Andrew in Austin

Another use for gama is when comparing two films of similar ISO. The film with the steeper slope of its straight line section will yield more contrast in the mid tones.

 

Processing affects the straight line section of the film curve. If you lower the development time, the slope of the line is reduced, as is the contrastiness of the mid tones and highlights in the final negative.

 

I would assume that sensitometry still has its place in film processing.

If you are referring to loading the developing reel, I have foun that loading the taped end first to be much easier than the other way around.

 

I've never cut the corners of the leading edge with roll film, so I'd be interested if this is anyway advantageous. On 35mm, on the other hand, I do make a small round cut at each corner.

The paper backing is discarded before the film is loaded onto the developing reel, which must be done in the absence of light, either a changing bag or my case a walk-in closet. In short, removing the paper backing is - step 1 - with regards to loading your film into the developing tank.

Janet, if you use the D76 quickly enough it will be fine. The aeration only effects the shelf life. Get yourself a stirrer.

I just happened to notice that in this month's edition of "Buttershug," there is an article about using instant coffee with some wash soda for a b&W developer. Included in the article are a couple of prints made from the negs.

The above quote sounds like it was borrowed from Edmund Burke.

 

Look for consumer color films to stick around even if their sales are reduced to smaller niche market in developed countries. Much of the developing world will be using film for some time to come and you may even see some of the production facilities moved overseas.

 

Black and White films on the other hand have already more or less become less dependent on the mass market. So, hopefully they will hang in there.

If you want to go back 50 to 60 years in time, when it wasn't uncommon for a professional studio to have at least one large format camera, then the whole question of grain takes on a different light. Even with 25 ASA orthochromtatic B&W, an 8"by10" neg will trump 35mm everytime with regards to grain in any enlargement.

 

Over time standards of common perception can deteriorate. So at some point in the future maybe digital picture panels will be the norm, which will not be news for the avaiability of photographic paper.

 

Also, film offerings are somewhat dependent on the mass market. Does anyone miss Panatomic X or APX 25? Were they the casualty of zoom lenses and photographers not willing to set up a tripod? I see the popularity of both 400 and 800 ASA films as being driven by the predominate use of hand-held zooms.

 

Digital will be the predominate media of the future, unless you know something I don't. My hope is that film will still have a niche overseas in the less developed countries and Eastman Kodak along with Fuji will manufacture a line of films to those markets.

"Burned into my memory is one instance when a customer blamed my store for ruining her wedding photos. The photos were shot on sub-110 Disc film, but the woman simply wouldn't accept that the graininess of the prints was a result of negatives smaller than the nails on my pinky fingers."

 

In addition to the real estate issue on disc film, each image was probably gathered through a single miniscus lens. Too bad you didn't have a roll of 120 with eight, 6 by 9 frames to show the dear lady the difference between the two formats.

 

With regards to machine prints, at least with analog printers, try to ensure that the important elements within each color exposure fall between 3 light values and keep the exposure index uniform throughout the roll. A fill-flash really helps during the summer months, but you may receive the unwanted nickname of Herr Blitz.

 

Maybe I'll get the old Minox out today, but first I'll need to head to the closet with the old film slitter before heading to the wedding shoot. :^)

With regards to color processing, since I shoot with Schneider, Zeiss and Zuiko glass, I wouldn't want to venture a guess on which lab does the best work in your area.

 

And Jim, my feelings are hurt. You mentioned Rollei, but not Oly. :^(

Dale, I didn't mean to suggest that a limited edition Rollei TLR isn't suited for serious photography . My main point was that Rollei was never capable of besting their Japanese competitors on price. That was true forty years ago and more so now.

 

I doubt if there isn't anyway that Rollei and its European suppliers could maintain the traditional quality of the Rolleiflex at anything other than a premium price. Plus, the infrastructure just isn't there anymore for a broader market. Hence, the occasional special edition TLR pops up for which the vast majority heads straight for a collector's vault. Rollei is just exploiting a profitable niche.

 

If someone wants to actually put a special edition Rolleiflex to work as opposed to keeping it in its fancy display box, then bring it on.

 

By the way, the Seagull remark was a poor attempt at adding some humor to the discussion.

Eric, I don't think Rollei has enough resources for a build it and they will come strategy within this market segment, by which I mean TLR's. If Rollei releases any TLR at this point, it's intended purpose is to sell to serious collectors verses serious photogs.

 

Not to beat a dead horse, I mean Rollei the firm, if one wants a new Rollei TLR. it's probably for sentimental or cache purposes. Stick with your imminently more practical Mamiya SLR system and leave the expensive jewelry for the leasure class.

 

I hear there is a GOLD EDITION Seagull TLR for us bottom feeders, is there any truth to this?

Eric, if you go back 50 years, Rollei products weren't exactly underpriced even then. In the mid 1950's a new plebian Rolleicord V sold for about $159, which was 3/4's of my dad's monthly take home pay as an engineer. Even then, it helped to have a trust fund or a company expense account to charge the camera to.

 

Enter the Japanese manufacturers with their look at we can do offerings. By comparison, Japanese TLR's were a bargain. The Yashica Mat, a copy of the Rolleiflex, sold for $75 new. I know our family had one and it was to troop on through the 1960's.

 

Did one get twice the imaging capabilities with the Rolleicord verses the Yashica? Nope and you still had to cock the shutter manually.

 

Why is it that today people are surprised that if you make $48,000 dollars a year, a Leica RF with lens or a Rollei medium format with lens will still cost almost a month's wages? Could it be that German craftsman and their business management don't work as cheaply as they once did. Plus, the cost of doing business in Europe is probably higher than anywhere else. Also, the dollar isn't trading as well against other currencies like it did in the 1950's.

 

Today Rollei today doesn't have the market muscle it once had. It's a much smaller firm after at least three reorganizations. Their market share is miniscule. The medium format market is a much, much smaller slice of the photographic pie, too. Rollei's heyday has passed.

 

Are they cashing in on their name and reputation by offering a few select TLR offerings at exhorbitant prices? Most certainly. Will the average photographer ever be able to own such a fine piece of expensive neck jewelry? Absolutely not.

 

Rollei's main line of medium formats are their SLR systems geared towards professional photogs who can write them off as a business expense. For the plebians, their 35mm offerings are all built elsewhere. And for those select few blessed with generous trust funds, there will be, at least I hope for the foreseeable future, the occasional luxury offering based on one of their legacy bodies.

Folders from the 50's use leaf shutters and are fitted with an X-synch. One can most definitely perform a fill-flash, either outdoors on a sunny day or indoors for a slow-shutter speed fill. There is no hot shoe, but they do have a nipple for PC cord. With a leaf shutter, you can use any of the available shutter speeds with a flash exposure. Simply use the rangefinder to figure the distance to your subject or set the flash to a preferred aperture setting.

 

I doubt that there are many photogs using what is essentially a vacation camera for commercial purposes. Occasionally, another photograper will comment on the antique nature of the camera. I simply say there are sailboats and motorboats. Shooting with a folder is much like taking to the water in a sailboat. One does it at their leasure, they're not for the speed-racer set.

 

If I'm shooting with an old manual camera, I'm literally not in any hurry and most likely doing so with the "Sunny 16 Rule".

In addition to metering, it's nice to have an 18% gray card so you can include it in one of your frames. It makes life easier when enlarging. You simply match the 18% gray card with your test strips.

<p>Sam, I'm guessing you are looking for a folder, because they are pocketable.   In my case, I commute on a four speed bike or public transport.   Therfore, I'm not all that willing to bring a bulkier TLR, (although, in my opinion, a TLR like a Rolleicord is the better choice for street or landscape photography).   By the way, I'll let someone else inform you on why you should avoid the Moskva.</p>

 

<p>The Bessa II, Super Isolette, Super Ikonta III and IV folders are at the top of the food-chain folder class.   If you want my two cents worth, they are better choices than the Moskva.   All them use Tessar type lenses fitted to Compur-Synchro shutters, feature <u>automatic</u> <u>film</u> <u>counters</u> and are blessed built-in couped-rangefinders.   The Agfa Super Isolette and Voigtlander Bessa II have unit focusing verses the usual front cell focusing.   In the downside column, these top of the line folders with range finders are a bit too heavy and bulkly to be called pocketable.   And typically they have small viewfinders, as well.   Just to let you know, if it wasn't for the small viewfinder, I'd actually prefer my Super Isolette to a TLR.   I definitely have to take off my glasses to use such a small viewfinder and there are no framelines.</p>

 

<p>Almost in the same class as the forementioned folders, is the very pocketable Perkeo II with a Color Skopar lens with front cell focusing.   The Perkeo II has a film counter, which to me is a big plus.   The Skopar is a Tessar variant, which is another plus.</p>

 

<p>Also very pocketable, but a step downward, are the Agfa Isolette II and Isolette III.   Most came with a hard coated Apotar lens, which is a Cooke Triplet, again with front cell focusing.   If you are lucky, you'll find one fitted with a Tessar-type Solinar lens.   The Isolette III offers the advantage of a built-in, uncoupled, rangefinder.   Because it is so pocketable, I tend my to use Speedex Special R clone of the Isolette III 10 times more often than my Super Isolette.   On all of the above, a lens hood is a must have accessory.</p>

With a lot less work you can insert a Viton o-ring, as suggested and be done with it.

With a little ingenuity you can hollow out a px625 alkaline and insert a 675 zinc-air cell for a hearing aid. They run about a buck apiece at the neighborhood pharmacist on these shores. They're probably cheaper at the Big Box discount store.

 

You'll notice four holes to allow for venting instead of two on the Wein cell. The 35RD only needs power for the galvonmeter, which is located in the base of the camera. So one can cover two of the air vents with a little nail polish and prolong the life of hearing aid cell. Expect a couple of month between changes.

 

By the way, zinc-air cells produce approximately 1.4 volts, but will work just fine on your RD.

<p>I know this an ancient thread, but the Agfa Isola had a collapsable lens tube. It had a single, meniscus element and a simpleton shutter.</p>

 

<p>Have a look here, <a href="http://www.corff.de/Klappkameras/Klappkameras-7.html">Isola 6x6</a>.

<p>Gabor, start on the camera you are least fond of. The foam seals and mirror pads are, as mentioned, a cake walk. Be real careful of handling the front sided mirror. You won't want to scratch it or knock it out of alignment.</p>

 

<p>If you get stuck, post a question on the <a href="http://www.kyphoto.com/classics/forum/">camera repair forum</a>.

I believe Jaroslav hit the nail on the head. The Isolette I thru III cameras were sold as second tier consumer cameras for the Post WWII advanced-amateur market. Personally, I've had good luck with an Isolette III that has been fully CLA'd, but there are some limitations. Scale focusing, parallax compensation and due to the primitive viewfinder, composition without my glasses on are some issues that come to mind.

 

A folder's main attraction is its pocketablility. That said, a folder is not going hold up very well under if scrutinized of by the more discriminating photographer. They're slow and deliberating cameras to work with. But still, a properly colimated Apotar should deliver sharp center resolution up to an 11 by 11 print. Unless the lens is stopped down, then the edge resolution is another story.

 

Unlike the Voigtlander Bessa II and the superbly designed Super Isolette, which have unit focusing, (where all the elements moved in relation to the film), the Isolettes I thru III utilize front cell focusing. So, I have to agree with Jaroslav that the focusing on the Isolette was probably optimized for a specific subject to camera distance. My experience shows it to be in the 10 to 14ft range.

 

Throw in the 85mm focal length, which has a f/8 hyperfocal distance of 49 feet, when set at infinity and you'll often discover that either the foreground or background will be somewhat out of focus in many shots. So you set focus ring to distance somewhere in between the foreground and background, using an accessory rangefinder as a guide and gamble a bit.

 

The front cell focusing Solinar offers some improvement in resolution over the Apotar at f/11.

 

With regards to lens resolution, for the crown jewels of pocketable medium format folders, the award goes to the Voigtlander Perkeo II with a Color Skopar set in a Syncro Compur shutter. Even still the Perkeo isn't going to hold up well to standards set by either a Rolleicord or a Minolta Autocord TLR.

 

With regards to micro contrast, I have to smile. The Xenars and Tessars fitted to Rolleicords were, after all is said and done, essentially custom matched sets of elements with rigid quality control. I doubt if Agfa took to matching up their individual elements to same level of quality control as Schneider or Carl Zeiss. Again, I have to agree with Jaroslav that there will probably be variations in performance between individual Isolettes fitted with Apotars.

>>If the two are indeed moving together, wouldn't the focus be absolutely horrid?

 

Absolutely. The focus would become progressly more blurred as the focus is adjusted from the position upon which it froze.

 

The image resolution of the Apotar becoms a bit week on close subjects that are within 8 feet, especially when shooting at a wide open aperture.

 

An Apotar with a Pronto shutter? The Apotar lens should be fitted to a Prontor S, SV, or SVS shutter. A very few had Apotars fitted to a Compur Rapid shutter. There are three versions of the Isolette II. On what side of the camera is your film winder, to the left of the viewfinder as you look at your subject or to the right?

<p>Re; In my first link I noted that the authors are Roland and Caroline Cox, but in fact they are Roland and Caroline Givan.</p>

 

<p>Their <a href="http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/focadj.html">method for adjusting the focus ring</a> is commonly used, but I suspect it may lead to inaccuracies in setting the focus ring.   Hence, my mention of setting the focus ring by backsighting.</p>

 

<p>Once the plastic plate for backsighting is made and scratched with a sewing pin, it takes less than 3 minutes to set the focus ring.   With focus ring removed, you will see imediately if the front element is turning independently of the middle element.   Also, the scratch side of the rigid plastic plate faces towards the lens assembly.</p>

 

<p>As mentioned posting previous to mine, there may be some issue of the film not being flat on the film plane.   For best results wait until just before you take the exposure to advance the film and cock the shutter.   Also, look to see that the lens standard and is perpendicular to the film plane.   The lens and shutter assembly should not wobble with the front standard in any way.   If so, it was installed incorrectly.</p>

Jim, a <u>common</u> <u>problem</u> with the Isolettes is their factory helicoid grease solidified over time.</p>

 

<p>If your front element is frozen to the second element, someone before you may have used brute force to free it up.   One of two things may occur.   Either the two front elements are still stuck together and you may be actually turning the front two elements when focusing or the focus ring may have slipped from its original position on the front cell.</p>

 

<p>The the two front elements will probably need to be removed, carefully cleaned of the old solidified grease, the second element reinstalled and then with a smidget of heavy grease added to the threads, reinstall the front element.  Then if you have a 35mm with a long focal length lens, you can reset the focus to infinity by backsighting.</p>

 

<p>The tools you need are a set of jeweler's flat tip screw drivers and a lens spanner.  A good microfiber lens cloth is good to have as well.  <u>Do</u> <u>not</u> remove the three screws from the focus ring, simply loosen them.</p>

 

<p>Look over the following:</p>

 

<p>Roland and Caroline Cox's <a href="http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/repair.html">web pages</a>.</p>

 

<p>Dave Richert also has a <a href="http://www.davidrichert.com/AGFA%20rebuild/agfa.htm">superb web site</a>.</p>

 

<p>Finally, Rick Oleson has a well done <a href="http://members.tripod.com/rick_oleson/index-123.html">web page</a>, which describes how to set the focus ring position on the front element. For a target on the film plane, cut your plastic plate a little long , (I use a CD cover).  Rick's method, which I call backsighting the focus, is far superior to either of the methods mentioned in either Roland and Caroline's or David's web pages.</p>

 

<p>Once the lens is accurately collimated, the optimum resolution is located between f/8 and f/11, right where the little dot is located.</p>

 

<p>Feel free to contact me off line</p>

<p>Mark, even the best of these mechanical leaf shutters run approximately a third stop slow at their top speed.   What the shutter service insures is that the slow shutter speeds are nearer to their marked speed.</p>

 

<p>The most common reason for needing the service in the first place is oil migrating on to the shutter blades causing them to to stick a bit or stick a lot.   Once serviced you can expect many years of trouble free service.</p>

 

<p>The important thing to check on the Yashica Mat is the film transport mechanism. Does it wind smooth or is it a bit jerky or grindy?   If it feels and sounds like a coffee grinder, steer clear. </p>

<p>I too need to own up to some latent Luddite tendencies. So, take whatever I type with a grain of salt.</p>

 

<p>From what I've seen, biting from the medium format apple can become hideously expensive, if you let it. If all you want is a toy camera on which to practice composition of dreamy images without any control over the exposure, then go for the Holga.</p>

 

<p>Personally, I've had pretty good luck with vintage cameras that did not have a built-in light meter. The $40 Yashica Mat I have is at least 40 years old, looks brand new and has the mysterious Lumaxar lens. It did need an 80$ shutter service, but its a great tripod shooter. The bad news is that a decent flash bracket, three Heliopan filters and a lens hood more than doubled the original investment.</p>

 

<p>I've tried out a newer Yashica Mat 124G, but it suffered from what was in my opinion an inferior build quality, so I quickly passed it on.</p>

 

<p>I also have a couple of Agfa folders that I picked up for under $25. They definitely needed a shutter and lens service, which I did myself. The Agfas actually get some use, because an Isolette fits confortably in my pants pocket. Even with an accessory rangefinder on one and a built-in rangefinder on the second camera I'll admit that they don't measure up to the Yashica Mat, especially with regards to framing and focusing. Agfa folders also have tendency for light leaks, so be prepared to coat the inside corners of the bellows with a mixture of Elmer's glue and shoe polish.</p>

 

<p>The Agfa Isolettes are definitely in the amateur relm, but they do deliver surprising good images and they're affordable.</p>

 

<p>Last year, I picked up an Agfa Super Isolette and it's a dream come true and it only cost me 8 Holgas, which was fair. Moral of the story is that it took the bite from the Yashica Mat and Isolette apple to lead me to Nirvana. Medium format offers, with B&W at least, greater depth and tonality than 35mm.</p>