mrbutterworth

Please let us know what scanner you are using too!

<p>

Thanks!

Has anyone experimented with scanning 35mm film directly on the glass

of a flatbed scanner? I would assume that a piece of AN glass (or

some sort of diffusion material) would be needed on top of the film to

hold it flat, and you would have to scan emulsion side down to avoid

Newton rings.

<p>

Did it work? What did you use to hold the film flat?

<p>

Also, what do you use to clean the topside glass of a flatbed that is

in contact with film?

<p>

Thanks!

Hi all,

<p>

A friend of mine has an Ex+ Nikon F2 serial number 7885XXX and we are

trying to determine a fair sale price for it. I know that the

proliferation of DSLR's has reduced the market for these wonderful

manual bodies, but I am not sure by how much. Does anyone know how

much this would be worth?

<p>

He also has three Nikkor lenses: 105/2.5, 35/2, and 80-200/4. Any

idea on their worth? I think they are all of the same period as the

F2, but I am not positive.

<p>

Thanks!

It is quite distinct to the naked eye, but is really hard to capture with the digicam that I am

using. It is only in the spot that I have the arrow pointing to, the rest of the lens looks

totally normal. Maybe I will try to get a better shot of it...

<p>

Nick

Just got this lens used today, and it appears to have something on one of the inner

elements. Is it possibly fungus?

<p>

Thanks, Nick<div></div>

Yes Rob, thank you! That is exactly the answer that I was looking for.

Take care, Nick

Is lens distortion more noticeable in different focal lengths? Take

the Noctilux and 35mm Summilux ASPH as examples. Both have relatively

high distortion, but I have never noticed it in the Noctilux photos

that I have seen. However, I have noticed it in the Summilux photos.

I don't own either lens, so my sample size is admittedly small.

<p>

I know that it is harder to correct for distortion in wider lenses,

but is it also more noticeable when it is there?

<p>

Thoughts, comments?

<p>

Nick

I have to ship one of my Leica lenses to Switzerland from the US.

Does anyone have any experience with the best carrier for this? USPS

seems to be the cheapest, but tracking would be a nice option, so

FedEx might be better. UPS? DHL?

<p>

Any issues or things to know about customs?

<p>

Thanks, Nick

No, the pour spout never leaks (and sometimes does not want to come off), but the main seal does. I'll try the electrical tape - thanks Craig!

<p>

Any other ideas are still appreciated.

Hello,

<p>

I'm looking for a developing tank that doesn't leak. I tried a

Patterson's tank and reels, but it leaked. Now I have an old SS Nikor

tank with Hewes reels - love the reels, but the tank leaks.

<p>

I would prefer a tank that could hold SS reels. Is there one that has

a screw on top and O-ring seal? I don't really care, just as long as

it seals tightly.

<p>

Thanks, Nick

Thanks for the responese!

<p>

Richard - the Gossen meters that you mentioned are fine, but if I can't have super low-light capability, battery independence would be nice.

<p>

Bill - I'm really looking for a hand-held meter, otherwise the Leicameter would be fine.

<p>

It seems like the Weston meters have a strong following for their reliability and durability, but I have not been able to find too much info on the differences between the various models.

<p>

Thanks, Nick

From the results of my post below I found out that the Luna-Pro meters

are quite big, and that is not what I am looking for. My next choice

as an accoutrement for my M2 is a Weston... but which one? Is the

Master V the most desirable as a user?

<p>

I'm looking for one that isn't too expensive and works well for

incident readings (so I will need the intercone). Whatever I get I

will be sending it down to Quality Light Metric for a physical.

<p>

Thanks again, Nick

Hello,

<p>

I am in need of a new meter to go along with my M2. Most of the time I can just guess at

the correct exposure, but there are circumstances where a meter is a nice accessory.

<p>

I have pretty much narrowed myself to either a Luna Pro F or SBC. I believe that both use

an the same SBC cell, and both take a 9 volt battery. Can anyone tell me the differences

between the two?

<p>

I have also considered other meters (Weston, 308BII, Digisix), but the Luna Pro's seem to

be the best compromise between price and low-light capability. Comments?

<p>

Thanks, Nick

I am curious why the "Cached" option is no longer available when

searching? It is very useful as it highlights a searched term in a

long page of text, and I found myself using it quite a bit.

<p>

Thanks much!

I am looking for a digicam that is capable of auto-focusing in

low-light situations. I am aware that most digicams allow one to set

focus manually, but it is usually a fairly cumbersome procedure.

<p>

Does anyone know of one digicam that really stands out for it's

low-light AF performance?

<p>

Thanks!

True, but film flatness may be compromised with the above methods. You can get a new

piece of optical quality AN glass cut to your specs at: http://fpointinc.com/

<p>

Last I checked he would even cut a round piece.

Diafine seems like the perfect developer for the adaptive Leica

shooter, but it doesn't seem to be widely used.

<p>

Positives (depending on your point of view) of this developer are: not

sensitive to temperature or agitation, quick to use, "increases" film

speed, long lasting, reusable, and gives high acutance.

<p>

For those of you that have used Diafine, what do you see as the

negative points of this developer when compared to other developers?

I am mainly interested in its use with older style emulsions (TX, APX)

as the new thinner emulsions don�t seem to work as well.

<p>

Would have posted on the Film & Processing forum, but they seem to be

more interested in large format than in 135.

<p>

Thanks!