Jump to content

charles_wass

PhotoNet Pro
  • Posts

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. <p>I rarely use my T90 and so, as a sort of insurance policy, I take it out of the cupboard quite often and fire the shutter a few times. I am told that may stave off the problem, but I don't know if I should believe that.</p>
  2. <p>As a Canon collector I was curious about the curious AL-1 and so bought one a couple of years ago when I came across an example in good condition. I am surpised that the focus indication is quite accurate and consistent given a subject of reasonable contrast.</p>
  3. <p>Presumably the modelscope is designed for manual exposure and focusing, in which case does the camera need to recognise it ? Some cameras can be fooled into recognising that something is attached to the lens mount and then will allow manual control.</p>
  4. <p>Apologies for a small error above. the lens on 6x7 was 90mm and the circular image nearly filled the frame..</p>
  5. <p>Long ago I used to photograph architectural models in the course of my work and in fact they were all models of interiors that had to be photographed so as to simulate the eye level of a person in the actual building. Sometimes the model maker arranged for parts of the side to be removeable and I used a small camera in that case, but never simulated a true eye level. Sometimes in those cases and always when the side was not removeable I used a modelscope. The modelscope is intended for viewing models in this context. It is a type of endoscope with a prism at the end to provide the right angled view. <br> There are AFAIK two types. The one I used was primarily for viewing by eye, but came with a set of adaptors to fit lens filter threads. I had to fit the camera to a copy stand because the effective aperture was about F/90! With a 35mm camera the modelscope provided a circular image cut off at top and bottom. I can't remember the lens I used, but it was probably 50mm. I also used a 6x7 SLR and got a circular image within the frame using a 80mm lens. Framing was difficult and I had to use high level supplementary lighting. With the 6x7 I used a Polaroid back to assess exposure and framing.<br> The other type of modelscope, that I have never seen, I believe has some sort of mounting arrangement itself specifically for photography.<br> I do not know the manufacturer of the model I used, which belonged to my company and was primarily for clients to view the models. It was simply marked "Made in Paris". <br> I do not know your location, but the modelscope was bought from an architectural model making business in London called Thorpe Model Makers. They were then in Gray's Inn Road, but I think they later moved.<br> I found using the modelscope very troublesome.</p>
  6. <p>There are two types of adapter to enable the lens you have to be used on the 300D. One has no glass element and will not allow focusing to infinity or anywhere near it. The other type has a glass element or elements to enable infinity focus but the glass degrades image quality. The usual advice is not to use FD fit lenses on EOS cameras. I have those lenses and cameras, but never use the two together.<br> <br />Manual focus lenses from other manufacturers can be used successfully on EOS cameras, including Nikon, M42 and Pentax K. Alternatively your lens can be used with adapters on many ILCs/CSCs.</p>
  7. <p>In my experience, admittedly limited to two FD adapters, the manufacturers err for safety in the other direction, making them fractionally short so that the lens focusses beyond infinity.</p>
  8. <p>When you shoot in Auto mode the camera chooses where to focus. It cannot read your mind. Try P mode and use centre point focus, at least at first. Also note carefully what Jos van Eekelen and Rob Bernhard advise about depth of field</p>
  9. <p>I have an adapter with a "lock - unlock" ring that enables the aperture to be stopped dow.</p>
  10. <p>The previous posts have covered the pros and cons of the various camera types well, but I suspect that, however helpful they tried to be, they will not in themselves enable you to make the right decision. The three types handle so differently that there is a risk of your making a choice you may later regret unless you can try all three and compare them. Is there really no way of handling examples? If you ask around or advertize locally you may even find someone who has a neglected camera they would be ready to sell and which you could try without obligation, though I acknowledge that few people except professionals used MF.</p>
  11. <p>I endorse Douwe Van de Voort's post, but would caution that the RB67 is very heavy and not ideal if you plan much hand held use. I used to use one, but almost always on a tripod. The Hasselblad is lighter and obviously so are the 645 models.</p>
  12. <p>The red LED indicates that the battery is OK, but it could be worth trying another.<br> Does the orange LED light?<br> There are numerous interlocks on the camera, but I believe they are not identical between the various RZ67 models. Which is yours?<br> I had a similar problem with my RZ67 ProII last year and when I took it to be repaired the technician found that one of the interlock links between body and film holder was sticking.</p>
×
×
  • Create New...