Topic: March 6, early weekend thread

[astrobeck]

went for a little drive today to see some sunshine and just get out of the house.
this is the next town over from me, Moriarty, New Mexico....an old defunct gas station

Ansco Panda with Ultrafine 100 film, sloshed in caffenol

[Bryan]

Becky, that’s a camera I’ve never seen before, looks like fun.  I wonder if the lens can be flipped? 

These were shot with a Ricoh Diacord L with Ilford Pan F Plus 50 developed in Beer.  I used a Rondo closeup adapter for the turtle shot. 

Rock Formation at Lanai Lookout by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Byodo-In Temple Turtle by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Byodo-In Temple Statue by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

[02Pilot]

Playing around with longer lenses.

[grit]

Yo! Oy.

[astrobeck]

Becky, that’s a camera I’ve never seen before, looks like fun.  I wonder if the lens can be flipped? 

I don't think it would come out, without a fight, so I don't think I'll mess with it.

[Kai-san]

Bought a Yashikor lens for a song since it had a crack in the front element. It's in the perimeter so I figured it would be OK, and it seems I was correct. I should probably not point it directly at the sun, but for that I've got other lenses. 

Yashica YE / Yashikor 50mm f2.8 / Fuji Acros @400 ISO in HC-110

[Francois]

I should probably not point it directly at the sun, but for that I've got other lenses. 

You might be surprised by the results. One thing's for sure, nobody will be able to imitate the results.

[Indofunk]

I should probably not point it directly at the sun, but for that I've got other lenses. 

You might be surprised by the results. One thing's for sure, nobody will be able to imitate the results.

I love telling people, especially those obsessed with lenscaps or having a filter on their lens "for protection" that the front element makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things. There's a graphic somewhere that shows a photo, it's pretty much ok except maybe it's lacking a bit in sharpness, then shows the lens that it was taken with: the front element is literally* shattered 

However, I'll admit that I'm a bit obsessed with protecting the rear element of my lenses

*(That's literal in the literal sense of the word literal, not the new Webster's definition that defines literal as figurative )

[zapsnaps]

I literally LOVE taking figurative pictures.

[Francois]

I should probably not point it directly at the sun, but for that I've got other lenses. 

You might be surprised by the results. One thing's for sure, nobody will be able to imitate the results.

I love telling people, especially those obsessed with lenscaps or having a filter on their lens "for protection" that the front element makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things. There's a graphic somewhere that shows a photo, it's pretty much ok except maybe it's lacking a bit in sharpness, then shows the lens that it was taken with: the front element is literally* shattered 

However, I'll admit that I'm a bit obsessed with protecting the rear element of my lenses

*(That's literal in the literal sense of the word literal, not the new Webster's definition that defines literal as figurative )

Which reminds me, I once went to city hall and there was a news reporter who didn't have a single rear lens cap on any of the lenses in his bag. I cringed the whole meeting just from seeing that. And I'm not talking about the amount of visible dirt and grit on those lenses!

[Kai-san]

I should probably not point it directly at the sun, but for that I've got other lenses. 

You might be surprised by the results. One thing's for sure, nobody will be able to imitate the results.

I love telling people, especially those obsessed with lenscaps or having a filter on their lens "for protection" that the front element makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things. There's a graphic somewhere that shows a photo, it's pretty much ok except maybe it's lacking a bit in sharpness, then shows the lens that it was taken with: the front element is literally* shattered 

However, I'll admit that I'm a bit obsessed with protecting the rear element of my lenses

*(That's literal in the literal sense of the word literal, not the new Webster's definition that defines literal as figurative )

This is basically correct, but mistreating the front glass of a lens would literally make the resale value drop like a stone.

[02Pilot]

I should probably not point it directly at the sun, but for that I've got other lenses. 

You might be surprised by the results. One thing's for sure, nobody will be able to imitate the results.

I love telling people, especially those obsessed with lenscaps or having a filter on their lens "for protection" that the front element makes very little difference in the grand scheme of things. There's a graphic somewhere that shows a photo, it's pretty much ok except maybe it's lacking a bit in sharpness, then shows the lens that it was taken with: the front element is literally* shattered 

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/10/front-element-scratches/

[Bryan]

Becky, that’s a camera I’ve never seen before, looks like fun.  I wonder if the lens can be flipped? 

I don't think it would come out, without a fight, so I don't think I'll mess with it.

It does look like snapped together plastic, you would probably break something trying to force apart the old brittle plastic. 

[Indofunk]

Ok, enough words, more photos!



Ektachrome 200 EPD, expired 1991. Exposed at 50 in an XA, crossprocessed in C41.

[AJShepherd]

Last time I used my Leica IIIf was last summer, when I had a problem where the first roll was OK, but the first half of the second roll had frames only exposed for a third of their length, though the second half of the second roll was OK.
So as last Friday was relatively decent weather, I took it out for a test roll using all the speeds from a thirtieth up and making notes so if any of them were only part exposed I could tell which speeds were at fault.

But all the frames were OK. Which doesn't solve the mystery from last time but suggests I don't need it serviced just yet.

[02Pilot]

Last time I used my Leica IIIf was last summer, when I had a problem where the first roll was OK, but the first half of the second roll had frames only exposed for a third of their length, though the second half of the second roll was OK.
So as last Friday was relatively decent weather, I took it out for a test roll using all the speeds from a thirtieth up and making notes so if any of them were only part exposed I could tell which speeds were at fault.

But all the frames were OK. Which doesn't solve the mystery from last time but suggests I don't need it serviced just yet.

That's shutter capping, where the first curtain runs slow and the second catches up with it. Generally more problematic at faster speeds. Can be caused by a variety of things, but normally it's degraded lubricants and/or debris (like wayward film chips). Sometimes it's temperature sensitive. A CLA will take care of it.

[AJShepherd]

The day I had that problem was really hot, but I'd not used the camera for several months. This time i'd exercised the shutter and also used a squeezy blower to blow into the camera in case there was any dust or anything, so didn't have the same issue. If it happens again I'll get a CLA done.

[Blaxton]

Leica, R6, 35mm Elmarit lens, Fomapan 100, Caffenol C-L, 30 minutes, semi-stand

Lincoln, Rhode Island
Lincoln, Rhode Island by William Blackstone, on Flickr

Lonsdale Marsh, Cumberland, Rhode Island
Cumberland, Rhode Island by William Blackstone, on Flickr

Lonsdale Marsh, Cumberland, Rhode Island
Lonsdale Marsh, Rhode Island by William Blackstone, on Flickr