tim_klimowicz

Just a quick suggestion...

I've had some success shooting [very] amateur shots using "daylight" bulbs like the one seen here: http://www.rewci.com/vercomfluorb.html

I bought mine for relatively cheap down on Canal St here in NYC for $8, but the poor thing burned out after just a couple months of use (unsure if the brand is bad, or the bulb was just defective).. Anyway, I'm sure they ALL don't burn out that quickly (heheh), and they have a 5500K temperature. My guess is that it's probably a lot easier and cost-effective if you could get your hands on a couple of these bulbs. They fit in a standard socket, and require quite a bit less wattage than typical bulbs. They're BRIGHT, WHITE, and CHEAP, and I used mine very successfully to get accurate color matches for my prints here at home (Epson 1280 printer).

Excellent feedback. Thanks so much for all the very detailed information everyone!

My only reason for pushing at this stage is experimentation. I've only been shooting with an SLR since this past summer (always loved photography, but never had decent equipment previously), but I've put about 20 rolls of mixed types of slide film through my camera, and I've gotten very comfortable with Elite Chrome 200.

The only problem is that some of my photos are a bit flat for my liking. Anything to add a bit of contrast would be great to experiment with, and I'll definitely shoot my next roll at 320 and push it one stop to see how it comes out. If I want more contrast, I'll go ahead and push it 2 stops, or maybe even look into other types of film.

Thanks again! I've literally learned almost everything I know by using the 'Learn' section here, and browsing the forums. Amazing resource.

Kodak Elite Chrome 200.

How far can I push this film, and will the results be on par with

most other films of this grade, or is there another you'd recommend

for pushing with the same level of color accuracy?

More importantly, I have a question about the cost. The lab I used

(Flatiron) lists the price of pushing/pulling as $2 per stop, I

think. Am I correct in assuming that's the price for the entire roll?

So a roll of 200 pushed to 800 would be approximately: $4.50 + $4.00

= $8.50?

THANKS!

Bought a used Canon FD 35-105 macro lens. Decent shape, except the

aperture has recently began sticking (due to oil, as others suggested

here on photo.net). In the beginning, it happened randomly, but now

it's stuck open at 3.5 on and off the camera body.

How much does this typically cost to repair? The places I've

contacted said I needed to bring it in before they can give me even a

rough estimate. I bought it for $150, and I'd hate to pay even more

than $50 to get it repaired, but I'm fearing it will be 2-3x that

amount.

Thanks.

Alan,

That explains it then.. :)

I'm obviously pretty new to "real" photography, so I didn't know that. I guess when I first dismounted the lens and it stayed open at 3.5, I assumed that's what was SUPPOSED to happen, meanwhile it must have been getting stuck open just like it does when it's mounted..

I haven't had any problems with it since I first posted this, but I'm sure it will return. After I feel better (been REALLY sick this week) I will bring it in to get serviced.

Thanks again everyone!

Thanks so much for the help!

As was mentioned above, I've found that there actually is a noticable amount of oil on the aperate blades, which is showing as a slight shine at about the middle of a few of the blades. I assumed it might be wear on the surface of the blades from years of years of use, but they look fine other than the shimmer of the oil.

I haven't had this problem with it all day today, but I'm sure it'll show up again before I get it serviced. The only thing I have noticed is that the blades seem to revert to about a 5.6 setting when I remove the lens from the body (even if it's set at 3.5 on while attached). Not sure what this is, or if it's a cause for concern, but as long as it's not malfunctioning while it's actually in use, I'm not overly concerned.

OH, and a bit of good news. I emailed the guy who sold it to me, telling him the situation, and he immediately responded offering a $50 refund for what it's worth, saying he's genuinely sorry about it and he didn't know about the flaw (he sells antiques, not cameras - probably wasn't fully aware of it - frankly, I'm astonished he was that kind). I figure that will cover the servicing of the aperture, which means the $160 I paid ($150 plus shipping and such) probably wasn't a bad deal anyway since the lens should function much better with the repair. :)

Thanks again folks! VERY much appreciated!

I just bought a used Canon FD 35-105mm lens off someone on ebay for

$160. The only known "damage" was a slight watermark of sorts on the

front element. It's less than 1/5 inch and pretty faint, and though I

know it will effect the exposure to some extent, I'm guessing it's

something that won't be apparent (or perceivable?) enough to make a

big deal over.

Now, the real problem is the aperture. It seemed to work fine

innitially, but as I've been playing with it more I've noticed it

getting stuck at its widest aperture (3.5) almost randomly. Most of

the time it works fine, but by opening the back and shooting with no

film (or just using the depth-of-field preview button) I've noticed

it sometimes gets stuck fully open regardless of what f-stop I set it

at.

A couple questions. Am I wrong in assuming the faint watermark won't

effect the image quality TOO much? Also, how much would something

like this (the aperture problem) typically cost to be repaired? Is it

possible to fix myself with minimal experience in servicing lenses?

And if so, how?

THANKS! I've been really excited to finally get a hold of this lens,

and I'm a bit let down with the aperture problem..