nicholas_t.

Unfortunately Rollei's venture into wide angle TLR's is prohibitively expensive. The Mamiya C series is one choice for a wide angle TLR. However, I don't recommend them at all. They are heavy and large and I personally had bad luck with them. The Koni-omegaflex are 6x7 TLR's, and are even larger. They have fantastic lenses but are huge, massive, enormous...<p>

You could get a SLR for $1000A. Perhaps a Mamiya 645 with a 45mm lens, fairly common. For the price you might even be able to get a Rolleicord as well? Cords usually need servicing but meet your specification for a TLR and they are great cameras. But they are not wide angle. They are small weigh as much as a Nikon with lens and require a different style of shooting to a 35mm camera. A Mamiya is closer to the 35mm style of shooting.

Albumen

I've got a Lunapro F and I can't recommend it enough. The null needle system is excellent. However, it is big as a pack of ciggies and for this reason I'd love a digisix to wear around my neck instead.

That photo, Lex, is real good example of what you are talking about and the OOF areas do seem to be similar to the Xenotar I used to have as well. Also, 5x7 from a 16x20 print wide or nearly wide open? That is a real testament to the lens' resolving power.<p> Cheers

I have been wondering this for some time now. I am curious to know

what real world experiences people have had with the 50mm F3.5 Macro

as a normal lens?<p>

The reason I ask, is that I know the F2 Macro is quite, "the legend".

But I am a real fan of the Xenotar lens design. Another sharpness

legend the Nikkor 55mm F3.5, is also a Xenotar design but seems to get

way more cudos.<p>

Opinions?

28mm F2 Zuiko and 50mm F1.4 Zuiko (make a nice fast pair).<p>

Just found this place too, bookmarked - will come back!

I used to own a 38mm/3.5 Zuiko which was a macro intended to be put onto a bellows... Your one, mounted in M42 mount must also have been used on a bellows. But you say the other ring comes off to turn into a 39mm mount? Great, might work as an enlarging lens. Stops down to F8-wierd. Sorry more questions than answers. Best Nicholas

That URL you provided does sound correct. There is a funny anecdote in the <a href="http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/VitC/vitc.html">Gainer Vitamin C article<a/> where Patrick describes the process:<p>

"A third method of getting sodium carbonate locally, wherever you may be, is to heat baking soda. The temperature required is quite high. I used a stainless steel saucepan on the stove top. When the baking soda is hot enough, you will see little geysers of steam and carbon dioxide which are fun to watch, but which spray powder around. I convinced my wife that the white coating on the stove was an excellent degreasing agent, but I still had to clean it up"<p>

Regarding yeild, here is some more from that excellent article:<p>"A pound of baking soda yields 10.6 ounces of anhydrous sodium carbonate, which is equivalent to 12.4 ounces of monohydrated sodium carbonate. One tablespoon of this anhydrous carbonate weighs about 8.8 g"<p>

Although, it does seem a lot of trouble to go to when you can buy Sodium Carbonate (98 or 99% pure) at a local pool suppliers real cheap. I got 4.5 Kilos (10lbs?) for around 12$NZ (approx 8$US). It's lasted over a year! Product names to look out for are "pH Plus" made by Olin in the States and "pH Increase" here in NZ.

If you are used to mixing your own developers or are willing to try there is a new Gainer developer variant which I am using at the moment.<br>

It is Vitamin C based and also uses p-Aminophenol (same developing ingredient as Rodinal) as well as one other ingredient...<br>

As far as film grain is concerned, I seem to get about the same grain as a 100 film with a 400 film as compared to Rodinal. It is very fine grained but with the same kind of (apparent) sharpness Rodinal produces.<p>

Email me for recipe.

Erik's plan sounds cool - the enlarging lens adapter. Being able to use commonly available enlarging lenses sounds amazing. There are lots of APO lenses available too they are extremely flat field as well.

If you can get it cheap it's a good film, similar to other traditional technology films (a la Tri X Hp5+ et all). Depends on which developer you use it in. It goes good in all of the Gainer developers. Grainy (as someone else stated) in Rodinal.

This is a case of, "if your not here now, you're not heard..."<p>

I'm a bit late on in the scene, but Patrick's comments are right on. His 1973 (written in the year after my birth) article is excellent and I refer others to it. I'm convinced and I only have a photocopy!<p>

There are others who corroberate, and their findings are similar even though they might use another medium (do a google search on "teaspoons, developers").<p>

Better yet, try it out for yourself.<p>

peace

This is an interesting question. If you are looking at a Rollei for 'starters', you can possibly think about it is a Rollei for 'finishes'. If you catch my drift... ;^)<p>

Like Dale, I've also owned alot of what the recent post war TLR Rollei's had to offer (4 F's, a C and 2 'cords). But unlike him, I am left with a 'cord (Va) and I don't regret it a minute. In fact I prefer it.

A Rolleicord is a wonderful camera. A really beautiful excellent camera, especially if you get one in nice condition. Of course the big issue is the shutter (and the lens of course). But you will probably need to spend much money getting the shutter overhauled (hopefully you wont buy one which is in need of lens clean).<p>

I prefer a Va, although a Vb is also a nice cord as well. The Va and Vb have the wind on and focus on opposite sides of the camera. This corresponds with the other Rolleis including the SL66 series. This makes sense if you want to get another Rollei (not a cord) later on.<p>

The Vb has a removable hood and the Va does not. The removable hood adds precious grams to an otherwise, very light camera. Hence my preference for a Va. In my mind the ultimate in simplicity and effectiveness in a camera.<p>

Oh, and a Xenar lens is a lovely lens...

Shit fuck

I've had good results with the limited time I spent with two examples. :-)))

> Nicholas Twist: What time @ 68 deg. F are you using for Gainer's<br>

> Rodinal + asocorbate developer. I assume you are using Rodinal,<br>

> sodium ascorbate (or isoascorbate) and borax in your formula.<br>

> Bob Wersan

<p>

Bob, hi, in my previous post I was talking about the actual Gainer formulas and not the additives. Gainer Phenidone/Vitamin C is the most common formula, a variation of it can be found <a href="http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/VitC/vitc.html">here</a>, but one that isn't used as much (I am guessing) is the actual p-Aminophenol formula which is made up as an ultra-concentrated stock solution and is diluted much in the same way as Rodinal is.<p>

Regarding the ascorbate additive, it is really trial and guess-work. I can give you some starting times (you will need to prabably change these) of around 8mins or 9mins with the ascorbate additive at 1:50 @ 20C with a minutes initial agitation and 7 secs every min thereafter. Or 10 or 11 mins with some borax added.<p>

So, what regarding APX 400's performance in either of these developers is really a question of preference. My preference is for the Gainer p-Aminophenol developer, or perhaps the Gainer Phenidone. I find the asorbate additive produces a touch too much fog, perhaps this can be alleviated with the borax added.

Try <a href="http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/VitC/vitc.html">Gainer Phenidone/Vitamin C developer</a>. Very easy to prepare and uses many store bought (photographic chemicals substituted with store bought ones) chemicals.<p>

This is a <b>serious</b> developer (although Patrick might disagree with you) which competes with all of the rest on equal footing.<p>

You will need to get one photo chemical however, and this you might need to order through the net: <a href="http://www.artcraftchemicals.com/">www.artcraftchemicals.com/</a> is one of the those companies. <a href="http://www.photoformulary.com/">www.photoformulary.com/</a> is another. That chemical is Phenidone.<p>

Don't be put off by anyone because of your <it>boots-in-all</it> approach, it's how I started as well as many others. Do yourself a favor and get a *SARS* mask to use when mixing up chemicals and read this: <a href="http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/developers.html">http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/developers.html</a> and probably this: <a href="http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/My_Technique/my_technique.html">Ed B's film developing technique</a>, if you want some place to start. There are other guides to starting in B&W photography, they are best found at a library, I can recommend the Time/Life square black or silver photo series of books. A bit old but, hey so is what you'll be doing.<p>

Back to the Gainer developers, once you get some film get it loaded and shoot some, mix up some developer, slosh it around in a tray, develop, stop and fix it and then wash it and let it hang to dry. You can then think about printing... You can use the Gainer dev's for paper too. I have to say, Beau, you are starting at the very beginning with a differcult *ask*, developing 4x5 film. Perhaps for your developing tests you could try something like 35mm and then once you have that *down* move up to your 4x5.

Lex, I've been using the new packeted A_P_X___1_0_0 for awhile now, proll'y developed 15 rolls of 120 of the new stuff.<br>

No difference noted; no test done either. :^)

Jorge, my friend, we got lotsa of Agfa film, so much of it in fact that they won't bring in the new stuff... almost as much of that film here as there are sheep... ;-))<br>

Cheap too, not as cheap as that Forte stuff you were looking at before, but at 5 bucks NZ a roll (24exp 400 and 120), it is almost half as expensive as Ilford and Kodak... and I like it too, esp 100, the 400 is good in some devs, but not so flash in others. APX 400 is good in Gainer and great in the P-aminophenol/Vitamin C version.

Jorge, perhaps so, easy enough for someone to do a simple test...<p>

I would, but like I said, we don't have access to the new films here in good ol' Nu Zeal'...<p>

Best, Nicholas

Regarding the new times for APX 400.<br>

You tell us whether the film has changed! I have tried to find out whether this is new or the old film (with a new developing time) from people here on Photonet or the rec.photo.darkroom groups (as well as from Agfa) but noone will do a test. Noone can be bothered it seems. I would do the tests but we don't have the new APX 400 stock in NZ yet. New films are apparently in the new style boxes.<p>

According to Ralf B. from Agfa, it is a new film with improved resistance to scratching. I am sceptical of this and think perhaps Agfa are getting their film developing times in line with each other. Or both, new coating on film and a re-alignment of developing times.<br>

I say this because for years Agfa have been giving us slightly higher developing times for APX 100 over 400. I always got the opposite, longer times for 400 over 100 (as is the norm with most 400 films). This readjustment would then rectify this apparent anomoly and give both films the high gamma development Agfa recommends<p>

Regarding APX 100<br>

Apparently the APX 100 film has not changed at all. Even in the new box.<br>

backward compatibility

The infinity issue sounds about right to me.<br>

Regarding the sharpness issue, if you really want to get the most out of your lenses you need to put the camera on a tripod. Are you doing that?<br>

Also, moving up to a higher speed film might help if you are hand-holding. This way you gain precious shutter speed stops. Camera shake is the biggest loss of quality in sharpness of negs after incorrect focus...

Neither pano adapters (early and late) are very useful as tripod quick releases. The early one (I got) is also quite underbuilt. I prefer using a smaller Rollei (not 2.8) for this one. But the rotational axis is closer to the nodal points on the earlier Pano head.<p>

A nifty trick is to buy a Rollei pistol grip take it apart and you get a Rolleifix + a genuine Rollei cable release.

Another vote for LFN.<p>

Just make sure to follow the instructions exactly.