Author Topic: I just made/fixed ... (Read 126335 times)

Indofunk · « **Reply #100 on:** September 12, 2016, 02:23:11 AM »

Quote from: Francois on September 11, 2016, 08:52:34 PM

Trudeau Airport

What?? Justin Trudeau already has an airport named after him? He's not even dead yet!

Francois · « **Reply #101 on:** September 12, 2016, 02:01:22 PM »

It's actually named after his father who was prime minister.
Before it was just Dorval airport for the city it's located in.
And for the airport geeks, it's YUL

Indofunk · « **Reply #102 on:** September 12, 2016, 04:41:12 PM »

Oh, kind of like a not-horrible version of Daddy Bush and Baby Bush? I tend to hate dynasties, but apparently this kid is quite popular.

Francois · « **Reply #103 on:** September 12, 2016, 09:20:35 PM »

It's pretty funny because he's anything but Bush dynasty like.
Justin actually takes after his mother than anything else. He didn't get along with his dad in his teenage years so he moved out west with his mom.
While he might not be as intelligent as his father, he makes up for it by knowing how to select his entourage. He's also got some very social views... before becoming a PM he was a teacher, unlike his father who was a lawyer. Very different approach.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #104 on:** October 09, 2016, 07:10:48 PM »

This is a little resto and refurb job I've just finished. It's a Sanderson half-plate from 1910 with an Aldis 200/4.5 of about the same period. Or it was; it's now a 4x5. The original is all mahogany but the new parts are cherry and maple - front, back, and bottom. My friend wants to use it, but he also wants to keep it original where possible, hence the screw-insert for the tripod base. For once, a camera that did not need new bellows; two small repairs and re-gluing the rear was all it needed.

The lens wide open works pretty nice.

The shot is on the Fomapan 320 freebie I was given at Photographica earlier this year. 8 mins in DDX.

Francois · « **Reply #105 on:** October 14, 2016, 10:47:35 PM »

Last week I picked up an Olumpus XA that was sold with a "Tel Quel" label on it (a.k.a. As Is) for 2$.
The camera was filthy. The front cover was popped out of the rails. The aperture slider was a rock.
I put some batteries in it and it seemed to work, so I proceeded to dismantle the whole thing. After a lot of cleaning and a bit of oil on the aperture rails, it seems to work OK.

I'm wondering if they all have a rather stiff aperture slider?
Also, the cover doesn't slide smoothly and doesn't click-lock when fully open. Is that normal?

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #106 on:** October 15, 2016, 01:16:10 PM »

Just a guess here, Francois, but if the sliding cover had a click then it was probably just a detente ball on a spring, and if the cover was off its rail then I guess the ball just rolled away leaving a scratchy spring end.

Francois · « **Reply #107 on:** October 15, 2016, 02:33:01 PM »

I really have no idea. What surprised me is how crammed this camera is inside.
I still have to work on the electronic flash that came with it.

Indofunk · « **Reply #108 on:** October 15, 2016, 11:03:20 PM »

My XA is in the shop now, so I'm working off of memory, but yes, the clamshell cover should click open and click closed. And the aperture switch is definitely supposed to have an easy throw, except when you push it all the way up to open the flash. At times it seems that I need to lift weights just to perform that task

I assume that's because there's a mechanical linkage that has to go all the way through the camera to the flash...

02Pilot · « **Reply #109 on:** October 16, 2016, 01:14:00 AM »

The clamshell detent uses a roller bearing. An easily lost roller bearing, unfortunately. Probably not hard to fab one up using a brad nail and a Dremel with a cutoff wheel. I don't have mine anymore or I'd pop the cover to measure it.

BernardL · « **Reply #110 on:** October 17, 2016, 07:18:36 AM »

Quote

Sandeha Lynch. Just a guess here, Francois, but if the sliding cover had a click then it was probably just a detente ball on a spring, and if the cover was off its rail then I guess the ball just rolled away leaving a scratchy spring end.

Extract the ball from a ball point pen. Probably a biggish one would be the proper size. I fixed a Componon 80/5.6 (diaphragm detent) that way. If the spring is also lost you need to make one.

Francois · « **Reply #111 on:** October 21, 2016, 09:10:08 PM »

Since that bearing is actually more like a piece of rod and not a ball, I went through the trouble to make one.
First one I made was too big in diameter. Too bad because it was made from very nice steel.
So I ended-up making one from a finish nail.

For those who lost their's, the best diameter is around 2mm. The length of the roller is 4mm.
It's located on top of the camera.

So now, my XA actually stays open when I need it to!

Kai-san · « **Reply #112 on:** December 27, 2016, 10:31:34 PM »

A couple of years ago I purchased a beautiful Franka Solida III with a Schneider-Kreuznach Radionar 80mm f2.9 lens. After running one film through it I realized that all shots were out of focus. At the time I just put it on a shelf, meaning to have a look at it when I had the time. This year I took some days off from work at Christmas and yesterday I decided it was time to make an attempt at fixing the Solida. At first I tried to collimate it against my Contax 645 with the 140mm lens, but I was unable to make any sense out of it as the range when the target was in focus was simply too wide. So I put the Solida on a tripod and focused the un-coupled rangefinder on a target around 30 meters away. The rangefinder showed a setting very close to infinity. Then I taped a ground glass to the film frame and focused the lens while using a loupe. The lens showed a distance of 10 meters when in focus. Then I loosened the focus ring, set it to the same as the rangefinder setting and fixed it again.
So today I went for a test shooting with Kodak T-max 400 film and the results are quite good. I do not know what level of precision it is possible to get with these cameras that has un-coupled rangefinders, especially with a large aperture. The first example is shot at f8.0 and the second at f4.0.

Francois · « **Reply #113 on:** December 27, 2016, 10:46:57 PM »

Usually, the closer you focus the less reliable it gets. I have that on one of my Graflex (a pacemaker crown graphic with the Kalart rangefinder) and can say that with the weight of that camera and its ergonomics, it's a bit of a pain to use that way.

Kai-san · « **Reply #114 on:** December 27, 2016, 10:57:00 PM »

That's the beauty of the Solida, you can can slip it into a (large) pocket. To be on the safe side I think I will stick to f5.6 and smaller apertures.

Bryan · « **Reply #115 on:** January 17, 2017, 12:53:07 AM »

This is a work in progress but right now I can scan 35mm, 127 and 120 film with it. Before this I would set up a tripod pointed down at the negative stacked on top of translucent plastic and an iPad for the back light. One problem with that was the plastic being directly behind the negative, any scratches or blemishes on the plastic could show thru. This setup gives me some separation which takes the plastic out of the depth of field eliminating that problem. It also makes setup easier and provides a more stable platform to shoot from.

I purchased a few cheap aluminum rails on eBay from china and built a camera support that sits on top of it. This allows me to move the camera back for scanning different formats. I have the same Kodak negative holders for 35mm, 127, and 120 square and rectangular formats. The rail system can be locked in place with an Allen Wrench. The wood negative holder is spring loaded from behind to keep it pressed together and square with the camera. I added a binder clip on top of the negative holder but I'm not sure that was really necessary but this film had a lot of curl to it.

I have ordered a 198 led on camera light that has adjustable brightness that will replace the iPad. I'm also going to add a holder for 4x5 film. The 4x5 film holder will sit behind the current setup and will also be spring loaded. If I need to scan odd formats like 110 or wide 35mm I will have to go back to my old system unless I can figure out a way to do it with this contraption. I'll post updates as I add to it. It's not pretty because I used mostly scraps of wood that I had around the house as well as a few other pieces of hardware.

Bryan · « **Reply #116 on:** February 02, 2017, 11:16:36 PM »

My contraption is done. I just added the mount for 4x5 film plus a new LED light source.

Bryan · « **Reply #117 on:** February 02, 2017, 11:22:29 PM »

Not the best example because it was shot with a Kodak No.2 Brownie Box camera with a meniscus lens but these are a few of the first scans from my contraption using the new light source.

Upper Car Deck by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Hood Canal Sunset by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

astrobeck · « **Reply #118 on:** February 03, 2017, 04:08:04 AM »

Now that is impressive! You must be happy with that!!!
Can I see an end view of those rails?
I think I know how they are shaped, but would like a peek....
I'm always looking for things and pieces to make more astronomy gear.
thanks

Bryan · « **Reply #119 on:** February 03, 2017, 04:48:38 AM »

Quote from: astrobeck on February 03, 2017, 04:08:04 AM

Now that is impressive! You must be happy with that!!!
Can I see an end view of those rails?
I think I know how they are shaped, but would like a peek....
I'm always looking for things and pieces to make more astronomy gear.
thanks

It may not be pretty but it works and it has made scanning easier. The link below is the ones I purchased on eBay, they have several different views. They come in different lengths as well. The ones I purchased have a hex head on the side of the slider to lock it in place with an allen wrench, I'm not sure all of them have that.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/272360583399?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

astrobeck · « **Reply #120 on:** February 03, 2017, 02:48:22 PM »

Ooh, thanks for that link!
Pretty is overrated at times, especially if it makes something work like you need it too!
Lot's of parts on that link, so I will give it some study.

Kai-san · « **Reply #121 on:** February 13, 2017, 10:15:49 PM »

My Pilot Super 6 from 1938 had a badly deteriorated mirror so I decided to try to fix it, because it's a surprisingly good camera despite it's age. Getting the mirror out should be rather easy, but on this particular model it's very tight. In the end I managed it by using a very small suction cup. So off the mirror went to Orion Optics in the UK for a re-coating. I got it back today and after a lot of fiddling to get it back in I finally found the trick, it has to be slid to one side when inserting it and then adjusted afterwards. I did a proper cleanup of the ground glass as well, so now it's ready for it's eightieth birthday next year!
(Sorry about the bad mobile phone shot)

Francois · « **Reply #122 on:** February 14, 2017, 01:42:59 PM »

A new mirror is a bit like a new heart for these old cameras...

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #123 on:** February 14, 2017, 09:14:06 PM »

Quote from: Francois on October 21, 2016, 09:10:08 PM

Since that bearing is actually more like a piece of rod and not a ball, I went through the trouble to make one.
First one I made was too big in diameter. Too bad because it was made from very nice steel.
So I ended-up making one from a finish nail.

For those who lost their's, the best diameter is around 2mm. The length of the roller is 4mm.
It's located on top of the camera.

So now, my XA actually stays open when I need it to!

I also lost the roller from an XA and XA2. Replaced it with a small snippet of a wooden toothpick. Works fine.

Francois · « **Reply #124 on:** February 14, 2017, 09:36:07 PM »

I used a small nail on mine. Just like on the original

Bryan · « **Reply #125 on:** March 21, 2017, 12:04:15 AM »

With some parts I had lying around I put together this Polaroid Pack Film Pinhole camera. I used a 0.3mm laser cut pinhole, a Polaroid back, a bellows and lots of gaffers tape and glue. With the bellows fully extended I get a focal length of about 155mmwhich gives me f/517. With the bellows fully collapsed I get a focal length of about 85mm which gives me f/283. Fujifilm FP-3000B has some crazy reciprocity. Using the pinhole assist app on my iPhone it gave me an actual exposure time of less than 6 minutes at f/517. With the calculated reciprocity it was a 58 minute exposure and it still came out a little dark. I'll test it with some FP-100C later.

Aksel · « **Reply #126 on:** March 21, 2017, 10:09:44 AM »

Seriously cool Franken-folder!
From the little experience I have with pinhole and fp100c, it´s nowhere as "bad" as the 3000b when it comes to reciprocity.

Francois · « **Reply #127 on:** March 21, 2017, 01:45:45 PM »

It's alive! It's ALIVE!

Bryan · « **Reply #128 on:** March 21, 2017, 02:17:23 PM »

Quote from: Aksel on March 21, 2017, 10:09:44 AM

Seriously cool Franken-folder!
From the little experience I have with pinhole and fp100c, it´s nowhere as "bad" as the 3000b when it comes to reciprocity.

I read somewhere that FP100C doesn't look very good shot with a pinhole, but I will give it a try.

Francois, it may have to be killed or re-purposed when I get bored with Polaroid Pinholes.

Francois · « **Reply #129 on:** March 21, 2017, 07:12:41 PM »

Just like the original Frankenstein

Aksel · « **Reply #130 on:** March 22, 2017, 07:16:26 AM »

Quote from: Bryan on March 21, 2017, 02:17:23 PM

Quote from: Aksel on March 21, 2017, 10:09:44 AM

I read somewhere that FP100C doesn't look very good shot with a pinhole, but I will give it a try.

I never reflected on that, might be that I just accepted the results, beeing pinhole but to my eye they looked fine.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #131 on:** March 22, 2017, 12:15:51 PM »

Quote from: Bryan on March 21, 2017, 02:17:23 PM

Quote from: Aksel on March 21, 2017, 10:09:44 AM

I read somewhere that FP100C doesn't look very good shot with a pinhole, but I will give it a try.

I never reflected on that, might be that I just accepted the results, beeing pinhole but to my eye they looked fine.

isn't it just that the fuji fp100c gets a blue cast from long exposures?

Bryan · « **Reply #132 on:** March 22, 2017, 02:54:09 PM »

Quote from: jojonas~ on March 22, 2017, 12:15:51 PM

Quote from: Bryan on March 21, 2017, 02:17:23 PM
Quote from: Aksel on March 21, 2017, 10:09:44 AM

I read somewhere that FP100C doesn't look very good shot with a pinhole, but I will give it a try.

I never reflected on that, might be that I just accepted the results, beeing pinhole but to my eye they looked fine.

isn't it just that the fuji fp100c gets a blue cast from long exposures?

I think that's what I read. I was just looking at some FP-100c pinholes on Flickr and they don't look bad.

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #133 on:** March 22, 2017, 03:52:45 PM »

Something I've been working on this past week or two.

Cuban Polaroid, aka Lambe-Lambe, Afghan Camera, Mobile Darkroom
Dimensions: 32x33x37cm
Weight: 4kg including camera
Camera body: Kodak Recomar 6.5x9 plate view camera
Lens: Kodak Sterling Anaston 105/4.5

This one will go touring France in the summer on the back of a cycle trailer. I may have to build another for my own use.

AJShepherd · « **Reply #134 on:** March 22, 2017, 06:37:02 PM »

That just looks incredibly cool!

jojonas~ · « **Reply #135 on:** March 23, 2017, 11:08:49 AM »

looking smooth there, Sandeha! even seems like the camera could be released and used normally if desired? btw, does it focus close enough for portrait shots?

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #136 on:** March 23, 2017, 11:32:42 AM »

It could be used normally if another view screen back were found, together with film holders, but you can see in the first shot that the back has been modified such that the negative is now pressed against the empty door, in front of the screen. It certainly close focuses though, and like Mauricio Sapata's version, will be used mainly for portraits.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #137 on:** March 23, 2017, 03:17:20 PM »

Quote from: Sandeha Lynch on March 23, 2017, 11:32:42 AM

It could be used normally if another view screen back were found, together with film holders, but you can see in the first shot that the back has been modified such that the negative is now pressed against the empty door, in front of the screen. It certainly close focuses though, and like Mauricio Sapata's version, will be used mainly for portraits.

ah, yes. I should've thought about that you've probably had to move where the film goes a bit back so that'd effectively make it to focus more closely. maybe it's even as far off as it can be focused on that shot of the focus screen?

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #138 on:** March 23, 2017, 03:45:28 PM »

Infinity is now about 5mm further back, but that's all. It still racks a long way forward - closest focus is down to about 30cm with the bellows fully extended, which is a good bit more than 1:1 macro though the extra exposure needed would be quite painful.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #139 on:** March 24, 2017, 08:51:23 PM »

Hello there,

I recently picked up a Beseler Printmaker 35 as my first enlarger. It was $35 plus shipping so it evened out to almost $80 after all was said and done. However, once it arrived, I was cleaning it and realized that it didn't have a negative carrier or the condenser assembly. Everything else is there, including a GraLab timer.

I've seen the condenser assembly going on eBay for like $20 tops, which is fine, but I was wondering if anyone knows how to, or has made, a negative carrier using black cardboard/construction cardboard. My dad told me that he built one like 40 years ago for his slides using kids construction cardboard.

Has anyone used/built anything like this? I just don't feel like paying $50 for one.

Also, does anyone know if the negative carrier for a Beseler Printmaker 67 fits into the Printmaker 35?

Thanks,
Miguel.

Francois · « **Reply #140 on:** March 24, 2017, 09:31:54 PM »

I've done custom carriers many times. Not really hard to do, but don't expect straight edges on your prints unless you also use an easel.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #141 on:** March 25, 2017, 12:22:48 AM »

Quote from: Francois on March 24, 2017, 09:31:54 PM

I've done custom carriers many times. Not really hard to do, but don't expect straight edges on your prints unless you also use an easel.

So, just black cardboard?

Francois · « **Reply #142 on:** March 25, 2017, 12:52:28 PM »

What I've found is that pretty much anything that's opaque and won't scratch the film will do the job just fine.

MiguelCampano · « **Reply #143 on:** March 25, 2017, 01:01:50 PM »

Quote from: Francois on March 25, 2017, 12:52:28 PM

What I've found is that pretty much anything that's opaque and won't scratch the film will do the job just fine.

Thank you! I'm definitely going to experiment building one fairly soon... Unless I find one for cheap on eBay

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #144 on:** March 29, 2017, 04:12:20 PM »

Finished and ready to deliver tomorrow.

The photographer has a week to practice before riding from Edinburgh down to the middle of France.

SLVR · « **Reply #145 on:** March 29, 2017, 04:54:52 PM »

Fixed my wonky needled darkroom timer and modified a lens board to fit my rodenstock lens.

Francois · « **Reply #146 on:** March 29, 2017, 08:28:15 PM »

Quote from: SLVR on March 29, 2017, 04:54:52 PM

Fixed my wonky needled darkroom timer

I still have to do this with my vintage time-o-lite that keeps going past zero...

jojonas~ · « **Reply #147 on:** March 30, 2017, 07:46:47 AM »

the end result looks great, Sandeha! is that the paper box on the right side of the camera?

Sandeha Lynch · « **Reply #148 on:** March 30, 2017, 09:09:50 AM »

Quote from: jojonas~ on March 30, 2017, 07:46:47 AM

the end result looks great, Sandeha! is that the paper box on the right side of the camera?

It is, a safe box for paper or film, with all the fitting very loose for working one-handed in the dark.

Francois · « **Reply #149 on:** April 07, 2017, 09:04:27 PM »

Just to reassure you, there were more parts a few hours ago...
I had it taken apart up to the aperture blades... what a b**** to put back together.
On this camera, the aperture is entirely adjustable by loosening 3 ill placed screws and rotating a mount that also holds the blades. No markings whatsoever.
And my marks for where the helix should mate got wiped-out from all the handling... I guess I've got a few more hours to go on this one...