marck mcgill

<i>There is a learning curve like any new camera, but nothing most people couldn't figure out.</i><br><br>Oh, yes. Like releasing the twin slide-knobs of the back locking mechanism, when they've been engaged with the back removed, perhaps?

I agree with Jean-Louis, whose considerations are largely subscribable, that an RB is not exactly a beginner's camera. One should really know WHAT he's doing, and WHY, to operate it correctly. All the interlocks can be confusing to many people. It must be said that the most recent model (proSD) has been slightly improved in simplicity of use and mistakes prevention.

 

However, on the other hand, you should consider how much ahead you want to go into photography, and which is your budget. If you know how to handle a fully manual 35mm, and you usually have a sixth sense for mechanisms and technical stuff, you can try to go directly to it rather than to spend money in something else that wouldn't satisfy your expectations anymore in a short term scenario.

 

If you're not exactly a clockwork master and your experience is limited to point and shoot cameras, perhaps a smoother step-by-step upgrade would be more indicated...

Then it could be the cable release. Unscrew it, pull the knob and set on M, fire the shutter and see if the blades open.

On previous RBs there was a much better designed light trap, that's why you didn't see the poorly designed foam seal.

 

How important it is, well... It depends on how badly damaged it is.

Hello Andrew.

 

Ditto for the parallax errors - just take pictures and don't even think about it.

 

If I was you, I'd buy the 55mm. 65 is too close to 80, and I disagree with those who say it is a good lens (I had the "chrome" type though, the "black" type could be better somehow).

 

Answering to your question, I have the 180mm Super f:4,5. The only word I can find is "SUPERLATIVE".

At first I thought a transparent glass filter with circular engravings was put over the front lens. But most probably - as others said - a catadioptric telelens alone is enough to achieve the horrid doughnut-shaped highlights and the awful spherical-aberrated-like corners.

 

It's funny how she (or he?) tried to convert a defect into a distinguishing character of the pictures. Those are the most awful foregrounds and backgrounds I've seen in the last ten years. I'd trash any picture of mine which would show any trace of things like those. That's probably why she (or he) is considered an artist while I'm considered no one.

I don't get exactly why meeting people willing to give for free extra-expensive ultra-classy cameras always happens to SOMEBODY ELSE.

 

However, the format of the camera is 6x9cm when used with sheet film holders. If you want to use 120 rollfilm, you should check first if it comes with a rollfilm adapter, or eventually buy a used one. There are adapters of two sizes: 6x9cm and 6x7cm. You can choose the one you like the most.

 

Understanding which specific model of the 2x3 Linhof series your camera may be is a sticky problem. Only a picture could help figuring it out, and even in that case it would probably be matter of debate.

Did you develop those films yourself?

Isn't actually the RANGEfinder which looks pretty milky?

Michael, thanks for taking time to answer. I actually already have an external timing unit, the built-in unit in the AC707 was just handier.

 

The saparate power/control wiring in the older CLS 450 may actually be an advantage, as I don't know how much power my timing unit can handle.

 

Agree on the modular advice.

Gentlemen, I have read in previous posts that the three colour heads

above works quite the same, and I understood that basically there is

no need to choose one instead of the other except for the "neutral

density" filter (not of great use) and of course price.

 

However, I am used to a Durst AC707 Autocolor which has a built-in

timer facility. It is not essential and perhaps external timers may

be more accurate, but sure it's convenient.

 

None of the above have a built-in timer? So all of the three heads

are supposed to be operated with an external timing unit?

 

Any other head for the Laborator 1200, of which I may not know the

existence, with built-in timer?

 

Thanks a lot - M.

Mag, that's no surprise: DOF tables are calculated on the basis of a choosen circle of confusion. Change the choosen circle of confusion, and the numbers in the table will change!

 

I bet that nor Mamiya nor the printed table you have specify which circle of confusion has been choosen to perform the calculation. That's the standard: no information on which basis the calculation has been made.

 

Mamiya's distance scale on the body is extremely imprecise with short focal lengths. You have to pick up the curve corresponding to the focal length you're using, see where it intersects the scale fixed to the camera's body, and read there the result in meters or feet. You will notice that the 360mm curve is very long and easy to read, while the 50mm and 65mm are almost superimposed and not very reliable.

 

Did someone already pointed you to Mr. H.M.Merklinger's .pdf book "The Ins and Outs of Focus", chapter 4? Maybe a quick read will convince you that there are good reasons to focus much more toward infinity than at the conventional distances that the "standard" theory suggests.

Agree in turn. Parallax error with such a long focal length and at such film plane to subject distance as in portraiture is absolutely negligible. A portrait with a 180mm is not a macro with an 80mm. I see no practical reason to call for a paramender.

Mag, as other posters said, you can leave the DOF table at home. There are tons of literature ragarding the myth of the "all in focus" distance. Say it however you like, but nothing will be in focus as much as the point you really focused at.

 

As for the ring, use it to give you a rough idea of the DOF you may have at a given aperture, then put it back to infinity if you're shooting landscapes. The focus itself should be at infinity as well, if you ask me.

Honestly, I can't figure it out. Can you post a picture of the thing?

I don't get the question exactly. My Mamiya C330 Professional with the 180mm f:4,5 Super is my all-times favourite setup for portraits.

You don't need a Linhof official repair shop, however. Every good technician with some experience with mechanical cameras knows how to fine tune a telemeter.

Did you try to fire the shutter by pushing the small button and turning the pins?

Dave, I wonder how many units of fisheyes for mid format have been sold, probably very few, and it may even be that nobody in this sub-group owns one. This is a question you may want to post on Mamiya's official forum: some technician will probably give you an answer.

Did you pull out the lens and checked if all the gear of the rotating pins and the shutter works fine alone?

Wolfgang, same problem here. Unfortunately, it seems that there are very few owners of Linhof cameras, and webpages dedicated to this model can be numbered on one hand. I almost made my mind up to bring it to my technician for the usual expensive repair. Please let me know in case you find any information.

Gentlemen, thank you very much for the insight. I seem to see an overall agreement on the Canon "A" serie. Will try to track a Fuji S602 zoom as well, the macro facility sounds extremely interesting. Regards - M.

Nice camera, but I don't seem to see it go exactly for cheap...

May be, but is it really OK with close focusing?

Good morning Fellows. I will soon go through a pair of web projects

for which I feel the need of quick-snapshot taking of various objects

(primarily details of cameras, tube radios and phonographs) being

disassembled and reassembled. I will occasionally use it for auctions

on you-know-which site as well, I guess. This is a field where,

really, one will appreciate the convenience of a picture format

immediately ready for the net.

 

The camera I have in mind should meet these criteria:

 

1 - must be able of close-focusing small details (this is very

important)

 

2 - must be easy to find on you-know-which auction site at cheap

prices (I personally have little interest for digital pictures, and

will not use it for photography, so a huge investment would have no

point)

 

3 - I don't care for brands, megabytes or megapixels (this is to

expand point 2: I'm not seeking for cheap CCD sensors - I'm seeking

for FAIRLY GOOD sensors which are NOW cheap (but just in price)

because they're considered "old technology" by megapixels and

megabytes maniacs. Once I'd have pixels enough for a fullscreen

picture on a computer's screen, I think I'd be done.)

 

4 - must be Windows XP fully (repeat: fully; I already have problems

enough with my scanner at work) compatible, possibly via the

convenient USB port.

 

5 - must have a self-shot facility (as I will hand tools, tubes and

gears with both hands all of the times).

 

6 - a compact camera is fine with me (will never upgrade it, as

again: will never use it for photography).

 

I hope I explained myself well: it's the camera that every megapixel-

crazy is getting rid of for few bucks, but which is a knock-out for

web applications. Is somebody gently willing to help? Thanks a lot -

M.