mark_sampson
-
Posts
818 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by mark_sampson
-
-
<p>The Dagor-type Schneider Symmars are f/6.8. There are relatively few of them out there. The first plasmat-design Symmars are f/5.6 and are single-convertible; by removing the front group you get a longer f.l. These are easily identified by the converted f.l. marked in green on the nameplate ring and the 2nd set of f/stop markings. They were made until 1972 or so, when they were replaced by the Symmar-S seies. The brochure at the time stated that Schneider had given up the convertible feature in order to improve the performance of the combined cells. The only G-Claron I've actually used is a modern (c.1988) 150/9; it was very sharp close up and fine at longer distances.</p>
-
<p>Thanks Gene, remarkable stuff. By the way, Mr. Nixon is riding in a Chrysler parade car, the olive green car is a Packard Caribbean.</p>
-
If it's a liquid-concentrate rapid fixer, it's almost certain that what you see is sulfur precipitating out of the mix, rendering the fixer useless. This happens with age and alkaline contamination (from developer). It's most often seen in bottles of concentrate that are years past their sell-by date, where it appears pale yellow. Perhaps the mud you see is dark because the fixer has seen some use? in any case, discard and mix fresh.
-
If the shutter has a bi-post flash connection you can just get a Bi-post to PC sync cable. Set your shutter to "X" and you'll be good to go. Don't worry about replacing the Optar right away, it's a better lens than its reputation. If you do want something else, look for a 203mm f/7.7 Kodak Ektar- or its clone, the 203mm f/7.5 Optar. One of those would give you a nice 'classic' 2-lens setup for not much money.
-
A lens meant for cinematography? Search on Stanley Kubrick and his movie "Barry Lyndon" or see Andrew Nemeth's leica site for the ultra-fast Zeiss story.
-
Mr. Cahn's answer is correct. Realize as well that most banquet cameras are adaptations of existing flatbed camera designs... stretched 8x10s if you will. An original design is Richard Ritter's: www.lg4mat.net. Also check the "ULF cameras" and "camera building" forums at apug.org and www.largeformatphotography.info.
-
I have a similar Dagor in the original (broken) shutter. I tried it out as a barrel lens and it's quite sharp but (not surprisingly)lower in contrast than a modern lens. If the shutter worked I'd be using mine. I think it's significant that, some time back, a previous owner thought it worthwhile to have your lens re-mounted into a modern shutter. I'd call it a fine lens for b/w in 4x5 or 5x7. Dagors were made for about 90 years, by many manufacturers, and prices are all over the map, depending on the exact type, but all of them have some value- even at 100 years old.
-
It's an excellent camera- with a modern schneider lens to boot. Buy it from your friend (give him a fair price) and use it yourself.
-
If you shoot the same scene with both lenses you'll see the differences between the 1920s and the 1980s. The G-claron lens will have much more contrast- while the uncoated Wollensak suffers from flare in backlit conditions. The Velo is a Tessar-formula lens and quite capable of sharp images if you don't turn down the soft-focus ring.
-
I'd look on the panoramic photography sites. There's an associaton of Cirkut photographers as well. And Douglas Chadwick does, or did, group portraits of vintage race cars with a Cirkut. I have several of his prints that I bought 10+ years ago at Watkins Glen- from the inscription on the prints he's in Hillsboro WV.
-
Actually you remove the front group, using the rear half only. That's what the green f/stop markings on the shutter are for. Image quality is said to suffer some, Schneider and most users suggest this setup for portraiture. My tests some time back with a 180/315 version suggest that quality is "acceptable". It will definitely be better at 150mm than 265mm. You'll have to try it yourself to see if it's good enough. (The convertible Symmars were replaced by the non-convertible Symmar-S series around 1972.)
-
I used my DR on an M6TTL for several years. The camera manual stated to mount/dismount the lens only when focused at infinity. In practice, that wasn't necessary; which really means that I didn't remember those instructions while actually photographing. No harm was done to camera or lens though.
-
Ask Gene M on the "classic cameras" forum. He's done more of this than the rest of us put together.
-
It's a fine lens but BIG. Not a real problem on a sturdy camera like yours. $300 is a great price. Outdoors I'd use a bellows lenshood, that lens throws a huge image circle, which can lead to camera flare.
-
Linhof Technika.
-
I believe the night aerial photographs during WWII were lit by huge flash bombs... but I have no data to back that up. I've also read that
Dr. Harold Edgerton devised an electronic flash unit that filled up a B-25 medium bomber. Don't know if that one ever went operational but it must have been one hell of a pop.
-
The Kodak Wratten gel filters are now made/marketed by Tiffen.
-
Here's how I look at it. Technidol was designed to produce a low-contrast result from a high contrast film (Technical Pan). Used with normal films, it will give a low-contrast ( or very long scale)result, with perhaps a speed loss. However, Pan-F+ is one of the more contrasty films available today, and a low-contrast developer like Technidol might provide interesting results. Specifically I would try that combination with extremely contrasty subject matter. Bracket your exposures, especially on the "over" side, develop in Technidol, and see what happens. You might be pleasantly surprised. That said, I don't imagine that this film/dev combination would be best for general-purpose photography. In any case, post your results. BTW, underexposing Pan-F won't "maximize contrast".
-
I'm looking for technical data on several Nikon lenses. The Nikon USA site is
no help; I recall that there was more information on a european site... can
anyone post a link?
thanks in advance,
Mark
-
That story someone told you is a load of bull****. Test with fresh film and a known high-quality lab. Shoot some frames with another lens on the same roll. That should show if your lens has a color cast (which I doubt).
-
If you're going to go to all that trouble, go big.
-
One wonders how faded the prints he made that day are now.
-
I have 29+ years shooting with a Leica M, never a weather-related problem yet. Salt spray would be the worst thing for it; but even that would be no problem if you clean the camera up immediately after.
-
I would expect that if you convert it (by removing the front half of the lens) the 370mm f.l. would cover 8x10. However it's unlikely to provide a sharp image in the corners (the common wisdom seems to be that converted Symmars are best for portraits). For 8x10, you'd really want a 300 or 360mm Symmar.
Eastman House
in Classic Manual Film Cameras
Posted