jimdesu

Mine clogs with disuse. Just run a test print and, if needed, run the cleaning utility.

pinhole camera

Hi there,

 

I have two Canon lenses, a 65mm f/0.75 and a 90mm f/1.0, and I've been

toying with building a camera around one of them (the back focus

distance is less than a centimeter, so there isn't a way to graft

either onto an SLR). The funny thing is that when I turn either lens

around backwards, not only do I get the expected high magnification,

but they seem to exhibit unlimited DOF! I can see a close-up of my

fiance's African violet, the dust on the pane of glass behind it, and

the cottage behind us all in focus. Assuming that your f/ratio when

reversed is just the focal length devided by the rear aperture, these

lenses should be somewhere between f/2 and f/4, which won't give you

that kind of DOF. This is really weird -- does anyone have any

theories as to what might explain it?

Another trick, credit to Harold Merklinger, is to focus the lens PAST infinity by just a hair. This will let you stop down all the way you want and still have a soft image.

bravo, Martin!

The foreground has that, for lack of a better word, wide-angle 'coming at you' quality. It'd be really neat if this was from a 50mm though. That's prove the point for certain.

I keep finding different sources of information on LTM; is it:

 

M39x26tpi@28.8mm, or

 

M39x25tpi@28.8mm ?

 

Need to figure out what to tell the machinist.... =)

Unless it's been damaged, I've found that pretty much anything CZJ, even the east-only designs simply couldn't be sneezed at.

wow, my experience totally disagrees with yours. 800 is sharp and doesn't appear grainy until I've got a homogenous background, then it's awful -- but I'm scanning, so that may be different from what you're doing. I love NPH, especially the softer contrast

Just thought I'd chime in; I'm in love w/ my expodisc -- worth the purchase too.

Everyone may think I'm totally out to lunch on this one, but I really like portraits with my Mamiya 7 & 150/4.5 lens, at or near to minimum focus distance. Great combination of sharp and smooth. You have to be able to crop though; if you've gotta produce ready-to-go chromes, it may not be the best choice.

Hi there,

 

I'm looking to purchase an anamorphic lens to attach to the front of

my Kodak Medalist (which is a 6x9 camera with a fixed 100mm f/3.5

lens), but I'm worried about vignetting, since I need to cover 6x9.

Specifically, I'm looking for a 2x adapter, but might consider a 1.5x

adapter if no-one makes a 2x that would do the job. Any recommendations?

 

thanks in advance,

 

James

I don't know, but I just picked up a T & H 50/2 lens in leica thread mount off of ebay, and am looking forward to its arrival....

Hi there,

 

I have an 80mm Oscillo Paragon f/1.3 (in an Ilex #3 that I need to

get CLA'd), and I can't find any info either here or on Google as to

what the coverage of this lens is wide-open. Does anyone know?

 

thanks in advance

 

James

always

I've had no issues using 220 in my Mamiya 7 either; as long as you remember to flip the pressure-plate around to 220. W/ 120, you might get some 'interesting' results.

For screw-mount lenses, you're going to be stuck w/ stop-down metering; you might as well just pick up an M42-EOS adapter and use them on your regular camera.

 

You could get an old Pentax Spotmatic, which would automatically stop down the diaphram for you, but these old guys aren't exactly feature-packed (durable, though).

If you're a real weirdo like I am, in addition to print film, you could use the great yellow father's duplicating slide film (edupe) -- it's got a asa that varies from 6 to 24 and is tungsten-biased, but it's got a 9.5 stop LINEAR exposure range that scans great (at least w/ my imacon).

 

It's a pain in the rear to use, but you get high-contrast plus large exposure range.

I have both a Super Ikonta IV and two Mockba-5 folders (which I want to sell, but haven't CLA'd them). The Super Ikonta IV is well worth the money, but unless you use an external meter, you'll want to make sure to use print film, as the included meter is really "wide area" and not at all coupled with what you see in the viewfinder. Great camera -- I'm not parting w/ mine.

This may sound really silly, but get yourself an old 200mm Sonnar (M42-mount) off of ebay. They're big, heavy, and have wonderful bokeh.

My answer was to go analog and buy a film scanner.

 

1. There are lots of really, really good (film) cameras and lenses being sold for a dime on the dollar.

 

2. A film scanner + photoshop will give you lots of control over how the print comes out (remember A.Adams analogy -- the negative is just the score; the print is the performance) without having to worry about dime-store dumb-heads.

 

3. Slides are great for learning to expose properly, but they can also have a serious liability in terms of contrast. You can always change from Velvia to Efke to NHG, but you can't change your sensor.

 

4. In my rather humble opinion, digital cameras may give you immediate feedback, but they can also encourage a 'blast away and pick the good ones' approach that film discourages. If you're looking to do event photography, this's not a problem, but there's a lot to be said for setting up the tripod, sitting down, figuring out where you want to place what tones in your subject (zone system), taking notes, &c. I lean towards the 'contemplative approach' instead, and have found it to have improved my shooting much more than before I slowed down.

 

just $0.02... =)

I don't have any scanned, but I like to use mine as a landscape camera. You can't go wrong with these beasties -- what camera can you drop on your foot and worry more about your foot than the camera?

 

But if you do, contact Ken Ruth (google search) to get yours fitted to 120 instead of the old 620 spools.

 

The lens isn't as sharp as my g690bl's lenses but there's a 'feel' to it that I really like -- I'm not sure how to describe.

If my theory is correct, you'll see less CA with Foveon's sensor and with film, because these media to an extent exploit CA, at least the longitudinal (I mean the non-transverse part -- pardon if I have the term wrong) component of the error. By having multiple layers some tiny thickness apart, if the blue layer is in focus, CA causing red to focus behind the blue will be caught by a red layer which will be less out of focus than if the red layer was resolved in the same plane as the blue layer.

 

But it's just a $0.02 theory....

 

 

Jim

Hi y'all,

 

I've been out looking at the mtf data for the new Zeiss lenses, and

it was curious why the (admittedly fantastic) performance of the

lenses takes a nose-dive just after 15mm off-axis. I did some

thinking, and remembered that a cinema-sized 35mm frame is a half-

frame of 18-24mm, did the pythagorean theorem in windows calculator,

and shazam: 30mm image circle! So it seems pretty clear that when

they do come out with a digital version in the future, we'll end up

w/ something like an APS frame. So don't hold your breath for a full-

frame digital rangefinder....

I disassembled a Pancolar of mind, and can't get it back together again. I can see where everything has to go, but the difference between two hands and purpose-built assembly lines can be significant!

 

just $0.02