lars_arvid_s.

January 19, 2005

Thanks again (and sorry for posting my reply under my GFs account).

I'm still intrigued (sp?) by the Norita, will try to locate one, haven't bougth anything through ebay before. Thanks for the tip about viewfinder coverage and about the Pentacon Six-line - will have to do some more searching and reading.

January 18, 2005

Hi, as I want to expand from my Lubitel 166U, I'm looking for a 6x6-

format SLR, perferably with a fast normal lens. I've tried a

Hasselblad 500c with a 80/2,8 but would like something a little more

like my SLR (OM-1 with 50/1,4). In my research I've learned that

there aren't many lenses in 6x6 faster than f/2,8. But I found

information about a camera - a Graflex Norita 66 with a Noritar 80/2-

lens - this seems like the perfect camera for me. But I haven't

found any here in Norway.

I don't know too much about the camera, so if you know anything

about the reliability or the price on the used market, I would

really like to know.

Also, are there any other alternatives? I will try to stay with 6x6,

as I understand Pentax has some 6x7-format-cameras. Oh, being a

student, it wouldn't hurt if it was reasonably priced..

Thanks!

September 30, 2004

Hi, I'm tired of dragging my clunky SLR around, so I was wondering,

what is the most compact film-based camera with a 50/2 or faster

lens?

A compact camera like this would go hand in hand with a Ricoh GR1*.

August 20, 2004

Lex, as Robert pointed out, I think the 28/2,0 takes 49mm filters - I tend to like the 49mm-lenses better, I'm a little annoyed by the 35/2,0 which takes 55mm filters, don't understand why they couldn't make it smaller.

Bas, I've tried out the 24/2,8 - I just don't like that focal lenght as much as the 28mm, otherwise I think it was a fine performer.

I tend to use most of my lenses wide open most of the time, and I think the 28/3,5 will be too slow. If I can't find a 28/2,0 locally (haven't seen any yet), then I probably will try to locate a new 28/2,8.

Robert, you don't got any links to information about the excellence of the 28/3,5?

August 19, 2004

Hi, I'm just wondering if someone could come with som qualitative

statement about the different Zuiko 28mm's. I've been real happy

with my 28/2,8 for a long time - but I recently lost it, now I

replaced it with a Zuiko 28/3,5 - don't know yet if I like it - will

surely miss the extra stop!

Oh, what I really want is the Zuiko 28/2,0 - but it seems impossible

to find, and I haven't read anything about it here either. How does

these three lenses compare?

August 10, 2004

Hi, I was happy with the results from my local lab, using a Frontier

370, but now they have changed it for an unknown (to me) KIS DKS

1510. Does anybody care to compare the two?

Info about the 1510 <a

href="http://www.kis.fr/english/produits/44.htm">http://www.kis.fr/en

glish/produits/44.htm</a>

January 13, 2004

There exists an OM to EOS adapter which let you use your existing Zuiko-lenses on EOS-bodies.

Look at this thread (and others in the Olympus forum):

January 6, 2004

You must not forget the excellent Olympus XA, which sounds perfect for your needs. The XA is equipped with a fixed 35mm f/2,8 lens, and is the smallest rangefinder in production (I think...). Anyway, I always carry a XA loaded with either Neopan 400 or TRI-X. A much smaller camera than the Olympus RC - which are the smallest of the classic RF's. You should be able to find a XA cheaply, I've bought four and all funtion flawlessly without CLA.

December 3, 2003

I agree with you. A manual focus, preferably RF-based digital camera would be nice. But the new digilux 2 is not even close. It's got a really small CCD-sensor, which means extreme DOF and extreme noise/grain. Highest ISO is 400 (again, the noise will be really bad), no optical viewfinder (only EVF) and it will cost approx. $1800.

What *I* really want is for Olympus (or another company) to build a small (little bigger than the Olympus XA) RF with a fixed 35/2 or 50 /1,4 (35mm equiv.) with the 4/3-sensor and an optical viewfinder.

That's all I need! Really (how modest..).

..if they could make it look like the Olympus 35SP or something then I will probably buy two.

Again, the most important spec. is the sensor-size. All non-DSLRs have really small sensors, and thats what's holding them back, not the amount of pixels or the missing 14x zoom.

IMHO...

Yashica rangefinder users? GSN,etc? · November 19, 2003

Like I've stated earlier in another thread, I've just got hold of an Yashica Lynx 14E IC. Big & beautiful camera. Have tried it with TRI-X and Provia 400F - seems to expose slide film correctly, although it's often impossible to see the over/under-lights in daylight, much better indoors. If any one have a solution to the "meter-flare"-problem, please chip in.

I always thought the electro 35cc were the one to get, but from what I've read these past days it seems like the 35 GX is the better camera, but it's a moot point as long as I can't find any locally (think I'm starting to get hooked on the Yashica RF's, oh well...)

November 9, 2003

I've just developed the first roll, it looks good so far (after just inspecting the negatives). I compared the meter readings to a couple of other cameras, and I think you are correct Michael, it tends to get fooled by bright light-sources (like uplights indoors) and it then underexposes about a stop. I will of course try some more testing, this time with slide film (thanks Winfried & Michael!)

Haven't seen screw-in hoods or shades, but I'll look some more.

November 8, 2003

Hi, yesterday I accuired an Yashica Lynx 14E IC, R/F and meter are

working and I`m putting a roll of TRI-X through it right now. I just

wondered if anybody had more information about the lens and the

meter of this camera (I`ve read Mike Conneally's great thread).

How accurate are the meter (accurate enough for slide film use?) and

how good is the lens wide open (or stopped down a stop or two?).

I will use the camera in paralell with my Olympus XA (when it gets

too dark for the small XA) and I was a little disappointed with

the "loud" (when comparing to the XA`s electronic shutter) shutter

sound on the Lynx, but it's not as bad as my SLR's. Also, I don't

find the Lynx too big, after all I've read I thought it would be

enormous, but it's just big ;-)

Ah, a couple more musings/questions, with the rather large front-

element, wouldn't the lens benefit from a lens-shade? And where do I

find a suitable shade? Same about hood, I've read that it takes a 60

mm slip-on-hood, anybody know it these are easy to find (nothing's

easy to find here in Norway, just glad I finally found a Lynx 14E!)

Well, off to finish the first roll now.. :-)

October 19, 2003

After I dropped my 28/2,8 about 2 meter down it developed the same symptoms, but I don't consider this a fatal fault, and I still use it just as much as before. If it stops working, it stops working, nothing to be bothered with until then, as long as the optical performance is still fine.

HTH,

September 29, 2003

I've got som bad experiences with the Zuiko 50mm f/1,4, which

otherwise - if it wasn't for the poor performance - would be my

standard lens.

I've used three different Zuiko 50mm f/1,8, and they all performed

well wide open (after my standards). I've had two different 50mm

f/1,4, both silver-nosed, with serialnumbers around 400 000, and

they were so bad wide open that I had problems focusing, and all the

pictures came out unacceptably soft, even stopped down a stop.

I've heard (probably at the Zuiko mailinglist) that lenses with a

higher serial number than 1,1 mill. are much better, but haven't had

the chance to test it out myself.

So my questions are these:

What are your experiences with the Zuiko 50mm f/1,4?

Are there a discernible difference between newer and older designs?

How can I buy (and know that it will perform well) a 50mm f/1,4?

(living in Norway aren't always a plus..)

Note, I've used about ten different Zuikos and haven't had a problem

with the performance in any of them, except the aforementioned 50mm.

Pretty longwinded b.c. of my weak english... Sorry.

September 29, 2003

I love my Olympus XA (the original). Just yesterday I bought another one for my brother ($50). I've tried four different XA's and the rangefinder patch were quite dim in two of them, but usable in daylight. The XA1, XA2 and XA3 are not that good cameras, with slower and softer lenses (35mm f/3,5-4,0), I think John is thinking of the XA4 which features a Zuiko 28mm f/3,5, and not the XA3. The XA4 are hard to find, and will probably be much more expensive than the original XA.

I don't understand why people are suggesting a Leica CL w/40/2 as a take-anywhere camera. At least it's strange to compare it to the XA. The CL are more than the double the weight and quite a bit larger, but still an excellent camera, just not pocketable in the same way.

I would suggest to try out a XA, it's not much more than $50, and if you don't like it you can easily sell it for the same amount.

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0064I9">Here's a link</a> to a thread at the Olympus forum, and <a href="http://www.diaxa.com/xa/xastart.htm">another one</a> to the excellent XA info-page at Diaxa.com

September 24, 2003

I bought my XA last summer (for next to nothing) while on interrail in eastern europe. Great little camera! Always with me, usually loaded with Press 800, UC400 or TRI-X. My flash stopped working after one week, the sliding cover sometimes fall off, and the film-loading-door sometimes opens up (using duct-tape now..). But it`s still my favourite point-and-shoot. The beeping sound is gone in mine (which makes it totally stealth, even when I use the self-timer along with my table-top tripod). My only serious gripe is that the combination of f/2,8 and max. ISO 800 makes for a pretty bad low-light-combo.

Probably the best camera in it's class (small, advanced, good quality, inexpensive). Too bad I can't find another one here in Norway.

September 9, 2003

Well, I can't speak for anybody but myself, but I think it's too little, too late (and too expensive). As long as one cannot mount the OM-lenses on the E-1 there is no use in following Olympus anymore. The reviews here in Norway are mostly favorable, but the E-1 costs more than double than the EOS 300D. I don't think the new body/lenses are small/light enough to justify the smaller sensor either. The 300D are just about as heavy as my OM-1, I can live with that. *If* the new 4/3-standard catches on (and that's a big if), and we see some sort of standardization on lens-mount, then that would be great, but I won't buy Olympus now, with only three lenses and a body, and then (maybe) be left out in the cold again.

The build-quality of the E-1 are supposed to be good (like the OM's), and I will certainly miss the feel when moving to plastic-Canon. Many of my friends are OM-users too (I lured them in...), but none of them are planning on buying the E-1, they are all switching to Canon/Nikon or sticking with the OM's. In fact, I don't know anybody wanting to buy the E-1, that's a little sad, for Olympus..

So, I'm sorry, but I won't wait for Olympus no more, I'll keep using my OM's and my XA, and save my money for the 300D (and maybe the OM-EOS adapter).

(Hmm, I don't know when I became so pessimistic, I used to be quite an optimist...)

So, are any of you planning to buy the E-1 and lenses?

September 5, 2003

Thanks for letting me know that there is such an adapter, I`m probably going to buy the EOS 300D when it arrives here in Norway, but I don't have the cash (yet) to buy so many lenses. I own (and use) an OM-1 with the following Zuiko lenses: 24/2,8, 28/2,8, 50/1,4(soft!), 50/1,8, 100/2,8 and 135/2,8.

I was wondering if any of you who own the adapter (and a DSLR!) would comment on the quality of the Zuiko lenses parred with the DSLR, or maybe (if I`m lucky) post some photos taken with said lenses, how it is to use Zuikos on the DSLR and last how the Zuikos compares to the Canon (equivalent) lenses.

Yeah, I know, I ask a lot. :-)

July 17, 2003

Thanks for the great responses so far! First, I will be shooting just before sunset, I tried this last summer with color film (reala) and I was pleased with the results. Handheld reala at ISO 80 was a little bit too slow, that's why I would like something around ISO 200-400. I probably got some T400CN lying around too, didn't think it was much different from 400BW, but maybe there are some differences when it comes to wet-printing them? Will probably shoot both C-41 BW and Neopan @ 250, though I always thought Neopan (both 400 & 1600) were more of a high-contrast film. I used the setting sun as a nice "catchlight" when using reala, hoping I can achieve something similar in black/white. Will probably be printing on Ilford MGIV RC satin.

Thanks for the recommendations so far, although further comments are appreciated

mvh, Lars

July 17, 2003

Hi, planning to take some summer-portraits of my friends, using my

100/2,8 or 135/2,8. Just wondering which film to choose (of Kodak TRI-

X, Fuji Neopan 400, Agfa APX100 and Kodak Portra 400 BW). Have no

experience with Neopan, not sure APX100 are fast enough, but these

are the films that I can get hold of here. Will be developing in D-76

1:1 (not the chromogenic of course).

I`m going for pleasing skin-tones, and probably wet-print

enlargements up to 30 cm x 40 cm.

The question is, what film to choose, and how to rate it?

Examples of Neopan 400 would be nice.

mvh, Lars

February 20, 2003

Thanks for the advice so far. I will probably try a test-roll in Rodinal first (hard to get TMAX-developer here) and see if I can get acceptable results, if not I will try the TMAX or whatever developer I can find locally. Will try the agitation-trick too, who knows - maybe I can learn something from this :-)

Another problem (should probably post a new thread on this) is that TMAX shot at 400 and developed in D-76 (straight) and printed on Agfa 312 VC looks grey, not black and white like TRI-X or APX100 (in Rodinal) It mimics the look I got after trying a roll of Delta 3200 @3200 (also in D-76). Really dull, setting higher contrast helped a bit, but not much.

Well, will not shoot TMAX400 for a while, happy with TRI-X so far.

February 20, 2003

Hi, yesterday I found myself with a borrowed Leica CL with a CV 21/4

and a roll of T-MAX 400 (the new type?). I was shooting in available

light indoors (the light meter didn't work either) at f/4 and 1/15th

(I would guess this would be the quivalent of one stop underexposure

(i.e. rating the film at ISO 800). Later on it became even darker

indoors, and I still had to stick with 1/15 and f/4, so this would

probably be two stop underexposure (i.e. ISO 1600), on the same roll.

How should I develop this film? At ISO 800 or 1600? With which

developer? I have only used Rodinal 1+25 and D-76 straight until

now, could I use one of those? Grain don't bother me much, as long

as the images are printable.

I also developed a roll of T-MAX 400 shot at 800 yesterday, in D-76

with the times recommended on digitaltruth.com, but the negs. are

incredibly thin. Should probably stick with TRI-X for a while...

Any help appreciated.

February 11, 2003

I can't answer your question, but you should try posting it to <a href="http://zuiko.sls.bc.ca/~swright/olympuslist.shtml">the Olympus OM mailinglist</a>, or search their archives via google.com. All the Zuikoholics are subscribed to this list :-)

HTH.

November 13, 2002

Thanks for the answers, I tried rephrase myself in a new thread in the unarchived forum.

Here's the link:

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0041gj">New thread</a>

November 12, 2002

Hi, my friend is an avid big-mountain skier (both alpine &

telemark). He would like to take some slides to publish in the

magazine www.friflyt.no (he has done this before, with a borrowed

Canon EOS30). Now he wants me to purchase a camera for him, but he

only got $300 to spend and he needs a camera now. I, for myself,

uses (and loves) the Olympus OM-system - but I don't know if this

would be suitable for him. Brand is not important at all, used is

the only way to go, and he probably would like a zoom between 100-

300mm, but I don't know if it is feasible with only $300 to spend

for both lens(es) & camera. Automatic (& autofocus - if it works)

with manual override are probably fine.

The only thing I can think of for $300 is an Olympus OM-1 with a

50mm 1,8 (for nothing), a 135mm 3,5 and a 200mm f/5 - but then you

have to be lucky.. :-)

He will probably have some more money to spend after the season, for

more lenses..

All help appreciated.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by lars_arvid_s.