This article from the way back machine

http://www.jollinger.com/photo/meters/other/flash_v_ambient.html

explains that flash meters use a capacitor to store the light energy from a flash (intensity x duration) and then converts that energy to an f-stop reading. Anyway, I think that's what it said

Francois · « **Reply #4014 on:** February 01, 2020, 08:47:43 PM »

Quote from: 02Pilot on February 01, 2020, 02:53:37 PM

FWIW, the Android LightMeter app has incident and reflected readings that seem pretty consistent (at least on my phone), and you can tweak the calibration in the settings. I do suspect that a lot of this is hardware-dependent, however. And I doubt very much that any of these will work well with a flash.

That's what I also use. It was right on the money with my old Samsung but completely unusable with my LG.
So I'm trying to work on a high precision calculator instead. And the calculations are not obvious. Thank god AppInventor is not too hard...

Blaxton · « **Reply #4015 on:** February 01, 2020, 09:56:43 PM »

I just received, via an internet auction site, a Praktica MTL5 with an 135mm Praktica lens. There is an Hellios 44-2 58mm lens on it's way. I think that I will enjoy it more. It's fun to use the MTL5. The light meter in mine more-or-less works (albeit slowly) and all the mechanisms work fine. It's clunky—the shutter sounds like a cell door slamming shut—but it seems solid.

Praktica MTL5, 135mm Praktica lens, Fomapan 100, Caffenol C-L, 30 minutes, semi-stand

Lincoln, Rhode Island by William Blackstone, on Flickr

kentish cob · « **Reply #4016 on:** February 03, 2020, 04:40:37 PM »

a couple of recent additions to the library...

irv_b · « **Reply #4017 on:** February 03, 2020, 07:17:37 PM »

I bought the George Rodgers book a few years back when I stumbled across an exhibition of his in London one lunchtime. The pictures were as expected brilliant and I splashed out on the book without hesitation, I'm sure you will enjoy it.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4018 on:** February 10, 2020, 09:07:45 AM »

A replacement lens. I locked-up my 500C/M so I took it to the repair shop to free it up and was told that the shutter in the 150mm f4 Sonnar was broken. Fee to fix was £200 + 20% VAT. Or, the chap had a mint replacement for £290. Well, my broken lens had suffered a hard life with previous owners and looked as though it had been embedded with several war correspondents, so I made the switch.

The 'new' lens is mint - I mean mint in the way the Japanese have 30 or 40 year old mint cameras. I put a roll of film through it between the shop and the Underground station on the way home. I took a second roll in Oxford on Saturday. Both will go to the lab today to see what it's like.

I looked up the date code on the lens when I got home and it was manufactured in May 1960; the month after I was born. Sadly, only one of us is still in mint condition.

The replacement lens has made me realise how much I enjoy using the Blad, so I'm going to waste at least a roll a month through it and I've decided to take it on my next long haul holiday to take some proper photos, rather than being a bone-idle tourist with a digi machine. Although a small disposable digi may well fall into my luggage as a stand-by.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4019 on:** February 10, 2020, 09:09:06 AM »

100 sheets of Instax mini. Nudes and instant film just go so well together.

Francois · « **Reply #4020 on:** February 10, 2020, 02:42:59 PM »

They sure go together better than 35mm color film that you drop off to the grocery store's 1 hour minilab

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4021 on:** February 10, 2020, 05:07:44 PM »

I have a very understanding grocery store. Harrods.

Francois · « **Reply #4022 on:** February 10, 2020, 09:07:07 PM »

How very posh...

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4023 on:** February 11, 2020, 11:21:52 AM »

Posh - band less frequently visited than some of the darker corners of my camera collection.

Actually, I was asking a new pro lab if they were OK with art nude and the chap said yes - they look forward to it - it breaks up their day! Whether he was pitching me or not I don't know, but he also said that one of the technicians is an art nude shooter and he would be assigned to my account as he takes more care than usual with what they call (but I never would about my own snaps) 'fine art' nudes. I'm very happy with the tonal range in their proof print service so far, so perhaps they do pay more attention to pretentious repeat customers than walk-in holiday snap folk. If such a species still exists. They are probably largely extinct now, come to think of it.

Francois · « **Reply #4024 on:** February 11, 2020, 03:20:22 PM »

Well, some of the rich and famous still use film for holiday snaps.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4025 on:** February 14, 2020, 09:38:11 AM »

Do they use a Contax T2 or 3? I'd love one of those and I was tempted a few years ago - before the prices went silly - but I hesitated and now think it's too late. I've always liked the brand and I've had a shoot with a 645 but never owned one.

Francois · « **Reply #4026 on:** February 14, 2020, 03:20:47 PM »

I think that the Hollywood stars will go for anything with the name Contax written on it.
I personally never had any camera made under the brand. But I did use a few cameras by yashica that were made by Kyocera, just like the contaxes and their optics and ergonomics were pretty good.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4027 on:** February 20, 2020, 10:46:48 AM »

(Another) Petri Racer. I love this little 35mm camera, with it's funky design. The RF no longer works on mine, so a replacement was fully justified at £30. I intended to sell my original mint but broken Racer to somebody happy to zone focus. But they look so cute sitting together on the shelf as twins. They are both keepers now.

For those familiar with the camera, both of mine simply say RACER on the front, not Petri RACER, which to my eye, looks cluttered. One feature of the camera is the shutter button on the front of the camera, next to the lens. It looks cool and falls easily to hand, leaving the top plate with less clutter. Both of mine are the poverty 45mm f2.8 versions, but there are a few 45mm f1.8s around, appently, but I have never seen one.

hookstrapped · « **Reply #4028 on:** February 20, 2020, 11:22:13 AM »

I love my Petri Racer! Mine had a sticky rangefinder but that was easy to fix by working some oil into the pivot screw.

Green-o-Matic!

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4029 on:** February 20, 2020, 12:08:53 PM »

It is Green-o-Matic! I also have a Yellow-o-Matic Zorki 10, in case I get bored with looking at green RF patches. The Zorki 10 also looks cool to my eye, but it weighs as much as a full bottle of vodka. Perhaps that's a balancing feature for its former home market.

02Pilot · « **Reply #4030 on:** February 25, 2020, 12:36:04 AM »

Just received a package of free film offered up by someone on another (non-photography) forum. Five rolls of TriX, three rolls of Acros, and five rolls of Neopan. I've got a few more rolls of the latter around here somewhere as well. Need to figure out a project to use it on - since it's discontinued I'm sure I'll end up loving it.

Francois · « **Reply #4031 on:** February 25, 2020, 02:29:43 PM »

There isn't much that's better than free film.

Maybe mystery film in a bulk loader but that's simply my thing.

02Pilot · « **Reply #4032 on:** February 25, 2020, 03:10:58 PM »

True, it's hard to beat free.

I know nothing about Neopan 400. Anyone have any advice on shooting it? How does it do in Caffenol?

Francois · « **Reply #4033 on:** February 25, 2020, 09:13:23 PM »

I don't have any experience with the 400 version of the film either. But I did try the 100 version once and it's really good. Too bad it never really made it to the local photo shops.

EarlJam · « **Reply #4034 on:** February 26, 2020, 12:28:13 AM »

Quote from: 02Pilot on February 25, 2020, 03:10:58 PM

True, it's hard to beat free.

I know nothing about Neopan 400. Anyone have any advice on shooting it? How does it do in Caffenol?

I shot a few rolls of Neopan in 2015/16, shortly after it was discontinued; lab processed in Edwal D-76 equivalent. My impressions are:

- Relatively fine-grain for a 400-speed film
- Doesn't seem to like hard lighting/high contrast situations. With soft or indirect lighting, though, the tonality is quite pleasing.
- Doesn't seem to tolerate even modest under-exposure, in the minus 2/3 to 1 stop range. This strikes me as a bit odd for B+W negative, which is usually a bit more forgiving when I grab a quick shot and then realize I forgot to adjust for lighting.

Francois · « **Reply #4035 on:** February 26, 2020, 03:29:22 PM »

I know that most films have a real ISO that's different than the advertised box speed. Most of the time they factor in a safety margin to prevent underexposure. And also, their contrast curves can change depending on the developer used.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #4036 on:** February 26, 2020, 03:53:15 PM »

Neopan 400 in 120 was an excellent film, and much missed. This is one taken with my Rolleiflex 621 with a 3.8 Tessar - built in 1934.

I always, always used Ilford DDX for fast films like this. You might have to expose a bit more given the age of the roll.

**Just realised that as the day was dull and verging on drizzle, I had rated the roll at EI 1600.

110430_neo4_04 by Sandeha Lynch, on Flickr

02Pilot · « **Reply #4037 on:** February 26, 2020, 04:27:41 PM »

I tend to shoot all B&W at half box speed. Caffenol seems to do fine with every Kodak and Ilford emulsion I've tried it with, and it was OK with Acros when I shot a few rolls way back when, so I'm hoping it will do reasonably well with this stuff. I really should test it before I shoot up an entire roll, I suppose. Whether I do or not depends entirely on how lazy I'm feeling.

Oh, and Sandeha, I have the same Rolleiflex - mine's from 1933.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #4038 on:** February 26, 2020, 05:47:16 PM »

Quote from: 02Pilot on February 26, 2020, 04:27:41 PM

I tend to shoot all B&W at half box speed. Caffenol seems to do fine with every Kodak and Ilford emulsion I've tried it with, and it was OK with Acros when I shot a few rolls way back when, so I'm hoping it will do reasonably well with this stuff. I really should test it before I shoot up an entire roll, I suppose. Whether I do or not depends entirely on how lazy I'm feeling.

Oh, and Sandeha, I have the same Rolleiflex - mine's from 1933.

Granted it may do well in any developer, but with DDX it appears to achieve its full potential speed.

If you know it's from 1933, then I can assume you have changed the mirror. At least, mine had 28/2/34 written on the rear. The lens number dates were two years earlier.

02Pilot · « **Reply #4039 on:** February 27, 2020, 12:42:23 AM »

Quote from: Sandeha Lynch on February 26, 2020, 05:47:16 PM

Quote from: 02Pilot on February 26, 2020, 04:27:41 PM
I tend to shoot all B&W at half box speed. Caffenol seems to do fine with every Kodak and Ilford emulsion I've tried it with, and it was OK with Acros when I shot a few rolls way back when, so I'm hoping it will do reasonably well with this stuff. I really should test it before I shoot up an entire roll, I suppose. Whether I do or not depends entirely on how lazy I'm feeling.

Oh, and Sandeha, I have the same Rolleiflex - mine's from 1933.

Granted it may do well in any developer, but with DDX it appears to achieve its full potential speed.

If you know it's from 1933, then I can assume you have changed the mirror. At least, mine had 28/2/34 written on the rear. The lens number dates were two years earlier.

Yep. 11 Feb 33.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #4040 on:** February 27, 2020, 08:48:42 AM »

Ten years ago I had the pleasure of shooting the actress Anne Reid, who was one year younger than the Rolleiflex itself.
Both still going strong today.

Also Neopan 400, but with two softboxes.

100918_neo4_10 by Sandeha Lynch, on Flickr

grit · « **Reply #4041 on:** March 11, 2020, 12:10:14 AM »

Just bought a secondhand Epson Stylus Pro 4000. Upon bringing it home, my wife asked, "why can't your hobby be needlepoint?"

Francois · « **Reply #4042 on:** March 11, 2020, 01:58:38 PM »

Just tell her that it's for printing larger needlepoint patterns

Bryan · « **Reply #4043 on:** March 11, 2020, 07:46:07 PM »

I've had my eye on the Nikor tank for 4X5 film for quite a while but just couldn't justify the cost since there are other ways to skin that cat. This one came up for $26 so I had to do it.

Francois · « **Reply #4044 on:** March 11, 2020, 09:44:37 PM »

That is definitely a beaut'.
I've always wondered why Paterson never released a 4x5 reel for their tanks. Shouldn't be too hard to do even if there is the center tube in the way.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4045 on:** March 19, 2020, 09:29:19 PM »

Picked up these book from the post office today, brand new and for less than 50 pounds. It's funny when you buy something online, you have no idea of the size of books unless you check. These came as quite a surprise both in weight and size. Check out Postscript Books if you don't know them, they have quite a few nice photo books among all the rest. PS! I do not have shares in or any affiliation to this company in case you wondered.

Mike (happyforest) · « **Reply #4046 on:** March 19, 2020, 09:39:09 PM »

Quote from: Francois on March 11, 2020, 09:44:37 PM

That is definitely a beaut'.
I've always wondered why Paterson never released a 4x5 reel for their tanks. Shouldn't be too hard to do even if there is the center tube in the way.

Paterson don’t but there is this: https://mod54.com/

Made for Paterson tanks.

Mike

Francois · « **Reply #4047 on:** March 19, 2020, 10:14:29 PM »

I know but the design of the Nikkor is so much nicer.

I wonder what are the dimensions of the Nikkor reel?
Maybe it would be possible to design something similar for the Paterson if the center tube gets re-directed somehow...

Bryan · « **Reply #4048 on:** March 19, 2020, 11:19:00 PM »

Quote from: Francois on March 19, 2020, 10:14:29 PM

I know but the design of the Nikkor is so much nicer.

I wonder what are the dimensions of the Nikkor reel?
Maybe it would be possible to design something similar for the Paterson if the center tube gets re-directed somehow...

It's a big reel, 4 3/8 inch diameter and 4 5/8 inches tall. Originally I assumed it fit in a standard diameter stainless tank, it's actually quite a bit bigger.

zapsnaps · « **Reply #4049 on:** March 20, 2020, 09:44:30 AM »

A cable release. It's made by Gitzo. I've always liked Gitzo gear, but refuse to pay more for a camera support than the cost of the camera it's holding. The release looks as though it was made in the 50s or 60s when quality meant over-engineering everything. I got it primarily for use with the Blad on a tripod and a 256 ND filter. Before the virus outbreak, I was off to Africa on holiday and I wanted to to snap the ocean from a cliff top and flatten the sea.

So I've bought a filter and a release. Now all I need is the lifting of travel restrictions, the end of quarantining foreigners, airlines to return to running a full schedule and to be able to take a trip without having to worry about 'social distancing' and washing my hands everytime I touch something outside of home.

But at least I know that the next time I'm on an Indiana Jones-type bridge made out of firewood kindling and bits of twine, when it starts to give way, I can whip out the Gitzo release and lash the bridge to it, saving a damsel in distress, a kid with a puppy, myself and the Blad.