james_r2

Problem solved: bought a 4x5 Thanks to all for your insight and advice

<p>Thank-you to all for so many thoughtful & detailed comments: Far beyond my "friend's" expectations.<br />Apologies if this topic has been covered - my bad. A search returned no immediately obvious hits.<br /><br />Figured 6x9 would be a poor man's LF, and have advantage over 6x6 or 6x7 in achieving familiar aspect ratio of 135 in a large print, without tossing a lot of the neg; going for wide, without resorting to panos, etc.<br />If consensus is cropping negs from 50 on Mamiya won't significantly impact final quality (all things considered), great - one less camera.<br> "large print" = 13x19 to 20x30<br> Landscape = built urban-industrial environment, + the odd desert/ocean/hill<br> 100% tripod / slow film - all types - but mostly BW<br />Nikon 9000 / digital print / special negs to pro service for drums or big prints<br /><br /><br> Thanks again.</p> <p><br /><br /></p> <p> </p>

<p>Asking for a friend:<br> Let's say you already own a Mamiya 7 with the 50mm lens, and want large landscape print capability:<br />(LF is not an option; looking for best MF landscape solution)<br> Consider 6x9 such as the Fuji GSW with a 65mm lens, or stick with the Mamiya and buy the 43mm lens for it?</p> <p> </p>

<p>Zombie Glass Backs thread:<br /><br />The glass back option required 2 things (besides the glass):<br /><br />1: An F model (3.5 or 2.8) with the internal pressure tab to lock/unlock the flat glass, and a recessed pin located next to the right hand side film gate guide rail. <br /><br />2: The correct optical glass back with a raised tab on one side of the pressure plate; when the plate is set to the optical glass position; the pin pushes the pressure plate away from the film gate - to accommodate the optical glass.<br /><br />Regarding optical glass - the differences can be subtle, and vary with the subject (buildings with flat planes vs landscapes @ f16), aperture setting, etc.<br />Opinions vary as to whether the improvement is on the edge, center, or all over: <br />My own tests have so far been inconclusive. <br />In my limited experience, if the glass is clean & clear, it won't have an effect on images, or scratch negatives.<br> <br />BTW - Rolleiflex backs are not universally interchangeable across all models: The later "White Face" film gate guide rails and corresponding film back's pressure plate are different than earlier versions: Using an older type of back will result in focus problems with a WF model: A post CLA field-test revealed this on my WF Rollei, and Harry Fleenor confirmed it. Exchanging pressure plates solved the problem.</p> <p>220 most certainly can be used with Rolleiflex models having the 12/24 option:<br />Some people report success with hacks to use 220 on non-220 fitted bodies; usually non-invasive methods of fooling the counter.<br> Note; there is no special setting on the film pressure plate for 220 - it stays in the same position as 120 - at least, that's the way my 12/24 equipped 3.5F works..</p> <p> </p>

<p>The red line a little past the halfway point towards the red panel is for calibrating the follower needle: see Prochnow's Technical Report pg 130 for F2.8 instructions</p>

<p>Note that in Prochnow's Technical Report, ppg 114 / 130, it states that DIN should be set to 15 (ASA 25) to confirm calibration of the match needle follower: all other settings are same.</p>

<p>A recently repainted M4 is losing the finish far faster than expected, and rather than brass, silver nickel is showing through.<br> Seller confirmed they didn't take finish down to brass before painting, and claim painting on nickel gives just as durable a finish: Apparently not, in this case.</p> <p>My understanding of "de-chroming" a Leica for repaint means the finish is stripped down to brass before painting, not left at the nickel layer.<br> Willing to bet most owners expect gradual paint wear to reveal a classic brass patina, not silver-nickel.</p> <p>Thoughts?</p> <p> </p>

<p>Knut and John - Paint chip confirmed by tech.<br> Tech also confirmed permanent haze on one element that was also not mentioned by seller -<br />guess the KEH people need glasses.</p>

<p><img src="/photo/17789914" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p><img src="/photo/17789916" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>A recently acquired lens has some sort of debris adhering to aperture blades: Moves when aperture is adjusted, and extends over edge into fov between f2 and f4. (see pix) Haven't got roll back from lab, so influence on IQ is unknown.<br /> Wondering<br /> 1: what it is & how it got there:<br /> sloppy tech?<br /> stray bit of metal or plastic that found its way in, or evidence of damage to the lens?<br /> 2: potential for damaging or interfering with glass or mechanics</p> <p>Thoughts?<br /> <br /> </p> <p> </p>

<p>We all have our good days and bad days.<br />Good Q.C. and customer comms is key in any field</p>

<p>Thanks Andrew for the useful info.<br> Followup: The Mt. Wilson staff were great: very accomodating to the group I was with.<br> T adapter owner bailed (would have been ok to use one), so tried handheld with mixed results:<br />The more distant objects (carbon star / cats eye / etc.) were somewhat blurry & dim due to atmospheric conditions and angle of the telescope. Jupiter and Saturn were the brightest by far. Only went for Saturn - it was quite bright; almost artificial looking.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks for the advice gents: will give the afocal method a shot, and if it isn't possible, I'll look for some nearby ducks and post the results.....<br> BTW, Mt. Wilson offers half or full night educational sessions on the historic 60" to the public; typically groups.</p>

<p>Looking for advice on taking photos through the Mount Wilson 60" telescope, with a camera/lens placed up to the eyepice: Can't find anything online.</p> <p>Choice of cameras (all with primes)<br> Canon 6D<br> Leica M4<br> Fuji X-Pro1</p> <p>Preferred focal length?<br> Any focussing / exposure / filter suggestions or pointers?</p> <p>Thanks in advance.</p>