Author Topic: I just picked up... (Read 842494 times)

Pete_R · « **Reply #4400 on:** July 04, 2022, 06:12:23 PM »

Quote from: jojonas~ on July 04, 2022, 04:22:28 PM

Anyone else on here dealing with fungis infested lenses?

I would dismantle and clean. There may be some etching left but nothing you can do about that.

02Pilot · « **Reply #4401 on:** July 04, 2022, 07:18:42 PM »

If you're willing to take it apart, moisturizing hand cream is the mildest effective way I've found to quickly remove fungus.

Francois · « **Reply #4402 on:** July 04, 2022, 11:37:32 PM »

I'm more of the "lets take it apart and use hand sanitizer on it" type...
But that can be a heck of a job.

If you know of a place that has some UV-C sanitizing lamps, you could try that.
Or find a place that has a chemical autoclave that uses cans of toxic gas and ask them to sanitize it...

jojonas~ · « **Reply #4403 on:** July 05, 2022, 12:13:53 AM »

Thanks for the suggestions, all! I tried shooting with it and it looked pretty soft.

Hm.. I do work at a hospital right now. They might have something that can sanitise glass

Pete_R · « **Reply #4404 on:** July 05, 2022, 07:37:52 AM »

The problem with just killing the fungus and not removing it is it won't improve the image quality.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #4405 on:** July 05, 2022, 08:36:50 AM »

Quote from: Bryan on July 04, 2022, 05:04:21 PM

If the fungus is not in the center of the lens it will probably give good results. I've heard putting them in the sun can kill the fungus to keep it from spreading but the etching on the lens is permanent. I've done it on a few lenses but haven't bothered to monitor mold growth after that.

Quote from: Pete_R on July 05, 2022, 07:37:52 AM

The problem with just killing the fungus and not removing it is it won't improve the image quality.

good points about the etchings being permanent! looks like there's both those roots or what you'd call it from the edges on the glass furthest back and maybe on the inside a more broader, spotty haze

02Pilot · « **Reply #4406 on:** July 05, 2022, 03:49:39 PM »

Not all fungus causes etching, at least not right away. I have lenses that had significant fungus when I got them, but had no permanent damage to the glass at all. The only way to know is to clean it.

collodion · « **Reply #4407 on:** July 06, 2022, 05:03:29 AM »

Quote from: Francois on July 03, 2022, 08:07:53 PM

The other option would have been oiling the wood with boiled linseed oil, but that's pretty labor intensive.

A man after my own heart....

For me, applying a proper French Polish to wood (antiques) stopped about a decade ago when my joints started complaining.
But oh what a beautiful finish... there is nothing like it!!!

Pete_R · « **Reply #4408 on:** July 06, 2022, 02:51:50 PM »

A timely discussion as I received two lenses yesterday, both with some fungus, though only mild thankfully. Cleaned both with my usual lens cleaner liquid and gone completely. I know the hand cream method but I believe in using normal cleaners first and, I find, it's usually sufficient.

This was one of the lenses - Tamron 350mm mirror. The other was the Tamron 500mm mirror.

Francois · « **Reply #4409 on:** July 06, 2022, 03:18:56 PM »

Hey!
I have one of those Tamron cats!
It's a surprisingly good lens. Compact and light.
I didn't expect the inside to look like that though...

Pete_R · « **Reply #4410 on:** July 06, 2022, 04:37:03 PM »

Quote from: Francois on July 06, 2022, 03:18:56 PM

Hey!
I have one of those Tamron cats!
It's a surprisingly good lens. Compact and light.
I didn't expect the inside to look like that though...

They are basically just two optical assemblies attached either end of a tube. Quite easy to get in to and clean. Is yours the 350 or the 500? The 500 is fairly common and can be picked up quite reasonably but the 350 is not often found and generally expensive. I got these two at a local live auction along with a body and a few bits and pieces for not much money. They'll be sold on once I've had a play with them as they're not something I'm likely to use much.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #4411 on:** July 06, 2022, 09:07:25 PM »

Quote from: collodion on July 06, 2022, 05:03:29 AM

Quote from: Francois on July 03, 2022, 08:07:53 PM
The other option would have been oiling the wood with boiled linseed oil, but that's pretty labor intensive.
A man after my own heart....
For me, applying a proper French Polish to wood (antiques) stopped about a decade ago when my joints started complaining.
But oh what a beautiful finish... there is nothing like it!!!

Two or three swabs of Danish oil and a Beeswax finish is what I go for. Not too much work.

IMGP9849a by Sandeha Lynch, on Flickr

Francois · « **Reply #4412 on:** July 06, 2022, 09:13:33 PM »

Quote from: Pete_R on July 06, 2022, 04:37:03 PM

Quote from: Francois on July 06, 2022, 03:18:56 PM
Hey!
I have one of those Tamron cats!
It's a surprisingly good lens. Compact and light.
I didn't expect the inside to look like that though...
They are basically just two optical assemblies attached either end of a tube. Quite easy to get in to and clean. Is yours the 350 or the 500? The 500 is fairly common and can be picked up quite reasonably but the 350 is not often found and generally expensive. I got these two at a local live auction along with a body and a few bits and pieces for not much money. They'll be sold on once I've had a play with them as they're not something I'm likely to use much.

I've got the 500mm. The 350 must be really stubby as the 500 is not very thick to start with.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #4413 on:** July 08, 2022, 04:02:06 PM »

wow! interesting to see the insides of a mirror lens. I had a rough idea how they work but it's still intriguing to actually see one in parts like that.

Francois · « **Reply #4414 on:** July 08, 2022, 09:21:27 PM »

What surprised me the most is that I was expecting it to be more like the inside of a Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope.

collodion · « **Reply #4415 on:** July 14, 2022, 03:29:41 AM »

Quote from: Sandeha Lynch on July 06, 2022, 09:07:25 PM

Quote from: collodion on July 06, 2022, 05:03:29 AM
Quote from: Francois on July 03, 2022, 08:07:53 PM
The other option would have been oiling the wood with boiled linseed oil, but that's pretty labor intensive.
A man after my own heart....
For me, applying a proper French Polish to wood (antiques) stopped about a decade ago when my joints started complaining.
But oh what a beautiful finish... there is nothing like it!!!
Wow nice job on the camera. You can never go wrong with wax
Two or three swabs of Danish oil and a Beeswax finish is what I go for. Not too much work.

IMGP9849a by Sandeha Lynch, on Flickr

Pete_R · « **Reply #4416 on:** July 21, 2022, 03:14:51 PM »

Just got this Yashica / Nicca from Japan. I already had the lens. Top speed is capping so it needs a service but otherwise looks OK.

Francois · « **Reply #4417 on:** July 21, 2022, 04:05:28 PM »

Looks really good.
M39 mount like the old Leica I suppose?

Pete_R · « **Reply #4418 on:** July 21, 2022, 09:53:13 PM »

Quote from: Francois on July 21, 2022, 04:05:28 PM

Looks really good.
M39 mount like the old Leica I suppose?

Yes. A lot of similarities to the early Leicas in construction, the way it comes apart and the awful film loading.

Francois · « **Reply #4419 on:** July 21, 2022, 10:29:08 PM »

Too bad they didn't think of adding the flip-up door until they came out with the M series...
But I did find a 3D model of the Ablon film cutter on thingiverse and it makes loading the film so much easier.

Bryan · « **Reply #4420 on:** July 22, 2022, 06:54:57 PM »

Crown Graphic 34, this is the 3.25 X 4.25 version. The deal was too good to pass up, it included a case, 12 film holders and a fresh pack of Adox CHS 100 II. I also purchased two packs of expired GAF Versapan Tyoe 2831. The camera didn't come with a lens, just a lens board with an odd size hole. I have a few lenses that I want to use with it so I had to make my own lens boards.

Crown Graphic 34 by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

The lens boards I made are here: https://filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=8655.msg139760#msg139760

Francois · « **Reply #4421 on:** July 22, 2022, 10:14:33 PM »

That has just got to be too cute.
Perfect for a roll film adapter.

collodion · « **Reply #4422 on:** July 28, 2022, 04:54:26 PM »

A wonderful format (3x4) , I have one also and really enjoy using it. Now I understand your comment about lensboards being hard to find..I very rarely see them in this size...
Looks like the one you made is working quite well

Bryan · « **Reply #4423 on:** July 31, 2022, 07:23:59 PM »

A guy in my neighborhood was having a garage sale with a lot of darkroom stuff including two enlargers and a lot of supplies. I don't have room for either of the enlargers so I passed on those, one was a nice looking Beseler. I did get two bulk rolls of film, one in a Lloyd loader for $2.00 with about a half roll and the other still sealed in the original Kodak tin for $1.00. I also got a Tokina EL 28mm f/2.8 lens in PK mount. Right now I don't have camera that takes PK mount but it was only a few dollars so I had to grab it. I don't know if I can adapt it to OM or Minolta and still get infinity focus.

The guy selling the stuff said he mostly used it for photography classes in high school. He thought the bulk film could be 1,000 ISO, he used to shoot a lot of that. after doing some testing I don't think either roll is anywhere near 1,000 ISO, or ever was. The roll in the Lloyd loader looks like someone opened the loader and fogged the edge of the film. I can't tell what film it is, the edge marking says Eastman 34 which is meaningless as far as I can tell. It has standard sprocket holes for still film but it does have a movie film date code that would put it around 1964. I rated it at about 12 ISO or less. the first photo below shows the edge marking. In the second photo you can see how bad the fogging is along the edge. Not going to use this roll, it will only lead to disappointment, at least I got a bulk loader.

Bryan · « **Reply #4424 on:** July 31, 2022, 07:29:55 PM »

The other roll in the rusty Kodak tin has movie fill perforations and is on a daylight loading reel. The edge markings say Eastman 19 and it has a date code that puts it at a 1966 manufacturing date. Again, Eastman 19 seems to be meaningless. I was thinking maybe Plus-X so I developed it in Rodinal 1:50 for 13 minutes. It seems best rated at about ISO 12 but it's very grainy, still usable though.

Francois · « **Reply #4425 on:** July 31, 2022, 10:29:01 PM »

Good find you got there.
I've searched through my books and can't find any info on Eastman 34 or Eastman 19, so I guess you'll have to email Erin at the Eastman Museum to figure this one out...

Kai-san · « **Reply #4426 on:** August 26, 2022, 07:05:46 PM »

Just picked up a very nice Nikon F90 for 50 dollars. I was looking for an alternative to my F4 as I'm not very happy with its autofocus performance.

Francois · « **Reply #4427 on:** August 26, 2022, 08:48:28 PM »

You're going to love the F90.
I have the F90x and I don't think I've ever experienced such speedy autofocus before.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4428 on:** August 27, 2022, 10:10:00 AM »

Yes, I've noticed the speed, just hope it will nail the focus better than the F4.

Francois · « **Reply #4429 on:** August 27, 2022, 04:25:53 PM »

If it's anything like mine, it's pretty darn precise. I'd even say it's faster and better than my digicams in many respect.

collodion · « **Reply #4430 on:** August 30, 2022, 02:49:00 AM »

I have one as well, and I find it to work quite well! Waaay better than my f4, which is so sad as the f4 looks and feels so sexy with all those knobs and buttons

Bryan · « **Reply #4431 on:** September 11, 2022, 09:21:34 PM »

Like I needed another Hawkeye Flash. It was too nice to pass up, plus it has the flash and a roll of exposed film in it. It cost me $15, that's a pretty good deal for one with the flash. I'll develop the film to see if there is anything on it. The lens needs a good cleaning but otherwise it's in excellent condition. These are often chipped, cracked or scratched, this one has a few small scuffs but no chips or cracks.

Also check out the batteries that were in the flash. Doesn't look like it's been used in a while. The battery compartment was very clean though, they really are leak proof.

The house I got these at was an old Craftsman in Seattle that was built pre WWII. Everything in the house was old, I don't think they bought anything new since the 1960's. Usually you see a mix of stuff, this was like a time capsule.

Francois · « **Reply #4432 on:** September 12, 2022, 02:22:01 PM »

Wow, these are really old batteries!
I'm really surprised that they didn't explode and leak their guts everywhere. Though I still have a set of old flash batteries that are still in OK shape.

Sometimes batteries can be quite surprising. We had some old 1980's Energizer batteries in my grandma's old radio for close to 25 years and the radio still worked with them after all that time...

Bryan · « **Reply #4433 on:** September 12, 2022, 07:27:52 PM »

Quote from: Francois on September 12, 2022, 02:22:01 PM

Wow, these are really old batteries!
I'm really surprised that they didn't explode and leak their guts everywhere. Though I still have a set of old flash batteries that are still in OK shape.

Sometimes batteries can be quite surprising. We had some old 1980's Energizer batteries in my grandma's old radio for close to 25 years and the radio still worked with them after all that time...

Alkaline batteries are the worst for leaking, these are probably dry cell zink. I'll have to see if there is any voltage left on these. As best I can tell Ray-O-Vac started using a new logo in 1958 so these batteries are from earlier than that, as far back as the 1940's. The film in the camera is VP-620 (Kodak Verichrome Pan) which was made from 1956 to 1995. If I get anything on the film I'll post it in the Found Film thread.

Francois · « **Reply #4434 on:** September 12, 2022, 09:17:57 PM »

That really depends on how it was stored. So far I've had a few found rolls that simply didn't come out...

Bryan · « **Reply #4435 on:** September 13, 2022, 04:22:05 AM »

I checked the voltage of the batteries, 1.43 volts! They've held a charge for at least 65 years! I put them in the flash but they didn't have enough in them to trigger the flash bulb.

Francois · « **Reply #4436 on:** September 13, 2022, 02:58:24 PM »

I guess the amps simply weren't there.
But it's still amazing that these things have held-up a charge for so long. I'm really lost for words on that one...

Bryan · « **Reply #4437 on:** October 07, 2022, 05:17:14 PM »

My wife got this for me, that was shocking! She thinks I need to get rid of cameras. I have a few of these type 40 film Polaroids but this one has the best lens and shutter. Everything is in really good condition with it, lens, shutter, bellows, rangefinder, etc. I'll stick some 4X5 film in it and see how it does. I like the flip up lens cap but I was afraid I'll forget to put it down. That won't happen, it blocks the shutter button from working, Dr. Land thought of everything.

Polaroid Pathfinder Land Camera 110A by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Francois · « **Reply #4438 on:** October 07, 2022, 10:20:10 PM »

That's one of the things with Polaroid back in those days; engineering was really top notch.
And it lasted for quite some time, just look at how insane the SX-70 was!

collodion · « **Reply #4439 on:** October 11, 2022, 02:57:02 AM »

What a beauty!! Ive tried that lens on a speed graphic years ago and it was quite sharp stopped down.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4440 on:** October 25, 2022, 05:45:56 PM »

I bought a contraption off evilbay that is supposed to be a cutting template for film leads, both standard 5cm and 10cm for old Leica-type cameras. As with all 3D-printed plastic gizmos that I've seen, it's flimsy and brittle. If you put a film with a bit of curl into that thingy the small templates will jump off and you'll need three hands to cut the film. Junk! But I expected that and the real reason for buying it is that it came with a freebee, a real metal holepunch for connecting the tail end of the film to the spindle in the cartridge. The hole punches you can get in hardware stores cannot make a large enough hole, so this one is perfect for bulk loading of film. The plastic junk will go in the trash bin.

Bryan · « **Reply #4441 on:** October 25, 2022, 08:29:14 PM »

Quote from: Kai-san on October 25, 2022, 05:45:56 PM

I bought a contraption off evilbay that is supposed to be a cutting template for film leads, both standard 5cm and 10cm for old Leica-type cameras. As with all 3D-printed plastic gizmos that I've seen, it's flimsy and brittle. If you put a film with a bit of curl into that thingy the small templates will jump off and you'll need three hands to cut the film. Junk! But I expected that and the real reason for buying it is that it came with a freebee, a real metal holepunch for connecting the tail end of the film to the spindle in the cartridge. The hole punches you can get in hardware stores cannot make a large enough hole, so this one is perfect for bulk loading of film. The plastic junk will go in the trash bin.

I have an aluminum trimmer guide for the Leica leader that folds with a hinge. It's not the Leica brand, I think it's a Japanese copy. It also does the end that mounts to the spindle without a hole. It works with the Leica FILCA cassettes. I find just cutting with scissors freehand and taping the film to the spindle works best.

Francois · « **Reply #4442 on:** October 25, 2022, 09:05:25 PM »

I like taping too.
But that 3D printed cutter looks really bad. I printed one that is a copy of the Leica Ablon and it's lightyears better than that thing.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4443 on:** October 25, 2022, 10:01:33 PM »

I use a small pair of scissors with curved blades, the accuracy is not critical. All my auto-load cameras accept freehand cut leads without any problem. I've had some issues with tape, probably not using the right kind. So I prefer the spindles with the self-locking system.

Francois · « **Reply #4444 on:** October 26, 2022, 03:49:47 PM »

The trick with tape is to put some on both sides of the film.
I usually use painter's tape or masking tape that I pre-cut to the width of the spool. I then put one about 50-50 on top and one 50-50 on the bottom.
This holds tight enough that you will break sprockets before the tape gives.

As for the leader, I know it's not critical but I like seeing a nicely shaped leader when I load the film... I know it's a bit OCD but I stand by it

Kai-san · « **Reply #4445 on:** November 07, 2022, 05:27:18 PM »

Yesterday I picked up a Mamiya ZM Quartz with a Mamiya Sekor E 50mm 1:1.7 S for 10 dollars. The camera didn't work, shutter release and advance lever locked. The lens is fine except that half the filter ring is gone (plastic fantastic!). The batteries were ok, when the camera was set to Auto the overexposure led blinked in the viewfinder and the beeper was going haywire. So I dismounted the lens, turned the camera upside down and with the palm of my hand gave it a couple of heavy whacks on the bottom underneath the advance lever. Put the lens back on and hey presto, the shutter works and I can wind the film. The overexposure led and beeper still going, so I suspected the ISO setting wheel was at fault. Took off the rewind knob and the ISO wheel and sure enough, a plastic part was broken. So I'll have to use an external meter, thinking of getting one that can be attached to the flash shoe. As for the filter ring I'm thinking of gluing a 52-55mm step-up ring to the remaining part of the filter ring and the front of the lens. Not sure it will hold, the alternative is to use push-on filters and hood if I can find the correct diameter. But anyway I got a working camera and lens for 10 bucks.

collodion · « **Reply #4446 on:** November 07, 2022, 07:11:50 PM »

Congrats Kai,
I respect your methods of Camera repair!

Mamiya made some good glass back in the day...

Francois · « **Reply #4447 on:** November 07, 2022, 08:52:55 PM »

A glued-on step-up ring would definitely work.
As for the repair method, you haven't seen me beat back into shape the lens on my Hi-Matic by using a hammer and a piece of dowel 😁
The camera was already pretty beat-up and cost me something like 0.50$ back in the day, so I didn't mind.
And to my surprise, the lens is now very smooth to focus and everything still works like new.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4448 on:** November 07, 2022, 09:10:26 PM »

Quote from: collodion on November 07, 2022, 07:11:50 PM

Congrats Kai,
I respect your methods of Camera repair!
Mamiya made some good glass back in the day...

Thanks, when everything else fails you have to resort to unorthodox methods. Your comment on Mamiya glass is spot on, I've been impressed time and again by my medium format lenses from Mamiya. That's what inspired me to pick up this camera and lens.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4449 on:** November 07, 2022, 09:18:54 PM »

Quote from: Francois on November 07, 2022, 08:52:55 PM

A glued-on step-up ring would definitely work.

It might seem drastic, but these lenses can be had for 30-40 dollars if something goes wrong.
I forgot to mention that the ZM was the last 35mm SLR that Mamiya ever made, it came out in 1982. And this lens marked with a red S are also among the last lenses they made for 35mm SLRs. After that they only made medium format cameras.