john lehman, college alask

Correction on my previous post (too many Rolleis) -- the max speed on my 2.8A is 1/400

A 2.8A has a maximum shutter speed of 1/500 (at least mine does, and all of the literature says so). You can only switch to 1/500 when the shutter is uncocked.

I had one about 12 years ago. It was well-built, but I found I did not use it enough to justify carrying it, and so sold it.

I have used one of these on a Supergraphic and now on a Shen Hao 4x5. Even with a bag bellows and a recessed lens board, there is almost no room for movements since the lens is so close to the film plane. But is does cover 4x5

From personal experience, AI lenses with very few exceptions offer all metering modes on the D200

I had a woodworker friend make me a splitter consisting of a long 70mm wide trough and a sliding cutter. The model was the common 35mm to Minox splitters. If you are interested, I can email you pictures

You're welcome William -- if you want to drive up, Fairbanks Fast Photo has them in stock. If they are in stock in Fairbanks Alaska, it is likely that your local store has them too (altho probably not B&H)

I vaguely remember an article on this in View Camera, probably about 4-5 years ago.

No need for someplace like Rocky Mountain Film Labs -- the mid '90s used C41 and E6 the same as today. Any professional lab (if such are left) could do them

The batteries can't be THAT hard to find -- our small town local camera shop has had them in stock all summer -- I bought a spare the week before July 4th :-)

I have one, taken from an old Graflex XL. It barely covers 6x7, but is otherwise excellent. Not, alas, a wide angle lens for 4x5 (for which I use 65mm and 90mm Super Angulons)

I was reading a 1935 book titled "Modern Miniature Photography" on early 35mm photography last week -- converting to modern dollarettes, film in England cost about $40 per 35 exposure roll. The book raved about how cheap it was.

An old (but still effective) technique from manual everything days is to combine flash with a focusing frame: a wire frame just a bit larger than your field of view attached to the tripod mount on the camera. You pre-focus the camera (and aim the flash) for the distance of the frame, and then when the insect is within the wire frame, you trip the shutter. With the flash, you can be using a small f-stop, and the flash takes care of the movement.

Another vote for the Gitzo 1228 - I backpacked 15 miles round trip in mountains with mine, an N200 and four lenses on Friday I have a medium-weight Bogen ball head on mine, but there are special light weight heads.

There is an entire discipline of remote sensing devoted to the problem of measuring things remotely. The branch which uses photography is photogrammics. To estimate the distance as you want to do, you need to know only the size of the target, it's size on the negative, and the focal length of the taking lens. If you are trying to guess from a projected image rather than the original negative, you need to also know the size of the negative (16mm film I believe), the projection distance, and the focal length of the projection lens. The characteristics of the eye don't matter.

 

A good library should have textbooks on photogrammics. Most serious photography textbooks published in the 1940's and 1950's also included the necessary material in their chapter on lenses. More modern ones (at least those published in the US) don't, since the publishers assume (probably correctly) that the high-school algebra required for the discussion is beyond the abilities of 99.9% of potential readers.

I just checked mine, and it says 110 volts only.

Whatever Wikipedia says about Kodak continuing to provide processing for Kodak IE (Colour Infra-red film) until 1996, when I shot it in New Mexico in the mid 80's, if you wanted to get Color Infra-red film processed, you couldn't get it from Kodak -- there was, as I recall, only one private lab in the US which would do it.

Following up on Stephen's response, from the company's standpoint, rapid innovation solves the problem of competing with your historical self. I have been an enthusiastic Rolleiflex users for years, but other than a new Rollei 35 in 1973, Franke & Heidecke has never made a cent from my dozen or so (used) Rollei purchases. Similarly, Leitz has never made anything from my enjoyment of a used Leica, and until this Spring, Nikon benefited from my first Nikon and lens 25 years ago, but not at all from the subsequent two film bodies, 8 lenses and various accessories acquired used since then. The D200 with new flash and lens which I got this spring was certainly good for Nikon as a for-profit organization :-)

The European 3.5C is the American 3.5 MVS. My 3.5 E3 takes a Bay II lens cap with 45mm separation; the Rollei list discussion should hopefully specify what the earlier E took (I vaguely remember that the change from 42 to 45mm occured between the E2 and the E3).

About 10 years ago my wife and I were vacationing in Bali when I was asked unexpectedly to do a catalog shoot for a local company. They gave me some left over Agfa 120-size slide film which had been stored at room temperature (i.e. about 35 C) for months. Since 120 film was hard to find and I used up much of my carefully cooled Fuji film on the unexpected assignment, I used the "baked" slide film for the second half of the trip; it came out fine.

While Adox has made film since the 1860's, the current Adox (Efke) films were introduced in 1952. That is probably about as close as you can get unless there are older-style Russian films available (possibly old Zeisss emulsions confiscated in 1945, but that is highly speculative).

You don't need a darkroom. I cut down sheet film in the bathroom with a rolling-blade paper cutter.

Bernard is wrong if you are not limited to a single format. The major factor is film size. A $100 4x5 system will produce better images than any $2000 35mm system -- so long as the subject stays still :-)

Another testimony on the 80mm macro purchased from Keh. Worth every penny.

I'm not really qualified to answer this, since I live in Alaska, but you probably will not need any filters for Velvia. Personally I find that polarizing filetrs take much of the "life" out of pictures. The only filter I might use for E6 film would be a 2B.

 

Now, if you were using B&W ....

 

The beanbag suggestion is good. Also, you can get extra film (altho not Velvia 50) in both Los Anchorage and Fairbanks.

 

As mentioned above, your wife should be listed first :-)