david_smith35

<p>Sanjay, if you are using the glass mounts the metal mask holds the glass in the mount. Strictly speaking, the mask is unecessary but the design of the mount makes them a necessary evil.</p>

<p>As David said, the slots are for locating the film - I use a pair of tweezers to lift them slightly, but the film still has a tendancy to move. I fix the film in place using a small sliver of self adhesive tape on the very edge of the film - a method I've used for years and found very effective.<br> As you've pointed out, there is a small degree of image loss (about 1.5mm if my memory serves me correctly) - not necessarily a bad thing as it allows for a small amount of image adjustment within the slide frame and allows you to correct a slightly sloping horizon!</p>

<p>I've had dust on the film inside the camera due to static, and it was rendered sharp - which it will be if it's on the film plane. If the hair is on the film it will be sharp - it will also appear black on transparency film. As Tom says, it could be the scanner. Have you examined the film and the scanner film holder?</p>

<p>In a word, no it hasn't changed my photography. I've always thought that Photo.net was aimed more at cameras and equipment than actual photography.</p>

<p>Absolutely agree with Ray Butler - used with the magnifier, the WLF is by far the biggest and brightest view of the focussing screen. A prism will always be dimmer, but a necessary evil on anything other than square format.</p>

<p>6 mediocre portraits of the same person - so what's the big deal?</p>

<p><em>Not a good intro to rollfilm photography IMO</em><br> Well, in my humble opinion, the Mamiya TLR's are a very good and inexpensive introduction to roll film photography. How can the lenses be called "uneconomic" when in fact when I owned one, they were the cheapest way into roll film photography that allowed interchangeable lenses. To describe them as something the size of a shoebox is plain silly, and they can't be compared to a Yashicamat or a Rollei, both which have fixed lenses, and neither of which has built in bellows focussing which allows close focus without accessories.</p>

<p>Jon,</p> <p>I can only agree with others on here that battery consumption isn't an issue with the Bronica. I've used an SQAi for nearly 20 years and it's never let me down. I Always carry a few spare batteries in my camera bag just in case. The battery holder supplied with the SQAi is perfectly fine and is certainly not flimsy. <br> Despite the inclusion of a timer switch on the Zenzanon lenses, I still use the 'B' setting on the camera (the SQAi) for longer exposures with no problems.</p>

<p>I hope you haven't stepped in anything (you know what) before pressing the filter rim against the sole of your shoe!</p>

<p>Well, these threads regularly stray off topic which sometimes makes them interesting reading.<br /> I was merely trying to correct the somewhat exaggerated claim that (it wasn't a challenge)<br /> <em>Fuzzy, for a Hasselblad, is equivalent to "tack sharp" in most other cameras.</em><br /> It implies that only a Hasselblad is capable of sharp images, which is obviously not true.</p>

<p><em> The OP was talking about film as were the other contributors, I think.</em><br> That's what I thought.</p>

<p>A Hasselblad is no more and no less sharp than any other camera of similar design. Don't believe all the hype.</p>

<p><em>What's the point? The OP hasn't participated on this thread for 6 weeks ,</em><br> Well, I wasn't aware there was a time limit on posting a comment.</p>

<p>Sanjay, All projectors will overheat glass mounted slides if projected for an excessively long time - you just have to experiment and work within the limitations of your chosen projector.<br /> As you live in a country with very high humidity, you may well experience a problem with fungus growth. Can you store your slides in the same cabinet as the camera equipment? I store mine in an airing cupboard where the humidity is presently around 51%. I have never experienced fungus or mould problems with my slides - however, dust is another matter!</p>

<p>Tom, The plastic screen for the Bronica can't be repaired - you will have to purchase a replacement, probably used as I doubt you will find a new one. There are one or two third party makes (assuming they are still available) such as a Beatie Intenscreen, but they aren't cheap.<br /> The Bronica prism finder isn't the brightest and is considerably dimmer than the waist level finder, which will always be brighter than any prism.</p>

<p>Vitaliy, I just wash them in warm water witha small amount of detergent. Rinse them off and dry them as best I can with a cloth - it's impossible to dry them properly as the mounts don't come apart. You just have to let them dry naturally which does leave some drying marks especially if you live in a hard water area. The drying marks can be removed with a micro fiber cloth and some elbow grease! Incidentally, the mounts aren't covered in dirt when new, but always have a faint film on the suraface of the glass similar to what you get on the inside of your car windscreen.<br> The other mounts you mention aren't available in my country, so I cannot comment on them.<br> I guess this is one big advantage of digital projection!</p>

<p>All very well using an HD TV for your slides, but the format isn't suitable for portrait or vertical images due to the small vertical dimensions of TV screens. Now if TV screens were square....<br /> Vitaliy, if you've never had to clean a new Gepe mount before use, you must have access to a special supply of Gepe mounts! There is always a film of crud on the ones I've bought - and in fact I usually wash mine in detergent before use. Incidentally, I have never found a slide mount that keeps the slide perfectly flat - but Gepe are the best of a bad bunch, and I've tried various makes over the years. If Gepe were truly bad, nobody would use them.<br /> Having said all that, it's only a small number where corner to corner sharpness is a problem - most are okay.</p>

<p><em>Only Gepe slide mounts are readily available and they are bad. I have to hunt for Titania and Wess mounts (and some others) on Ebay, they're much better but old and dirty, have to clean each glass which is very tedious.</em><br> Well, Gepe mounts aren't exactly bad, but they're certainly not well designed. The glass mounts don't always hold the film flat due to the aluminium masking frame which creates a gap between the glass surfaces.<br> Regarding cleaning dirty slide mounts, even brand new Gepe mounts have to be cleaned before use!</p>

<p>Vitaliy, I have an Ohnar version of the 3.5x loupe you mention, and I'm pretty sure it comes from the same factory as the Cabin brand. It has a magnification of 3.5x and covers the full area of a 6x6 slide with ease. The optics are of excellent quality. Hope this helps.</p>

<p>Sanjay, as you are probably aware, most of the projectors mentioned are no longer made. 6x7 projectors are hard to come by and very expensive - and so are the slide mounts. It would be easier to find a 6x6 projector, although these aren't exactly common either. You best bet is to keep an eye on flea bay as they do crop up occasionally.</p>

<p>I think you will find it impossible to fit 20 images on a roll of 120 film!</p>

<p><em>Re weight and shaky cameras: the mass of a tripod helps isolate what's on one zzzzzzzzzzzz</em><br> Good grief, practically a whole page of pseudo scientific clap trap. It's just a tripod for crying out loud.</p>

<p><em>None of those fashionable lightweight excuses for being lazy!</em><br> So, what exactly is a light weight tripod? Be precise rather than making vague comments about what is light and heavy.</p>

<p>We all have our idiosyncrasies when using the English language. On some of these forums I've seen a Hasselblad referred to as <em>an </em>Hasselblad!</p>

<p>I wouldn't worry too much about the weight - I'd be rather more concerned about the two section centre column.</p>