michael_cependa

Thanks for all the replies. I have a nylon strap into which I think I will have a couple of buttonholes cut and sewn in to stick the lugs through.

 

The vignetting is still puzzling, since other people aren't experiencing it. I guess I should look around for a cheap alternative hood and see if that works any better.

I use Vuescan, so I can't comment on the sofware issues except to repeat the above advice that the dust removal can't be used with conventional black and white film.

 

As for scanning resolution, my experience with the 4990 is that anything above 2400 dpi is useless. Scanning at higher resolutions will give you a bigger file, but no extra detail that I can see. I have read that the flatbeds can't focus as precisely as dedicated film scanners and therein lies the limitation.

 

My comparisons, however, have been with handheld shots; perhaps with an extra sharp tripod assisted exposure one could extract more detail with this scanner.

I have had for about a year a Rollei 2.8D. I had a Harry Fleenor CLA

carried out, including installation of a Maxwell screen and have

been for the most part very happy with the results.

 

But I do have a couple of problems. The first is with the metal

Rollei hood I purchased used at immense expense. It appears to cause

a slight vignetting in the extreme corners of the frame. Most of my

shots have been at f8 or f11. Is this normal? Are there other hoods

that will do a better job? With colour transparency, I can easily

correct in photoshop, but it's a pain with black and white which I

print with an enlarger.

 

My second question concerns a strap. The "D" does not take the

alligator clips made for later models. I can't find the older model

proprietary strap anywhere. I realize there are a number of threads

on substitutes, but all of these suggest putting a strap around the

metal bracket above the actual lug, which is intended to take the

weight. I am very hesitant to hang the camera from the brackets -- I

do have a strap that will fit in that way -- and I wonder if anyone

has any experience, either good or bad with that solution? Or is

there some simple way to fashion a strap that will extend through

the bracket and mount on the lug?

While I don't use Kodak paper, I do find this news discouraging. I do use HIE Infrared and Xtol. I have also been planning to use Tri-X developed in Diafine as I understand it will get a two stop push (i.e. you can shoot in at 1600) without excessive grain and contrast. HIE is unique and the Tri-X Diafine combo is I think unique as well. Obviously Kodak has no committment to black and white and I guess I can expect to see the whole product line disappear.

I primarily shoot black and white, which I develop and print myself.

But I like colour as well, especially on holidays. I recently

acquired a Rolleiflex TLR. I am wondering how best to use it for

colour prints. I am thinking about having my film scannned and then

printing the shots I like on my ink jet printer at home. Should I

shoot negatives or transparency?

Shot from last summer. M3 50mm Summicron 1st rigid version.<div></div>

Thanks for all the information. I believe I'll go with a Rollei specialist and have him put in a Maxwell screen.

"The supply spool for this roll of film becomes the takeup for the next."

 

Not sure I understand this. Bear in mind I'm used to 35mm that you rewind back into its canister. I've got an empty camera with a cylindrical cavity into which I load the film. At the other end is another cavity with a thin cylinder with a slot in it that rotates when the film is wound. So when I've finished the roll I wind it all on to this cylinder and then remove it from the camera in the light? The edges don't fog? I guess I'm going to have to sacrifice a roll to get the hang of how it works.

 

Thanks for your reply; the other bits I fully grasp.

maxwellprecisionoptics @ toast.net

 

Came across this somewhere. Don't know if it's current.

I have just received a Rollei TLR 2.8D Xenotar from Adorama. It seems

to be cosmetically, for the most part, as described (E) and the glass

appears perfect.

 

However the flash plug lock lever is bent in towards the body of the

camera so that it cannot be swung out over the ridge at the edge of

the lens board. Presumably the lever can be removed and bent back,

although I doubt I will ever use a flash with this camera. I'm not

really inclined to take Adorama to task over that as the camera came

with a mirrored chrome lens cap that wasn't stated to be included.

 

When the lens board is fully retracted the corner by the flash plug

(that presumably received some sort of knock) looks a fraction of a

millimeter closer to the body than at the other corners. My

understanding is the alignment of the lens board can be shimmed or

otherwise adjusted. Is that correct? The body itself appears true and

straight with no dents or other deformities. The focus knob rotates

smoothly.

 

The low shutter speeds seem obviously too slow and the self timer had

to be helped along the first couple of times I tried it, and after

that functioned properly. I would say a CLA is in order. I would like

to have the CLA done locally in Vancouver if possible. Does anyone

have experience with with either VanCam or Camtex with a Rollei TLR?

 

The viewing hood appears to have been removed at some point by

someone who had some difficulty putting it back. On one side the two

screws are not quite fully screwed home and are at a slight angle and

the screw heads have marks from the screwdriver. However, the hood is

squarely and securely mounted. Doesn't seem like a big deal, really.

 

The sports finder mirror appears badly deteriorated, though still

useable if I were to actually want to use it. It is practicable to

resilver it?

 

The focussing screen has a grid and is very dim at the corners and

edges. I would like to get a Maxwell or Beattie screen, also with

grid. I've seen a couple of threads on their respective merits, but

would be interested in an opinion of someone who has tried both. I

will also need to decide on whether to get one with or without a

central split image. I understand the Beattie screens have an

optional diagonal split. Do the Maxwell splits have a diagonal

option? Is the split center actually usefull? Does it allow for

accurate focus without use of the magnifier?

 

Finally, I am a little confused about removing the film. I have no

experience at all with anything other than 35mm. The manuals I've

found on the internet seem to suggest that I should wind the film out

of the cannister entirely onto the take-up spool and then remove it,

which seems a little bizzare to me. They also go on about an adhesive

strip and paper backing, both of which leaves me a little confused. I

understand that the camera only takes 120 film only, which has the

backing, but I have no idea what it's purpose is or what the

practical implications are.

 

Initially I am only likely to shoot black and white. I take it that I

am to remove the paper in the darkroom when I load the film onto the

developing reel?

 

Any feedback appreciated.

I should add that I printed this at twice my usual exposure and with a 1.5 filter, when most of my prints are OK with 2.0.

Here is a scan of a print. My scanner is a bit of joke -- the original print shows a lot more detail. After the first roll, I backed off my development time significantly, but I still have very dense negatives and blocked hightlights.

For "my Leica M3".

Yes, it's a preset lens. I find I don't need it wide open to see through the finder and I keep it at the aperture I'm shooting at. That's not the problem - I've been careful about keeping it set properly. I've been using the same meter for Leica M3 and with that I get proper exposures.

 

The Nikon has a fair amount of brassing and was obviously heavily used at some point. The price was reasonable and there's always a risk in buying something that old that it will need work.

Update: I have shot three rolls with the 28mm f3.5 pc lens. I have managed to produce some pretty good architectural shots, but they were very difficult to print. All rolls were overexposed and I have come to the conclusion I'm not getting anything over 125 in shutter speeds. So off it goes tomorrow for a CLA. Aside from that, it's a nice camera. I ended up getting a used Weston Euromaster meter.

 

No light leaks, so the back must be sealed OK.

I just purchased a 3rd version 28mm Elmarit and was very impressed by the image quality of my black and white 8x10s. I don't think you would be disappointed. I use it on an M3 for which I acquired a metal VC clip on finder from Cameraquest. With the clip on finder there is no issue of the lens or hood intruding into the framelines.

 

On the other hand, I wouldn't call it a small lens by Leica standards.

Craig,

 

I should admit at the outset I have just retired to my home after five hours of drinking at my neighbourhood pub. Yet I still retain some modicum of intelligence and having read your post some five or six times I have no idea what the hell exactly you're trying to say.

Thanks to everyone for such a wealth of detailed information, including Leslie, who had me remind myself of why I bought the camera (apart from it's overtly retro all-mechanical appeal). The movement of the back really is ever so slight, so I don't think I need worry about that based on the replies in this thread. I'll put in a roll of Delta 100 this weekend and see how it goes.

And the occasional situation where I'm looking for a really precise composition. The 100% view and gridded screen were part of the attraction of the F for me.

Oh, and getting a waist level or look down or whatever it's called finder. That's something I'm interested in using the Nikon for too.

You have a point about redundancy. Aside from wanting it for the pc lens for architecture, I haven't really thought through what exactly I'll use if for. I find wide open close up focussing with the 90 on the Leica a bit hit and miss and it might be good for that. But having a second body to switch black and white and coulour is one idea for which I'd want a regular range of lenses and also for sailing or other situations where I'm going to be concerned about knocking about the Leica gear.

28 50 and 90 is what I have for my M3 and I like those focal lengths. I shoot a variety of subjects, but am not really interested in macro or really long lenses. I'd like to know which lenses are particularly good in those or similar focal lengths.

 

As for light meters, that's a good question. I have a Voigtlander clip on meter for the M3, but the F has some sort of odd proprietary shoe mount over the rewind knob, so I can't clip it on unless there is an adaptor available. It's a bit awkward to use handheld. I also have an old Zeiss selenium cell handheld meter, but it seems to be out by about a stop in bright light. I'd like to get a Euromaster/Weston meter with incident dome, but those seem a little on the expensive side and I'm leery about getting an old one.

I have just bought a black paint Nikon F with the unmetered eye level

prism and the "E" type focussing screen. My other camera is a Leica

M3 and I wanted an SLR for the few applications a rangefinder is not

ideally suited for. I am new to Nikon and have a couple of questions.

 

The mirror foam was shot and I had that replaced for a whopping $15

Canadian. The back cover seems a little loose - it moves around ever

so slightly when I grip the body. I believe it's sealed with some

sort of string or yarn stuck in the groove on the body that the back

fits into. Should I have that seal replaced? Is it something I can do

myself? I guess I should have the shutter speeds checked out, but I

thought I would run a roll or two through it first and see if there

are any obvious problems.

 

I presently have a couple of lenses I borrowed from a friend - a 50mm

f2 and some sort of zoom. I plan to get a 28mm pc lens for

photographing buildings, which is one reason why I bought the camera

in the first place. I see that there's a huge variety of reasonably

priced (very reasonable compared to Leica) used lenses out there and

I'm wondering what which lenses are particularly good in terms of

image quality, and whether there are any dogs I should avoid. I do

like the look of the older lenses with the scalloped focussing rings -

are the newer lenses significantly better?

Thanks for all your replies. There seems to be a consensus the Elmarit is still a fine lens and I think that's what I'll concentrate on looking for.

I'm looking to purchase a 28mm lens for my M3 and have already bought

a clip on finder. Third and fourth version Elmarits seem to go for

about half the price of the Summicron. Aside from the extra stop, is

the Summicron that much better?

 

I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has used both these lenses.

I'm really hesitant to pay what it takes for the Summicron, on the

other hand this is likely the last lens I will buy for some time (I

have both 50 and 90mm Summicrons and the 28 will pretty much cover

the bases for me).

 

I'm thinking the 28mm will be good for interiors as well as more

obvious applications, so the extra stop has some appeal. My general

approach is to just get what I think is best, but we're talking about

a $900 US difference.