stuart_todd

I've just acquired a Nikon FE and MD-11 motor drive. I've noticed that when I

attach the MD-11 to the FE sometimes it goes without a hitch and sometimes I

need to either flick the wind on level 'on' then 'off', or turn the shutter dial

to a manual shutter speed (B or M90), or take off the motor drive, shoot a frame

and NOT wind on the next frame and THEN re-attach the motor drive, or all of the

above, or combination of the above.

Am I missing something here? I've been through the PDF manual for the camera and

find anything!

Many thanks,

Stu :)

Hello,

I'm looking a 35mm SLR or a Leica Visoflex for a copy stand in my

darkroom. I do own a Hasselblad, but it's limited shots per roll and

the "fun n' games" of making a 35mm slide from a 6x6 tranny is not

pleasent. And we can all guess what would happen if I tried using my

Leica M2... "and that's _another_ out of focus picture of my top left

hand corner of my copy stand, again note the common 100 watt desk

lamp with blue filters..."

At university I remember when we where shown how to use the copy

stand, we all got told that we needed to use an SLR camera with a

good viewfinder coverage to avoid getting any extra unwanted details

on the edge of the frame.

The options I see are-

1. Buy a 35mm SLR or

2. Get a Visoflex for my M2.

Any sugguestions for a camera? Don't care what brand it is, cheaper

the better. Also the other option is getting a Visoflex for my M2 and

save me from buying ANOTHER camera. But I'm not sure how good the

coverage is and the local Leica shop has nothing nice to say about

Visoflexs.

Stu :)

Thanks for your answer!

I got a monster of a Canon 55-135mm FL lens and a Tamron 28-50mm with adapter for it today.

Yes there are a lot of FL lenses on ebay, but living in New Zealand, makes the cost shipping a cheap lens from the US to here rather more pricey...

Stu :)

Hello,

Excuse me if this has been asked before, I'm very new to the mid-

period Canons. I know about the EOS series and LTM Rangefinders, but

not the FL/FD/A series.

I've seen a very nice and very cheap Canon FP body for sale and the

camera appeals to me because it's all manual like my RFs. But the

problem is a supply of lenses, not many second hand camera dealers

here in NZ carry FL lenses, but all of them seem to be stocked to the

gills with FD mount lenses... so will FD lenses fit and work properly

on a Canon FP ? (FL lens mount body).

Many thanks in advance,

Stu :)

I'm going to shoot a documentary for a university assignment on a

dairy farm. It's going to be shot over several three day visits.

Lighting conditions will vary from pre-dawn to the peak of midday. So

I would pack both films, but it would be nice to keep things simple

and I don't own a second camera body yet to swap between the

different films... unless someone feels like selling me a Bessa-R

cheap...

I'm use to using Fuji Neopan film (souped in 1:50 Rodinal) and was

wanting a second option. Do I pull Neopan 1600 to 800 or Push Neopan

400 to 800?

Also does anyone have times for developing both these films at ISO

800 in 1:50 Rodinal?

Many thanks in advance,

Stu :)

For me with black and white, I tend to stick with one speed per format.

35mm I'm using ISO 400 (Fuji Neopan)

6x6 ISO 100 (Fuji Neopan Acros)

4x5 ISO 50 (Ilford Pan F or FP4+ Pulled)

When it comes to using colour... I'm all over the place.

Stu :)

I wonder if it's compatible with CV's Bessa Trigger Winder?

That will make life easier.

...And will Cosina make new viewfinders for change in focal length?

Stu :)

Brilliant! Thanks!

I'll order the chemistry on Monday and see what happens...

Many thanks again.

Stu :)

Like many worldwide I've been bitten by the 'lith bug'.

However I'm located in New Zealand and we only seem to have a supply

of one type of Lith developer (Fotospeed) and as a student the

running cost is absurd.

So I was wondering if anybody knows some formula for making your own

Lith developer?

Stu :)

http://www.geocities.com/my_grand_city/

I would really appreciate your comments, views and criticism.

Stu :)

Arrgh...

What's the screw in filter size for an Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Elmar

f=9cm 1:4 Serial prefix 413XXX?

I'm looking for a UV/protective filter, black & white filters (i.e.

red, yellow, etc) and most importantly a front lens cap!

Stu :)

PS. If you're looking to part/sell off with any of the above items,

drop me an e-mail

Ok I'm goin' get flamed for this...

I would have thought that the Hasselblad was the so-called medium format Leica equivalent? "Back in the day" if you wanted great optics for 35mm you went for Leica glass, for MF to went for Hasselblad�s T*s (yes I know that the T*s is actually a Zeiss product).

At my old photography school we had book (I forget the title, sorry) what profiled some of the great photographers with their cameras. If it wasn't Leica, it was Hasselblad, if wasn't Leica or a Hasselblad, it was a Speed Graphic. At this point in time I can only think of two famous Rollei owners (Walker Evans and someone else who I can't quite remember), but numerous Hasselblad owners and users... but then again I was sucker for Hasselblad advertising since day one.

Leica is almost infamous as the ultimate war photographer's camera; the Hasselblad has been to the Moon and the far reaches of space. Where has the Rollei gone to, that others haven't been or done?

I asked the members of the photography class a while ago what the ultimate 35mm camera was and majority answered Leica (with Nikon and X-Pan coming in 2nd equal). Then I enquired about MF, Almost in unison the reply was Hasselblad. Even the staunch Rollei user in our class got converted to the Hasselblad.

However, one point of note. Most Leica owners I know are owners, not shooters. Their cameras are kept in little glass display boxes. Most Hasselblad shooters I know are shooters, dragging their Lowpro bags with a content twice the value of their cars, to the ends of the world and back.

Stu :)

PS. Just remembered that other Rollei user: David Bailey.

I've seen several here in New Zealand for sale (beleive it or not!).

Try either Auckland Camera Centre or Camera & Camera, I've seen them there before. Also being New Zealand, they too may want to move the stock and could sell them at cost (like most Leica gear in NZ!).

http://www.aucklandcamera.com/

http://www.camera-camera.com/

Stu :)

Stu :)

Just in case anybody is interested...

I ran a two rolls of Kodak's Ektachrome Infrared EIR (one in E-6 @

ISO 200 with Y2 filter and one cross-processed in C-41 @ ISO 100 with

various filters) through my Canon EOS 500 yesterday and the dreaded

in-body infrared sensor didn't fog the 'image' part of the film. The

fogged cyan coloured line was a good 2mm below the picture!

...HOWEVER...

Mid roll on both films I tested the theory that when the camera is

left on the IR film counter sensor is also on. For a period of five

minutes or more, the fogging starts to get bigger and spread outwards

and towards the 'image' part of the film.

If you want to see some of the pretty pictures, ask me and I'll scan

some at university and post them up.

Hope this helps.

Stu :)

PS. 80B Filter on cross-processed EIR is just wrong... believe me

it�s plainly wrong, ok!?

Just to throw a spanner in the works...

Have you also considered taking out something different that's 'wild & wonderful'??? Like Kodak HIE High Speed Infrared (assuming you're shooting 35mm).

I'm sure with the renowned temperature of that place combined with the geography you'll get something really different and cool (no pun intended).

Stu :)

PS. If you have not shot Kodak HIE before, e-mail me off list and I'll post you a quick guide to how to use it.

However... really out-dated film is brilliant for cross processing. Just remember to shave off 2-3 stops when exposing it (i.e. rate ISO 400 @ 100 or 50 ISO)

Stu :)

Here's my $0.02...

I'm currently at university training to hopefully become a landscape and architectural photographer. What I have been told is that I'll need both 4x5 and medium format cameras. However a 4x5 on it's own is good starting point. Get yourself a view camera as most field cameras have limited movements, brand-wise... I hear Linhofs and Sinars are good. I use a Plaubel Profia. I don't think the body is that much of a concern... it's the lenses you got to worry about. If you can afford it, start off with a 150mm or 120mm and a 90mm. If you can't afford two, go for a 90mm. You'll find the 90mm will quickly become your standard lens. Third and forth lens choices... give yourself 6-12 months of shooting first. But I'll be inclined to go for a 47mm/65mm and something long like a 500mm+ (or around 150mm in '35mm land').

Also as a learner I'd recommend a roll film back. Cheap way to learn. Or if you have the money, a Polaroid film back and some type 54 film.

A great, bl**dy, big, stable tripod will help. As much as I love my ball head for everything else, I've felt a 3 way pan head works best with architectural shots. Also a couple of bubble levels help too.

And to top it off, an airport trundler for suit cases. At the end of a long day of shooting, you can really start to curse at Newton for his stupid laws (gravity + LF gear hand carried all day = sore back, arms, neck...). It can make carrying around gear much more easily. Just make sure you've got lots of padding inside your case thou.

Stu :)

>>>Warning: Minor Novel Here<<<

Hiya all,

I guess this question has been asked a hundred times already and I'm

famous for not getting the right info out of search engines.

Anyhow, after an eternity of 35mm SLRs and cheap zooms someone

introduced to me to the wonder that is 35mm Rangefinder cameras in

mid 2002. So I got myself a Canon QL17 for $10 shortly afterwards and

the corruption began. So in October last year I got brave and started

to sell off my Canon EOS gear. By January I had sold it all, bought

the necessary new Hasselblad lens and with the left over cash buy a

35mm rangefinder system. So I made a list/chart thingy in December

with Hasselblad Xpan/Fuji TX1, Bessa R, Bessa R2, Leica M3/M6, Canon

P and Konica Hexar on it. Then over time did some research into each,

read feed back and got options on each one, and according marked the

chart with positives and negatives.

Well to my surprise the Voigtlander Bessa R won (I was gunning for

the Xpan originally). So I decided that's what I would buy. However I

completely forgot the Contax G series cameras. After a quick eleventh

hour comparison, I'm stuck!

Here's the sticky points-

Cost:

A Contax G1 2nd hand costs the same as a new Voigtlander Bessa R!

The Contax G lenses seem reasonably priced 2nd hand and on par with

new prices for Cosina Voigtlander lenses

Lens Choice:

Bessa R uses 39mm LTM mount, so lens choice is much greater

Being a proud 6x6 Hasselblad owner, I'm already know how good Carl

Zeiss optics are and Contax use Zeiss glass... however I don't see a

little red T* on the Voigtlander lenses

I use to own a Tamron 14mm f2.8 for my EOS cameras, which I miss

terribly, so...

15mm f4.5 for the Bessa R - $349 ~ 16mm f8 for the Contax - $2500

(unless the 15mm f4.5 Contax mount lens that Stephan Gandy sells will

fit the Contax G camera bodies or do what everyone else does and get

Bessa L with a 15mm... but that means another camera to cart around)

Camera Operation:

Bessa R is a good old-fashioned mechanical camera, no battery drain

for those long exposure night shots I like. Contax G1 reminds me of

my EOS-5! So I assume that the camera sucks the batteries dry for

those long exposure night shots I like.

Bessa R is mechanical; the Contax G1 is electronic

(in the words of my Grandfather "The more buttons it has, the more

things to go wrong with it!")

The Bessa R uses framelines and the Contax G1 uses some fancy

electronic rangefinder

(http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?

s=&threadid=253) - I have never used a camera with framelines before

and I'm slightly uncertain. But my sister's Pentax P+S has same style

of rangefinder that the G1 employs and I'm quite happy with it.

If it's any help my three favourite styles of Photography are

landscapes, architectural and photo-journal type stuff. The two main

reasons why I want to get a rangefinder are-

A) Small and light compared to it's 35mm SLR cousin, which is good

for long hikes into the wilderness on location scouting missions,

before I hire the necessary sherpas or helicopter in a 4x5.

B) Discrete and they don't look expensive. Even the cheapest 35mm SLR

I use to own got the scary-suspicious look from strangers in the

street, however with my Hasselblad or the Konica Hexar I borrowed

once... no one battered an eyelid!

...So with all that said... advice please?

A big thank you in advance,

Stu :)

Apart from the $200-300 price difference on "that auction web site",

what else is different between the two.

Stu :)

After reading all this (which approximately took one cup of coffee and two cigarettes) one company name popped into my head-

Polaroid

Here's a company that was going to disappear by the end of the 90's, properly makes the least profit on it's emulsions (compared to Kodak, Fuji or any one else) and missed the digital band wagon big time. I remember reading that Polaroid considered starting R+D into digital way back when Canon and Sony were playing with digital in the mid 80's. However some bright spark on the board of directors thought it had no future and so it got forgotten...

But the other day I bought a factory fresh film for my 1970's vintage SX-70! And from what I know no one seems to be stocking up on type 54 film. Although the Polaroid company seems uncertain at this point, it's got at least another 5-10 years in her. So I'd assume that Kodak film as got at least twice that life span.

Although it did make me think, what if Polaroid got into digital back in 80's? Knowing what Polaroid's R+D was like once and the influence they once sported, what would digital be like today? And how would it regarded?

Stu :)

Dream lens: 40-60mm zoom.

I guess still haven't quite got over the Canon 20-35mm zoom yet (sold just before xmas with all the other 35mm gear), but new 50mm Distagon is helping.

Stu :)

"Another question - so f-stop refers to an aperture rather than actually equating to an aperture?"

Can you clarify that please?...

...In the meantime does this help-

The f-stops on a particular lens refers to a set of fixed variable diameters, with the same ratio of size to other lenses with different focal lengths.

So basically an f-stop is an aperture opening using the formula below.

f-number = lens focal length / effective aperture diameter.

Now how the numbers we use (f2, f2.8, f4, f5.6, f8, f11, etc) came into existence is another bedtime story.

Stu :)

I agree with top answer and before you say "why".

The F-stop diameter size changes with the focal length of the lens.

Sure f8 on 50mm lets the same amount of light into the film, as does f8 on a 100mm.

So for example the aperture diameter (6mm) of f8 on your 50mm will be smaller than the aperture diameter (12mm) of f8 on a 100mm.

So that means for lens of 200mm focal length at f8 you're going to need an aperture diameter of 24mm. Can you imagine how big a f-stop of f2.8 if going to be on your 200mm lens?...

...71mm!

However to save cost in design and/or building zoom lenses, somebody worked out that instead of having fit a bigger diaphragm inside the lens, just use the same maximum diaphragm diameter for smaller focal length, but just change the f-stop value. That's why some long tele-photo lens (135mm and up) with maximum aperture of f2.8 seem to cost you your liver and kidneys and why many affordable zooms for us 'plebs' do the f4.5~5.6 change.

Wait until your lens lingo starts including alien words like- Planar, Sonnar, Distagon, Elmar, Tessar, Tele-Tessar, Summicron, Biogon and even a lens called a Pancake!

...In the meantime forget those names and go forth take many enjoyable photos with your Minolta.

Stu :)

Thanks to all for answers, it does help clear the air.

However... I disagree with lens quality. Many moons ago I owned an OM10 with a Zuiko 50mm 1.4 and in comparison to Canon's 50mm 1.8 MKII, I'd say the Canon "plastic fantastic" took better pictures. So the Olypmus got ditched.

Stu :)

Hiya,

Can someone please tell me why a Olympus OM10 with a 35-70mm lens or

a Pentax K1000 with a 50mm lens commands a greater value on the the

second hand market than an Canon EOS 500 with 35-80mm. I can't work

it out!

Stu :)