chauncey_walden

<p>Schneider says: With the lens put together, it operates in the short focal length mode. By removing the entire front element (everything in front of the shutter), the lens is converted into the long focal length mode. In this configuration, use the green scales on the shutter to determine f/stop. Removing half the lens from the system affects the lens's ability to correct for aberrations. The long focal length mode is perfect for portraits, as the edges of the image will exhibit softness. In the short focal length mode (both lens elements in place), the lens will behave like a non-convertible lens in terms of quality and specifications.<br> Now, 370mm is about 14 1/2 inches and if you have 16 inches of bellows then it seems to me that as long as the center of the length of the rear element is less than 1 1/2 inches from the back of the lens board you should be able to get infinity focus by running the bellows out until you get the center of the length of the rear element 14 1/2 inches from the film plane. If it is longer than 1 1/2 inches then you need to use the extension lens board and shorten the bellows extension until you get the center of the length of the rear element 14 1/2 inches from the film plane. In either event, you probably won't be able to focus much closer than infinity.</p>

<p>Tonio, leave the " marks off.</p>

<p>Plenty of them on ebay. Do this search: "27mm series adapter"</p>

<p>At one time in the past I had a 1600F around number 500 that mostly worked and those 2 wonderful Ektar lenses. I also had the original Zeiss Tessar for the Hasselblad. In the book on Hasselblad history it was stated that Hasselblad turned to Zeiss only because the Kodak lenses were too expensive. The Heliar based standard length Ektar certainly knocked the socks off the Tessar.</p>

<p>Here you go: http://www.submin.com/general/manuals/autoknips/autoknips.htm</p>

<p>JDM, I have always looked forward to reading your comments and seeing one of your images shown at the bottom of the page. You are such a good photographer and have such a varied background and wealth of experience to share. I always delight in seeing your image of Uxmal and can only aspire to make something so beautiful. I look forward to the day you return to the forum.</p>

<p>Michael,<br> It sounds to me that what Ferdi pointed out but didn't explicitly say was that no matter whether you have the horizontal or vertical mask in the SL66 you are still using a 6x6 area of the film so still only 12 shots per roll.</p>

<p>A low cost option for a push-pull projector that will handle 6x7, 6x9 or even 6x12 is an old boardroom lantern slide projector. Some of these are high quality units with excellent lenses. To mount slides all you need are two sheets of picture frame glass and some binding tape. I've seen several go in the $40-$50 range with multiple lenses.</p>

<p>The Autocord is a very nice handling camera that will focus with a fingertip of the holding hand and produce great results. You will know immediately if there is a problem with a tight focus lever. If it is broken off, it was too gummed up. If it moves with more than fingertip pressure, it may be getting gummed up. Of course, using it helps free it up whatever. SLRs are nice and give options. However, some users compose more easily looking at the image formed on the ground glass of a waist level finder than they do looking through a prism. Also to be considered is whether or not you like the square format over the rectangular. If you are going to be cropping the 6x6 Autocord images down to fit on 8x10 or 11x14 paper you might as well have the 6x4.5 Bronica. On the other hand, an 11x11 image is quite nice.</p>

<p>And I remember how gosh wow I was when Kodachrome went from 12 to 25! 64 Sounded good but eventually sucked due to processing problems.</p>

<p>Marc, I believe the Makro-Kilar is sitting on an Exa as the Exacta was having problems. Haven't looked for it for a while. A nice little macro lens.</p>

<p>Should have been fairly easy based on aspect ratio and open vs stopped down. The Olympus could have been separated from the Pentax by the different view. ;-)</p>

<p>It was interesting to read the article on my Makro-Kilar.</p>

<p>JDM, thanks for posting this. Some beautiful portraits there. I passed the link on to a wet plate photographer as an inspiration for some of the poses. There is always someone who has no sense of history....</p>

<p>I just had to replace my 8x10 GG and my spare was 1mm too high (the long edge) so I just ground it off on a diamond wheel. Took less than 2 minutes. A good glass place should have the capability to carefully remove a mm or two evenly on a grinding wheel as that is how they remove the sharp edges. You might place a strip of masking tape along the edge revealing just the amount you want them to remove. Don't go nibbling on it!</p>

<p>Gonzalo, send it back. Let it be someone else's problem. It is not in good condition, cosmetically or mechanically.<br> Check out the 2.8D that is on now for what good cosmetic condition is (no connection disclaimer.) I bought a 2.8C that is in just slightly better cosmetic condition than yours, missing the magnifier, but perfect mechanically (one of the most accurate shutters I ever tested) for $85. Let this one go. A 2.8 gets very expensive when you start looking for accessories like filters and a shade. Look for a bargain in a good 3.5 E or F model, later and lighter and an equal picture taker.</p>

<p>There is a lens on this side. Show us a picture of the back. Or, turn the dial so that the line that is on "1" now is aligned with "T" and bring the tab that looks like it might be around "8" now around to "3.5" and operate the shutter release. The shutter should open and stay that way until you press the release again. Anyway, with it open, point it towards a window from a darkened room. Hold a piece of white paper behind the lens (or do it in front of a white wall) and either move the lens towards or away from the wall or move the paper towards or away from the lens and see if an image is formed. Find and note the distance from the lens to the paper or wall when the image is sharpest and this will give you an idea of the focal length of the lens.</p>

<p>Stanislav, doesn't the Pentax 67 also take Pentax 645 lenses? If so you could get one of these and try it: http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-07LAhbp645p-Adapter-Hasselblad-Pentax/dp/B002JY4KME<br> You won't be able to focus a lens less than 100mm at infinity and may have to focus closer anyway to get increased coverage for the 67.</p>

<p>Stanislav, your first problem is that the flange focal distance for the 67 is listed at 84.95mm while the Hassie is 74.9mm. So it would be like shooting the Hassie with a 10mm extension tube on it.</p>

<p>At the low end there is always an Adapt-A-Roll 620. They will feed from a 120 spool and just need a 620 spool for take up.</p>

<p>How's the rear half of the lens? Have you removed it from the shutter? Have you unscrewed the back elements of the front half and cleaned both sides? If worse comes to worse you should be able to remove the shutter and replace it with one from another MF camera with a good 75mm lens and with a little testing to tweak the focus be able to use it just fine.</p>

<p>The Retinas mentioned or a Vitessa with an Ultron.</p>

<p>Rick, also be on the lookout for the slip-on mask for the Turnit that goes with the 150. My set with the lever wind type 1 has the 35, 50 (Nokton), 100 and 150 and assorted goodies like the Proximeters.</p>