john_cullen1

<p>I don't want to imply that KEH is at fault. These things happen and they have been very helpful with the return-for-refund process - actually received a separate call to make sure everything was in order. <br>

I have purchased a host of equipment from KEH and have never had a problem with their service or their products. I suspect that this is probably a case where the camera body was not checked out as thoroughly as it should have been.<br>

I only posted the question because, although I have used the Pentax 6x7 and 67 cameras, I have not used the 67 II body and was "hoping" that there was someting I simply overlooked which was leading to the problem.<br>

Anyway, thanks for the replies. I have returned the camera for refund.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I purchased a used Pentax 67 II from KEH = when it arrived, I put in batteries but discovered, much to my horror, that the shutter button seems to be in the depressed position. I tried to load film but the film advance lever will only advance once - sort of like there is film in the camera even though the back is open.<br>

I assume that the camera is in need of repair but before I return it to KEH, I thought I would ask the community whether/not there is something I have overlooked.<br>

Thanks in advance for your help.</p>

<p>I have been looking for a strap for my GX680III for some time now without success. Does anyone know of an alternative to the Fuji strap, which seems to be next to impossible to locate and then breathtakingly expensive. Thanks for you help.</p>

I have a GX680 III – the one with the rubber rings on the knobs. The rubber rings are now loose and, in

consequence, it is difficult to tighten/un-tighten the knobs – especially the ones on the lens standard. Were

these rings originally glued to the knobs? Are others experiencing this problem? Any suggestions on resolving

the issue would be most welcome?

Thanks Frank and Matti for your kind response and the information. I appreciate the time you took to respond

very much and wish you both the best of luck. I look forward someday to possibly returning the favor. Best -

John

Greetings to all:

I want to purchase a GX 680 and was wondering if the batteries in the film back power anything other than the

LED? I would assume that the battery pack in the camera runs the motor, meter, etc. I also understand that the

batteries in the back are not easily replaced. If all they power is the LED, then one could, I presume, continue

using the back. Any information and/or comments would be most welcome. Thanks in advance for your help.

Hi Roger and thanks for your reply. I guess I am obsessing because I am never really satisfied with my end results. They are "satisfactory" to me but I never expected all of my equipment to produce the same result. If I had several lenses that produced different results, I probably would not obsess as much but the fact that they all came in about the same tends to make the hair on my neck stand on end.

I am hopeful that someone else will have had a similar experience with the Tmax films.

Thanks again.

Hi Ernie and thanks for the reply.

I guess what I meant to say, and should have said, was that I could not get a correct zone 2 negative unless I rated the film at 500 ISO. All the other speeds did not produce the near black negative when exposed for Dmax. That is the procedure I followed to determine my personal EI. The zone 8 negative was used to determine correct development time.

Hope that makes things clearer. Any advice?

Thanks again.

Several months ago I started testing my cameras to determine my

personal EI and normal development time for 100 and 400 Tmax. I

followed the instructions carefully when making my exposures and ran

several tests to determine the appropriate "normal" development time

for each film. The results were unexpected - everyone seems to

suggest that the personal EI will, in most cases, be significantly

lower than the manufacturer's suggested EI. In my case, they were

always higher - i.e. I had to increase the exposure to produce a

correct zone 2 and zone 8 negative.

In my case, I tested the following cameras/lenses and received the

same results for each. Hasselblad 50mm, 110mm, 150mm, 38mm; Mamiya

RZ67 90mm; Rodenstock 210 (4x5); Mamiya 7 - 65m lens.

I shot my test film at the suggested ISO and at two ISO's below and

one above the manufacture�s suggested ISO. For 400 Tmax, I used 400,

320, 200, and 500. For each ISO, is used a gray card and adjusted

the F-stop to record a zone 1(closed down 4 stops) and a zone 8

exposure (opened three stops).

My result, in each case, is 500 EI for 400 Tmax and 160 EI for 100

Tmax.

All films were developed in Xtol, 1:1, for 5.5 - 6 minutes with

continuous agitation for the first 30 seconds and then four

inversions every 30 seconds. The development time was determined

after several test rolls used to determine my personal development

time with these two films and developer combination.

I guess what I am asking is this - has anyone else had similar

results with these two films? My negatives seem to be quite good and

easy to print but what bothers me is the nagging feeling that I have

performed the test incorrectly and that my negatives really could be

better. Any advise/help/experience would be most welcome. Thanks.

Albert -- You can get some excellent informaiton on the Mamiya Forum of the Mamiya Home Page. Just post your question and someone from Mamiya will answer you in a day or so. They can tell you the exact difference between the lenses.

I have a 180mm C lens which is quite good although not as sharp as my 180mm Z lens. Unfortunately, my Z lens is now suffering from rear element separation - a condition that cannot be repaired by Mamiya since they no longer have the elements available for the older style lens.

I find it rather odd that such a new lens should be suffering from separation. I have a variety of other lenses that are much older and still crystal clear. Makes me really wonder about Mamiya's quality control.

Good luck.

John Cullen