scott_paris4

There's a popular TV show now that takes place in the 50s or 60s, and has a character who is a photographer. Apparently, millennial viewers are mystified about what he does in "the red room."

On the original topic (Lab-Box), I have no personal experience, but there are quite a few review videos on the huge video site (whose name I'm not sure I should mention.) Also, according to the Lab-Box website, a leader puller is offered along with the machine.

No, I didn't notice the date, and you're absolutely right. Not the first time I've tried to add to a long dead thread. Apparently the threads are not sorted by date on the forum page, or I've got something set wrong; in any case I guess I need to pay more attention to the dates.

Over the years, I've used Nikkor, Schneider, Rodenstock and Fuji enlarging lenses. Unless you get one that's been dropped or otherwise mistreated, it's very hard to pick out differences between the various manufacturer's top-of-the-line lenses. Although, of course, opinions will vary. I just bought a Fujinon EX 135mm f5.6 lens (their 6 element, 6 group, multicoated best ever enlarging lens) for $57. I think this was in the $400 range when new. So, as someone said up stream, there's really no reason in 2019 to use anything but the very best enlarging lenses.

Glad it seems to be working out. Can you tell us who you had do the CLA?

I just found a post that says the Tessar patents were long expired when Leitz designed the Elmar. So maybe Leitz just wanted something different. I dunno. Edit: Oh, and Mr Elwing's post, above. My avatar picture is forty years old. No more-recent photos exist.

Yes, those rectangular wall units with amber filter are intended for paper, so they're probably fine. Again, don't just trust anything... do the test before you actually use the light. The actual filter part is replaceable, so you can try different colors. I think if I were in your position, I'd get two of those round lights from Adorama. That's $50 total, and since they're new they're probably trustworthy. I prefer red over amber, but that's a personal preference. And it's not a dumb question at all. Here's an off-topic suggestion: Black and white darkroom work isn't particular complex or difficult, but there are lots of details where you can go wrong and be stumped if you're trying to learn all by yourself. The easiest way to get an overview of the process is to take a darkroom class at a local art school or junior college, or find someone near you who has a darkroom and would be willing to let you hang out with them for a while. Google photography clubs in your area. Most are all-digital now but you might get lucky. When you're starting out, everything is new and confusing. It's just way easier to learn from someone who has experience. My avatar picture is forty years old, but I still look exactly like that.

Here's a follow-up, only 7 years late: Skipping to the end, I eventually sent 5 Fujicas to Essex. They were all finished in reasonable time for about $100 each. In each case the work was perfect. I still use the cameras from time to time. Sadly, Hurricane Sandy (I think) put them out of business. They are now permanently closed.

Follow-up, only two years late: As I said, the two lenses were Fujinons of different focal lengths but about the same vintage and both in Copal 0. Just to be sure, I did measure the two shutters, and of course, they are identical in every dimension. Just guessing, but I'd say that the designer of the lenses knows the standard thickness of a Copal 0, and it's easier/cheaper to design the lens to that standard than to modify all the shutters for a particular lens. Guessing again, I would bet real money that all Fujis from at least the 1970s, or earlier, fit a standard shutter size. For times earlier than the Copal standards there were almost no standards at all, which is probably where all the warnings come from. In any case, after measuring, I swapped the lenses and aperture plates, and it works just fine. Thanks.

Follow up on Midstate: I sent them a Nippon Kogaku (Nikon) 50mm f2 and two other Japanese LTM lenses. They did a fine job fairly quickly and at a reasonable price. One tiny glitch: the Nikkor had a dented filter ring. They did a decent job on that but the guy told me that the filter was a "weird size" and he didn't have a filter he could use to test the repair. Fair enough, except that it was 40.5mm, virtually the standard size for Japanese lenses of that vintage, and several more modern ones, including the Konica Hexanon-M 50mm. Not really a criticism of Midstate, but an observation. Things that were standard on older equipment seem foreign and strange to younger repair folks. I sent another lens to Vermont Camera repair and they did a fine job, and I've sent several not-so-valuable Leica lenses with fog and failed lubricant to several other non-Master places that were well reviewed. They all came back in perfect shape, including one that I had been told would be impossible to clean. Moral of the anecdote: cleaning and re-lubing a rangefinder lens, even an older Leica lens, ain't rocket science, and doesn't need a "Master."

The Elmar and Tessar are visually identical. Both have the cemented doublet at the back; BUT the Elmar's diaphragm is between the 1st and 2nd elements, while the Tessar's is between the 2nd and the doublet. Maybe that was just enough difference to allow Leitz to avoid paying royalties to Zeiss.

Are these the bullet-shaped Brownie safelights, bell-shaped metal ones with a bulb inside and a round filter on the open end? The yellow one is probably OK, the green one will be too dim for paper developing. You can probably find replacement round filters on eBay, so you could switch the green for yellow, orange or red. You'll probably want more than the one yellow light anyway, so I'd go ahead and buy another one. Again, darkroom stuff is available on eBay, but some items are vastly overpriced. You can get a new big bulb light at Adorama or B&H for about $25. The only way to know for sure about any safelight is to test. Put the light at the distance you'll probably use it. Put a piece of paper face-up where your enlarger or developer will be. Put a quarter (or anything opaque) on the paper and turn the light on, for, say, 10 minutes. Develop and fix the paper. If you can see even the slightest hint of a white shadow where the quarter was, the light's not safe.

Well, to be entirely correct, the Zeiss Tessar wasn't "often referred to as 'the adlerauge.'" It was called that once by an advertising copywriter, in a magazine ad sometime in the 1930s. . Which would explain why you haven't run across that snippet before. :) . To be fair, this actually looks like a nicely made lens. It's just not functionally different from the manual focus Chinese lenses available on Amazon for $150 or less.

Do you have any experience with the X-E2s? Is the difference between that camera and the X-E3 enough to justify trading up? I would almost (but not quite) trade up just for the Acros mode, since I do mostly black and white with the X-E2s anyway.

How do you set that? I'm not finding it in the menu (although I'm sure it's there somewhere.)