jim_meisenbach2

Just read that Roger Hicks passed on this past Sunday, As I understand it, he had been ill for some time, and had a very rough time the past couple of weeks. RIP.

OK, a + for stand development. I use HC-110 1+120. My first few tries with stand were disappointing, but in the last year or so, it really has worked quite well. I think my fine tuning will consist of shorter times at room temperature. My film has been UFX 400, both 35 and 120. "Ornello" at Digital Truth has been putting stand development down, as has Rodeo Joe. I agree: unless you need absolute perfection in every roll because your living depends on it, experiment to your heart's content. If HC-110 stand was good enough for St. Ansel, I guess it is good enough for me. Jim

Thanks again for all replies. Orsetto refers to a body focus screen issue with the ec. don't know what this is. educate me, please. thanks jim

Martin: seems to be a remarkably capable little camera. I assume it is a 16mm film type. perfect for the type of photography you posted pix of. Jim

Bronica S2A was my first real MF camera. Bought it to use in wedding photography. Performed quite well, no problems. Unfortunately, somebody else wanted it too. Replaced it with a Bronica EC. It also has performed flawlessly for at least 20 years. Had to have 6x7 so bought a GS-1 w/ AE prism. Another very good performer, easier for me to handle w/o grip. Also have a Rollei tlr, which I have not gotten along with ergonomically. My advice is to handle as many different types of MF as possible, and buy the one you feel most comfortable with. Price is a personal matter. As I said, the EC has gone a long time with no problems, in spite of its rather bazaar mirror system, You are the one who will have to balance everything out. Best of luck. Jim

I am not a big fan of Rodinal, either, but I do like to use stand development if I feel the need for it. I use HC 110 1:120 per some recommendations I stumbled on somewhere. My film of choice for the past couple of years has Ultrafine Extreme 400, mostly in 120. I find that I have had to pare my time back to about 40' in a Paterson two-reel tank. My working solution is well over the capacity of my tank, but considering the minute amount of developer used, its ok. Has anybody else out there used HC 110 stand? Jim

All, thanks for insights. I really have no problem with my normal lens, although my Planar on my 2.8f may be just a bit sharper. I have owned , in the past, (until they were stolen) a 2,8 50 that was tack-sharp, and a 200 that was just so-so. The 2.8 50 seemed a bit sharper than the 3.5 50 I bought to replace it. I am now down to one lens and a Vivitar doubler that I use occasionally for close-up stuff. I do really like the 18 inch minimum focusing distance with the 75. Again, thanks for the info. Jim

I have had a Bronica EC for many years. It is equipped with the PC 75mm Nikkor, which performs ok. Only this year I learned that there was a different Nikkor 75 with the prefix HC. Searched the internet but was not able to turn up anything on this lens, other than it is "highly desireable" on ebay. Can anyone fill me in on the differences between these lenses, and is the HC worth the pursuit? Thankyou for any info. Jim