Author Topic: I Think I'm losing it... (Read 8020 times)

SLVR · « **on:** March 16, 2013, 01:18:00 AM »

So I went out for a nice walk after work snapping some shots on a perfectly sunny day.

Im shooting:
Leica M2 with 50mm cron and Leica Orange filter
Fuji Neopan 400.

Metering for general daylight using sunny 16 and giving 1 stop of exposure for the orange filter put me at F8 and 1/1000. This is what I got on the meter and what sunny 16 says.

Looking at the shots I took with those settings the images are HORRIDLY overexposed. Im talking, the negatives are almost black. This is the 3rd overexposed roll that Ive had this from this camera when im shooting 400 speed film and this orange filter. Its kind of angering me. One would think that this happens only when the orange filter is used. But on the same roll shooting with no filter and metering at dusk (not sure what to have guessed here may have been shooting 1/125 and F4 sun had already set. This was my reading from the meter.) same thing, blown out shots.

However i shoot a roll of 100 speed film and dont change a thing other than the film and everything comes out perfect. WHAT GIVES!? Even when rating the film at 50iso to give it the extra stop for the orange filter, granted there were a couple overexposed shots from that roll also. Less though than the 400.

I just kind of feel like I suck right now. Been shooting film for what seems like a long time and cant seem to expose a roll properly.

any ideas? Shutter speeds and everything seem perfect, the camera was JUST CLA'd in January.

sapata · « **Reply #1 on:** March 16, 2013, 02:57:32 AM »

The only other thing that can go wrong in this case is the way that the film it's been processed

LT · « **Reply #2 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:18:30 AM »

Sounds like either user error or a sticky shutter to me. Is it consistent across the whole roll?

Over development of properly exposed negs would result in very contrasty negs, not completely bullet-proof shots.

Can you take a digi-snap of the negs held against a light-source & post here? I need to see what you are getting to make a more accurate suggestion.

PS the orange filter won't make your film over exposed. In fact, all my oranges need an adjustment of between 1.5 and 2 stops, so if anything, your 1stop adjustment would lead to under exposure

SLVR · « **Reply #3 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:27:10 AM »

I'm using all the times from the Mass dev chart. I have the iPhone app and follow it for the most part. My agitation is the only thing that differs.

Heres a rough contact sheet of the recent roll on Neopan 400 and a rough sheet of the Foma 100 that i thought worked much better

Foma 100

Neopan 400

Im kind of noticing a trend where anytime i have an outdoor shot the image is 1 or 2 stops overexposed no matter what. Im metering using a Voigtlander VC II meter. Seemed to work fine on my IIIa. Maybe it would be worth double shooting both cameras to get a comparison... OR use a different meter. I trust the Gossen meter that i got from Francois much more than this Voigtlander at the moment.

SLVR · « **Reply #4 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:29:22 AM »

Leon, this is why I'm so puzzled. I checked the compensation on my digi cam and it was exactly 1.5 stops. So me giving the neg 1 stop of compensation should still give me a half stop of underexposure! Worse case scenario I go and get the shutter speeds tested again but indoor shots seem fine?

LT · « **Reply #5 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:47:13 AM »

Hmmm - tricky

I suppose the fact it's only outdoor shots hints at it being a problem with the faster speeds/ or meter is out (can you remember conditions & what the settings were?).

Unless the lens aperture blades arent closing properly. Have you checked the lens f-stop ring is working?

I suppose you do need to sacrifice some more film to check it against another camera. Does your digi have full manual control? At least that way you'll only lose one roll of valuable film.

SLVR · « **Reply #6 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:58:49 AM »

it's quite strange. I think i'll try this tomorrow. Yes, i have a fuji X10, it has manual control. I'll give it a try tomorrow. As far as operation the camera seems fine. Compared against my other leica it seems perfectly fine. It is somewhat chilly still out so im MAYBE thinking that the lubricant could be slowing things down. I've seen this phenomenon before. It really is the only explanation I think. The shots today 30-35 on the neopan (you just see the tops, all blown out) were shot in conjunction with sunny 16. I know for a fact that the exposure was correct for these shots.

Its a little annoying. I'll also shoot neopan again since that seems to be the film that has the most problems in daylight.

LT · « **Reply #7 on:** March 16, 2013, 04:21:38 AM »

I just noticed the line on the shots. Now I'm stumped. $:-\$

Sorry I can't be more helpful. Good luck with getting it sorted.

SLVR · « **Reply #8 on:** March 16, 2013, 04:36:13 AM »

Oh don't mind the line. I think that's a reflection from my plastic film Holder page thing. I think you hit the nail on the head with the sticky shutter. I'm going to come back with something tomorrow. I've also reached out to the guy I got the camera from to get some info on the CLA that the camera had to get a background of what lubricants were used and perhaps if they have certain operating temperatures they work best in.

Late Developer · « **Reply #9 on:** March 16, 2013, 05:03:30 AM »

TinTin, one test to identify a sticky shutter is to leave the camera body in a dry, warm place overnight (an airing cupboard works well) and then shoot a roll immediately after removing it.

I have one of those Oris mechanical "automatic" watches that winds itself as you move around. I didn't wear it for a few weeks but, when I finally put it back on my wrist, it ran slowwwww. I happened to mention this to one of Oris' servicing dealers and he suggested the airing cupboard test. I wasn't convinced, initially, so I mentioned it in passing to a friend who repairs cameras. He said it's a trick camera repairers also use to see if it's nothing more than the camera / lens lubricants that have gunged up.

After 24 hours in my airing cupboard and a few hours walking about, my watch is back to perfect.

I'm not saying that this will definitely work but it's worth a try - especially if you haven't used the camera or had it CLA'd for a while.

Pete_R · « **Reply #10 on:** March 16, 2013, 07:43:51 AM »

It could be shutter. If the second curtain is hanging up. You should be able to see this if you fire the camera with the back open and looking through the shutter. On higher speeds you shouldn't get to see the whoe frame, just the slit passing across. If you can see the whole frame then definitely shutter problems.

Do you record shutter speeds used? If this only happens with speeds faster than the flash sync speed, then it's definitely a second curtain release problem.

Fluminian · « **Reply #11 on:** March 16, 2013, 10:45:15 AM »

Have you considered batteries as the source of the problem, TinTin? I've got a Sekonic L-248
and have to set the film sensitivity 2 stops lower to get accurate results. That's because the
old mercury batteries had lower voltage than today's replacement ones.

Francois · « **Reply #12 on:** March 16, 2013, 01:35:44 PM »

Quote from: Peter R on March 16, 2013, 07:43:51 AM

It could be shutter. If the second curtain is hanging up. You should be able to see this if you fire the camera with the back open and looking through the shutter. On higher speeds you shouldn't get to see the whoe frame, just the slit passing across. If you can see the whole frame then definitely shutter problems.

Do you record shutter speeds used? If this only happens with speeds faster than the flash sync speed, then it's definitely a second curtain release problem.

I can't remember if the Leica M2 has a back door so you can see through?

More important than the type of lubricant used is the place in the world where the camera was CLA'd. It'll tell you a lot about what was used. Florida doesn't need the same lube as wintery Toronto.

SLVR · « **Reply #13 on:** March 16, 2013, 02:04:52 PM »

Fluminian, I thought it maybe could be batteries too. They were replaced. I feel much better also knowing that yesterday my meter was giving me exactly the same readings as I would get in my head following sunny 16. It hasn't been very sunny out until now so gauging exposure in my head has been difficult. But yesterday raised some concerns.

I contacted the previous owner to get the info of the CLA that he claimed it had. He said he had minor service back in january which was just shutter adjustment. I dont think there was any cleaning involved which MAY explain some stuff. I'm waiting to get in contact with the repairman, he has very positive feedback all over the web and was an employee of Leica so he knows them well.

This morning i set the camera out in the cold and tested the shutter. Nothing visibly out of the ordinary. Though to me things looked a LITTLE slow. Maybe.

Also now the second curtain doesnt feel the need to seat properly into the first so advancing and recocking the shutter feels like you are destroying the camera. since the lip of the second curtain is wedged against the side of the assembly as you pull it back.

I just think the camera has some demons, and I dont suck.

Pete_R · « **Reply #14 on:** March 16, 2013, 02:37:56 PM »

Quote from: Francois on March 16, 2013, 01:35:44 PM

I can't remember if the Leica M2 has a back door so you can see through?

Good point Francois. I don't know either. Sound of the shutter is another way of checking. As you go up through the speeds the sound should prgressively get shorter. If it stays the same after the flash sync speed then that indicates the same issue.

SLVR · « **Reply #15 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:04:32 PM »

There is a door at the back. Just looking at the camera now and everything is nice and smooth with the camera being warm. I'll call in a half hour to find out what all happened to this camera. I'll report back for those who I have sparked interest with

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #16 on:** March 16, 2013, 03:31:09 PM »

Quote

Also now the second curtain doesnt feel the need to seat properly into the first so advancing and recocking the shutter feels like you are destroying the camera. since the lip of the second curtain is wedged against the side of the assembly as you pull it back.

That is waaay wrong.

KevinAllan · « **Reply #17 on:** March 16, 2013, 05:13:33 PM »

The closest equivalent problem I had was with a Pentax 35mm lens which had been recently purchased used. It was first used on a trip to the Hebrides and all the shots taken with that lens were overposed up to 5 stops. It turned out that the diaphragm wasn't closing down properly. I realised just in time to get it repaired under the warranty provided by the camera store - which is one reason for preferring to purchase from a good dealer rather than eBay.

SLVR · « **Reply #18 on:** March 16, 2013, 07:24:33 PM »

The purchase was a face to face classifieds type deal.

Anyways i drove out to see the repairman who did the "CLA" on the camera. He was about an hour's drive from where i live and worked for leica in the past and now does repair and service from his home. He remembered the camera and told me the previous owner just wanted cheap fixes. He never CLA'd the camera. He inspected the camera, told me the good. And the bad. Second shutter curtain was already out of spec when warm. He will do some testing in the cold as well. As well as relubricate the camera with different spec oils and greases to match Canadian shooting environments.

Its now in for an overhaul. Should get it back next week!

SLVR · « **Reply #19 on:** March 29, 2013, 08:19:59 PM »

Well the camera was serviced. Something is still pretty wrong with the camera. I shot a roll of expired C41 color and the whole roll came out underexposed. Then I shot another roll of the elusive neopan 400 that i had so much trouble with. maybe 2 or 3 turned out from the whole roll.

Shot a test roll this morning and compared every shot with my X10. Basically double shot everything. Was shooting fresh tri-x. Exposure was off hence the added grain and contrast sucks since exposure wasn't correct and the lens has coating damage on the front element. Im told that it shouldn't impact the images that much, maybe soften them a bit and bloom around highlights but shouldn't be a problem.

Well with a body that doesn't accurately fire the shutter, its a problem.

Film Left, Digital Right

Im not sure what to do next. Im pretty miffed. Looking at getting a new lens right now, and likely will be going back to the repairman tomorrow to get him to explain what the hell is going on.

Francois · « **Reply #20 on:** March 29, 2013, 08:49:45 PM »

That would be the best thing to do... this is really strange.

Pete_R · « **Reply #21 on:** March 29, 2013, 09:41:31 PM »

Looking at those negs in your last shot, it doesn't look off to me.

SLVR · « **Reply #22 on:** March 29, 2013, 11:31:36 PM »

Peter are you talking about the "Shared Pathway" Shot?

That actual shot is at the bottom row on the left in my negatives shot. Its quite thick.

LT · « **Reply #23 on:** March 30, 2013, 05:18:27 AM »

The shot of the negatives against the window (which I think is what peter is referring to) makes the negs look fine - if anything they are a bit dense (in the highlights at least) hinting at over development.

It would be worth doing a side by side comparison with a trusted film camera rather than with digital to rule out issues elsewhere.

Pete_R · « **Reply #24 on:** March 30, 2013, 07:32:26 AM »

Yes, it was the shot of the strips of negs I was refering to. There doesn't seem to be the variations you were getting previously.

I agree with Leon. Comparing a roll of Tri-x with a digital camera isn't really comparing like with like. Two film cameras shot side by side with same film and developed together would be better.

Flippy · « **Reply #25 on:** March 30, 2013, 10:19:09 AM »

The exposures look fine now to my eyes. With the exception of what looks like some shutter fade. Read this: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-135.html and use it to check your shutter for fade. As the article points out, not all shutter speed testers can detect shutter fade (so your repairman could have missed this issue), but testing the shutter this way will make any fade readily apparent. It is also perfectly accurate for testing speeds, if you can trust your eyes. I used the TV test to calibrate several of my oldest SLRs and then shot slides and got perfect exposure.

SLVR · « **Reply #26 on:** March 30, 2013, 12:10:05 PM »

I think the shutter fade you see is because im trying to bring down the exposure so much. There was a lot of compensation that had to be done.

I guess ill have to go out again and do another test roll. I was more or less bringing the digital to check exposure. Which i initially thought was off because of metering issues.

TriX was developed 9min in xtol at 1:1. 30 sec agitation, 10sec every minute after that. Straight from massive dev chart. Maybe it would be worth it to do a roll in some fresh c41 to take the developing error out of the equation and go to the 1h lab...

Im just trying to rule out every point of error. Something is wrong, these negatives don't look right in my eye.

LT · « **Reply #27 on:** March 30, 2013, 05:45:11 PM »

Quote from: TinTin on March 30, 2013, 12:10:05 PM

TriX was developed 9min in xtol at 1:1. 30 sec agitation, 10sec every minute after that. Straight from massive dev chart. Maybe it would be worth it to do a roll in some fresh c41 to take the developing error out of the equation and go to the 1h lab...

Just because that time was right for the person who entered it onto the MDC, doesn't mean it would be right for you, your meter, your camera, your thermometer, your method of agitation, your measuring grad, your water quality etc etc etc etc. You should only treat those things as a guide, then fine tune for yourself.

I think some c41 at the lab would be a good idea.

SLVR · « **Reply #28 on:** March 30, 2013, 07:25:30 PM »

Did C-41 lab, everything is perfectly fine. I feel real dumb. Looks like I have to rethink how im developing

Sorry for wasting everyones time!

On a slightly positive outcome i did make out with a voigtlander 35mm 1.4 for the M2.

Francois · « **Reply #29 on:** March 30, 2013, 08:09:58 PM »

Well... it did get everybody thinking...

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #30 on:** March 30, 2013, 09:28:22 PM »

Quote from: TinTin on March 30, 2013, 07:25:30 PM

Did C-41 lab, everything is perfectly fine. I feel real dumb. Looks like I have to rethink how im developing

Umm, you mean you dev'd a bw silver film in C41 and then started blaming your camera?

Is giggling allowed?

SLVR · « **Reply #31 on:** March 30, 2013, 09:45:05 PM »

No. My process for BW must be wrong. Im thinking its the developer mixture. I switched beakers around the same time this all started to go south so i'm going to go back and try again with my old beakers.

I did a test on C-41 film and a 1h lab because their processing is consistent. My C41 was color. I never mixed them up.

LT · « **Reply #32 on:** March 31, 2013, 07:43:47 AM »

That is really good news TinTin. Sorting out developing routines is easy and mostly cheap

glad your leica camera isn't kaput.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #33 on:** March 31, 2013, 08:22:40 AM »

I misunderstood.

But your newly serviced Leica should see you well.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #34 on:** March 31, 2013, 09:28:19 AM »

Missed this the first time around, Though glad to read it now and understanding that you're sorting things out. Also, congrats to the voigtländer!

SLVR · « **Reply #35 on:** March 31, 2013, 01:58:58 PM »

Thanks guys! I really do have to apologize though. Such a huge mess this was

Francois · « **Reply #36 on:** March 31, 2013, 03:51:52 PM »

Bah! it's just like mud on the hubcaps... not a big deal.