allen_gross

I'm off to a 2week trip to Bavaria. traveling light w. my Contax 139 (another great "bargain" purchase from KEH), Zeiss 28 mm distagon w. T/C as principal walk around kit, Vivitar Series 1 19-35 in case I need wider. Maybe take its little brother Yashica FX-D as well (only weighs 1 lb). Porta 160 and 400.

Mike:What is "curtain bounce?" I also have a 137, and have stopped using it because too many shots on a roll are out of focus for no reason. If this is due to curtain bounce is there anything to rcorrect this? I use my Yashica FX-D quartz instead but miss the wonderfully bright 137 viewfinder.

John: yes, the distance scale agrees with the measured distance. Tried it at 6 ft. And distance (which reads @ infinity. Michael: I'll try to get a picture of that bushing and pin for you . I think the mirror is in its proper position, but you may be able to tell. -Allen

<p>John: I tried your suggestion. Mirror returns to this same place each time - no need to re-focus. Also tried it with different lenses - same result.</p>

<p>Firstly, thanks for the quick responses. As you might guess, this is my favorite forum on Pnet and I’m always impressed how helpful people are.<br> John: Thanks for the advice on avoiding starting a new thread to post successive comments.<br> Michael: Apologies for not being clear about the examples and the lenses used. I first noticed the problem using the CZ lens taking pictures of the Rodin statues at the Norton Simon Museum (it affected other photos as well). The same thing happened on a subsequent occasion: occasional shots with everything equally out of focus (normal daylight, aperture and shutter speed).<br> I then thought of shooting with different lenses to see whether the problem was with the CZ – hence the use of the Super Tak, which I usually use with my M 42 Pentacon but have also used with the Contax with the M42- to C/Y adapter. I also shot with a Vivitar 19-35 at 28 mm and got similar results. So I think it’s something with the camera.<br> Dave: The original problem was noticed while using a single lens throughout the roll (Ex. 1).Ex. 2 used different lenses to ascertain that it wasn’t the CZ causing the problem.<br> James: Thanks for putting the photos on one thread. It’s a Contax 137 MA, with the speed selection ring having long been broken, making the camera essentially an MD in operation. The M42 lens is attached with an M42 to C/Y adapter. As mentioned, this lens has functioned fine before on both my Pentacon and the Contax.<br> Michel, Dave and John:<br> <strong>“It's as if the lens or film plane were somehow displaced by a certain small amount.” </strong>What would cause this?<br> <strong>“film flatness problem.”</strong> This I doubt, as I’m always impressed when loading film into the camera how flat the film appears. And it’s happened with several rolls, so it couldn’t be a faulty roll. <br> <strong>“gummed-up mirror system.” </strong>Seals and foam look fine – looking at it while repeatedly firing the shutter without a lens, everything looks fine.<br> John: I will try your approach. Should your hypothesis be true, what would have to be done?<br> Any other ideas based on the info I gave you?<br> Thanks,<br> Allen</p>

<p>I have had this Contax 137 MA for quite some time. Last year I noticed a discrepancy between successive shots - with some pictures being out of focus (usually a successive shot). It doesn't seem to be a lens problem. In example 2, I took some shots of the same scene with my CZ 28 mm, an M42 Super-Tak with adapter (usually also an excellent performer), and you can see the differences. Could there be some sort of mirror slap in the camera? My local tech didn't see anything wrong. Can anyone help/explain?<br> Thanks,<br> Allen Gross</p><div></div>

My guess is that there is room in the negatives to reduce the blown highlights. I recently had bunch of shots taken in Tuolomne meadows (Portra 400) with white water, that the lab printed with blown highlights and too much contrast. I then scanned it myself with Vuescan and my Minolta Dimage III scanner and got better results than the lab. I second the advice to take your prints back to the lab and tell them your concerns. They can probably do a better job.

Ditto - firm but smooth. Allows me to see the darkening gradually. It shouldn't feel like "steps".

Call Bel Air on Westwood. I don't know if they do in- house processing. Samy's does, but not any more for E-6 (I don't remember where they send them to). I've been very happy with the Samy's in Pasadena for in- house color neg processing, and they send their traditional B&W to Samys Fairfax. Happy hunting!

<p>FE2, Fuji 200 film, Nikon 28-105 lens</p><div></div>

I bought my first SrT in Germany in 1978 on the day our daughter was born. Used it for years, then bought a few more used to give to my kids as they grew up. Now of course they use digital cameras, while I went to Nikons and Contax/Yashica.I recently couldn't resist buying a 50 mm Rokkor 1.4 for $30 at my local Samys, then borrowed my son's SrT 101 - still working well. I had forgotten what a pleasure it was to use this camera!

My thanks also, Rick. I was previously using a hue/saturation adjustment to get that toning, but your method is far better, and more flexible! -Allen

I take a Panasonic P&S which has a terrific telephoto range and ISO quality, and use a Nikon film camera (F3 or FE)for "fun" or when I need to control depth of field and don't mind the extra bulk.

I remember fondling one in Vienna some time ago. Had to settle for a Contax D.

<p>Oops - computer problems. I'll try again.</p>