dpowis

I've used the Kenyon system, and the result is pretty incredible. The whole camera and lens are stabilized, and you can get sharp pictures at 1/30 with a 135mm lens while driving on cobblestone. However, the whole system is expensive, and most notably heavy and unpractical. You have to lug around the gyro, plus the battery, plus the inverter.

I'd say it's a good tool if you are using it professionaly, or on a very specific occasion (you can rent it pretty easily), but for everyday use, I'd rather have a stabilized lens or a DSLR with a stabilised sensor.

My 2 cents.

http://www.canonfd.com/choose.htm

But google would have found it easily for you...

If you really want to use cameras that had the PX625 mercury batteries for the meter, you can use an adapter. That's what I do with my old Canon F1. I bought a C.R.I.S adapter and the exposure is spot on now. This adapter lowers the 1.55 volts of a smaller silver-oxyde battery to the required 1.35 volts of the old mercury batteries.

If you really want to continue using your camera, it's a good buy.

Hi all,

I've just found a roll of FP4+ film that I most likely exposed in

July 2005. I usually process my film (B&W only) in my Jobo CPE-2,

and am happy with the results. Should I add a bit of time to my

usual processing time (manufacturer's time minus 15%), or am I being

much too worried for a film that's been exposed just a little less

than a year ago ?

Thanks.

Daniel

As a comment, I think Rene's second picture glows more than the first, and I think that has more to do with the intelligent use of ambient lighting (and the reflections due to the sheet of paper on the stand). Then, maybe the way a Leica lens enhances tone separation or whatever you might call it helps.

Anyway, I think I'll be buying a Leica before summer.

I have received from England a bunch of Ilford film (mostly HP5s),

and the package says ILFORD HARMAN technology on the package.

Apparently, something changed in the production process. The

typeface of the film markings has changed a bit (I konw, big deal),

and a few other things changed too.

The film curl has been reduced, and I have no residual dyes left in

the film (my previous batches of HP5 had more purple stuff left on,

with the same fix/rince process).

Have any of you experienced this ?

Daniel

C.R.I.S MR-9 adapter.

I've got one on my Canon F-1. The exposure is spot-on. A bit expensive, but at least it works well.

About the lift :

It is so much simpler with. When each step of the processing is over, you just lift the tank, it pours out into a pipe, you lower the tank and pour in the chemical for the next step.

Very easy.

Without the lif, you have to put your hands in the water, grab the tank out, splash water all over the place, empty it, fill it with the next chemical, re-attach it.

You get the point. (I've got a CPE2 with lift, by the way)

Hope this helps

Dan

Kelly, don't you love those Kodak film canisters ?

Last time I used Kodak film (TMZ), there was a lot of cursing and the canister eventually looked like this in the end. Every other film brand has pretty easy opening. Usually a small flat-headed screwdriver (I don't use a bottle opener anymore, I broke the last one doing it) is enough to pop on of the covers off if I accidentally let the film go all the way in.

I don't know about the vintage of the film, but I think there is still one or two labs in the US specializing in old films, such as C-22 process. Turnaround will be long, price might be a bit high, but this people will do everything in their power to get acceptable pictures out of your film. I'm sure somebody on this forum will know the name of one of them.

Hope this helps.

Dan

looking back through Huw's posting history, I saw on one of the posts about the meter in the screwmount Leica :

Jamie J. , jun 06, 2004; 12:14 p.m.

Maybe next you could build an M-Digital?

Well, guess we got to this point.

Thumbs up again on the project, Huw!

I've been using an old Contax II with a 50mm Sonnar lens, and after a moment (almost one year now, actually), indoors like indoors, most exposures are OK. Although, here's my method.

- Try to use 400 speed film (pretty universal) at all times (that way you get used to setting exposure manually without getting mixed up with changing films.

- For me, in Paris, night-time exposure in an average-lit street is 1/25, f/2. Should be around that in most night-time urban lighting (not Las Vegas, though)

- If you can, don't mind overexposing a bit, B&W will stand it pretty well.

- For most daytime situations, set 1/500 (for 400 speed film) shutter speed, and adjust aperture to lighting conditions, and then eventually shift shutter speed and aperture to fit your photographic needs (freezing motion or depth of field). Sunny 16 does a pretty good job.

- If you are in the streets and it starts getting a bit dark, car lights are a fixed intensity reference. That can tell you if the lighting is stronger or weaker than what you are used to.

It takes a bit of time to get used to, but looking at my last roll of film, it contains a wide range of exposure situations, from sunny days, to overcast dusk, to indoors, etc... And all of them yield a good picture. I couldn't tell you by how many stops some are off, but they should be able to get prints or scans out of them.

My .02

Dan

The fact you mention an indoor setting tells me that the lenses for the Mamiya could lack the big apertures of the Leica lenses. Also, something tells me part of the Middle eastern culture (meaning muslim) isn't fond about picture taking (just my experience, I've been to Saudi Arabia and taking pictures of people isn't the best way to make new friends there), so not only would the Leica be better in the indoor setting (I guess that would mean somewhat low-light), but also as a smaller therefore less noticeable camera.

My .02

Dan

As to what people consider as sharp, I've seen some friends telling me "Hey, this picture of yours looks really sharp", but it was just pretty contrasty, and was enlarged on a condenser head.

The supposed sharpness came from an old Canon FD zoom (70-210/4), that was never reputed ultra sharp.

So sharpness is pretty subjective.

Also, I developped today a 4 x 5 negative. (with a lens from the 70's), and things looked beautifully tonal, but not necessarilly sharp.

My 2 cents.

Don't you just hate when such things happen to you ?

There's a shop in Germany that has most Jobo spare parts.

If you have a 2513 (or 1510) tank, you'll need center core 4043

http://www.lumiere-shop.de/product_info.php/info/p1425_Ersatzteil-Achsrohr-40mm.html

If you have a 2523 (or 1520) tank, you'll need center core 4044

http://www.lumiere-shop.de/product_info.php/info/p1426_Ersatzteil-Achsrohr-80mm.html

There's also a shop in England that carries them :

http://www.novadarkroom.com/acatalog/Film_Processor_Spares_Jobo.html

There we go.

Hope this helps.