joseph_dickerson

<p>Have you cleaned the contacts? There's a good chance that that might fix the problem.<br> If that doesn't do the trick, and assuming you liked the P67 meter, it's an averaging meter on the older models, try KEH for a working one.<br> JD</p>

<p>You don't mention which camera body you're using. Full frame or crop will make a big difference in your choices.<br> JD</p>

<p>I haven't seen one of those for a hundred years, but the one I had back in the day worked great.<br> No need for exposure compensation as it's just a plus diopter lens. As Rick pointed out it's pretty much plug and play.<br> I got some nice stuff with my Rapids and the Auto-up.<br> JD</p>

<p>You might look for his Fine Light series of educational videos. As far as I know they were only available as VHS tapes, but some may have been re-issued as DVDs. I still use them in some of my classes.<br> He had one that specifically covered Chroma-zones.<br> JD</p>

<p>"David Henderson highlights what I consider to be the main problem with the 17-40 and a polariser. I have tried that combination and noticed a major difference in the effect across the frame. The combination is not something I would recoment.<br />My 2p."<br> <br> Just to clarify, this is not a problem that affects just the EF 17-40. <em><strong>Any</strong></em> wide angle lens will exhibit this uneven darkening of the sky when using a polarizer. The wider the lens, the more pronounced the effect. Has to do with the angle in relation to the sun.<br> JD</p>

<p>I think Giovanni nailed it, but using a Polaroid back on any medium format camera at this point in time is almost a moot point.<br> Only Fuji makes an instant film that will work in medium format backs, and only one emulsion at that. Only Fuji knows how much longer they'll be marketing any instant film so you easily find yourself with an expensive paper weight in a fairly short amount of time.<br> JD</p>

<p>Tiffen used to make, and may still, a polarizer that has a short "handle" that is used to rotate the filter. This handle could be pointed at the sun, just like the index mark Edward mentioned. The filter came with a small polarizer with a stem that fit over the handle, you'd watch through the small filter until you got the effect you wanted, and the main filter would match it. With a lot of cameras all this could be accomplished with the main filter mounted on your lens.<br> It might work on the Fujis if you can find one. I have one in series 8, which with the appropriate adapter ring would probably work on you camera. I suspect these have been discontinued but they were plentiful back in the day, so you can probably find one on Ebay.<br> JD</p>

<p>I doubt they are compatible, but not sure. However, with only one "Polaroid" film available from Fuji, I think that Polaroid backs have outlived their usefulness.<br> Says the man who has a couple of them for his RB67.<br> BTW, the Polaroid back for the P67/P67II is not interchangeable, you have to dedicate a body to it, unlike Hasselblads. Mamiyas, etc.<br> JD</p>

<p>Be careful of vibrations transferring from the deck to the tripod and then to the camera.<br> I think you'll find a tripod won't be useful for this scenario. At the very least, test it after you're under way and check the file(s) at 100% before you shoot too many images.<br> JD</p>

<p>Ray...I got the info re: the 24mm lens from the Mirex web site. If the OP needs a 24mm he would be better with the Samyang or the Canon Mk I or Mk II TS-E lenses.<br> But I agree completely, the 24mm Mamiya is one heck of a lens. Wish I could use it on the Mirex, do think I'll try to find the 35mm though.<br> To elaborate a little, when I was researching Tilt/Shift adapters I read several reviews that suggested that medium format lenses would be really poor performers on 35mm or digital cameras. I found this to be not at all true, at least with the lenses I own. I have four lenses I use on the Mirex; 45mm, 55mm, 80mm, and even the 150mm Mamiya C (645) lenses. The 45mm is the older (77mm filter) one and it's the poorest performer, but it's still OK. The others are all stellar.<br> I'm not sure what <em>Edward</em> is referring to when he mentions "yaw". From my life-long experience with view cameras, yeah...I'm a moldy fig, yaw wouldn't come into play at all. Yaw is an artifact caused by the positioning of the swing axis in relation to the tilt axis. Maybe there's another "yaw" that I don't know about.<br> JD</p>

<p>I think the best ever was the EOS 1v, with the EOS 3 close behind.<br> JD</p>

<p>I'm using the Mirex Mamiya 645 to EOS adapter with great success. I believe the widest Mamiya lens you'll be able to use is the 35mm. I really like the 55mm, the latest one, and also have used the older 45mm. I think the newer 45mm might be a bit better though. I was told, I think by Mirex, that the 24mm Mamiya will vignette on the Mirex adapter but I haven't tried it. <br> Absolutely no issues getting the Canon camera (6D) to meter with the manual lenses. I'd assume the same would hold true for your Sony.<br> JD</p>

<p>I have used Life Pixel, in fact I'm sending my EOS M to them tomorrow.<br> If you're interested, I have a Rebel XTi that was converted by Life Pixel that I'm selling for $300. It's like new in the box.<br> PM me if you'd like to discuss it.<br> JD</p>

<p>To my knowledge there aren't any tilt/shift lenses for medium format with the exception of medium format view and technical cameras (Horseman, Linhof, et al). There are shift lenses, both Pentax and Mamiya made them for the 6x7 systems, but these lack the ability to tilt.<br> I had an adapter that allowed me to mount my Pentax 67 body on the rear end of a 4x5 view camera, but it was clunky at the very best, it was just easier to use a roll film back on the 4x5 when I wanted to shoot roll film.<br> JD</p>

<p>You might check and see if Mirex has a T/S adapter for the Sony mount. I'm using Mamiya 645 lenses with a Mirex adapter (has both tilt and shift) on EOS cameras.<br> However, if I remember correctly, the limit at the short end of focal length is 35mm. I using Mamiya lenses from 45mm to 80mm.<br> You can also adapt Canon T/S lenses to your Sony. The older 24mm is a pretty good performer, and not too expensive, but it's not as sharp as the mkII version.<br> JD</p>

<p>Alan, <br> It's already shipping from Japan. Lot's of folks on the EOS M forum have them in hand, or like me, in transit.<br> So far everyone seems pleased with it, any negative comments I've read are very minor in my opinion.<br> It really sounds like a major upgrade over either the M or M2. Pre-order prices for the various kit options were incredibly low. The pre-order sale from Amazon Japan may be sold out though.<br> JD</p>

<p>The official release date in Japan is March 31. There may be some in the hands of consumers, but I kinda doubt it.<br> A bunch of folks have pre-ordered them off the Japanese Amazon web site (Amazon.Jp.co) and the cameras are scheduled to ship Mar. 31. So you might be a month or so early on your request. <br> There's a lot of information, and some hands-on reviews, predominately of pre-production cameras, on the DPReview EOS M forum.<br> JD</p>

<p>Andres, <br> Let us know what you decided...inquiring minds want to know.<br> JD</p>

<p>Another issue is the fact that Hasselblad lenses cover 6x6, the RZ67 neg is well...6x7cm.<br> Pretty much a dead horse.<br> JD</p>

<p>Andres,<br> There are several bodies (VHR) on ebay in the $300-350 USD range. I think 300 Euros might be a bit high for a 985 body and lens (assuming, as I suspect, it's a 985). Most of the VHR bodies I found are in Japan, where I think they should be plentiful. In a market where they are scarce will change the price structure considerably.<br> I wouldn't say he's too terribly high, maybe 200-250 Euros is more like it. You can check ebay for past sales and get a good idea of what the things are selling for in your market. Just make sure you have some time, 14 days is pretty much the accepted standard, to test it out after you receive it. You should be able to return it without any penalty, except of course return shipping if any.<br> JD</p>

<p>Dave makes a good point, however, there's no need to burn film. Just put the camera on a tripod, focus with the rangefinder, then confirm the focus on the ground glass. Repeat at varying distances and you'll know if the rangefinder is accurate with that lens.<br> By the way, the camera looks like a 985 not a VHR. This means that you'll have to turn the whole camera for vertical compositions. Only the VHR and VH have the reversible back. This might change your take on the camera. It does look like a really clean one though.<br> JD</p>

<p>Andres, <br> The Polaroid back from KEH lacks the spacers, and I can't tell from the photos if it's really the correct one or not.<br> There should be two black metal spacers, one goes under the ground glass when you're using it for focusing. The other goes between the front standard (lens board) and the infinity stops when you're using the rangefinder.<br> Check with KEH and see if they have those parts...they're great people to deal with by the way.<br> Making a cam is something best done by a qualified camera repair person. However, you can find them used on ebay occasionally. But you won't find one for a Linhof lens on a Horseman, only for Horseman/Topcon lenses on the Horseman camera.<br> JD</p>

<p>I'd guess that the cam for the Horseman lens won't be accurate for the Linhof lens. But it wouldn't take too much fussing around to figure out if the rangefinder is accurate or not. Just focus with the rangefinder at varying distances and see if the ground glass image is also in focus.<br> You do know that Fuji FP-100 is discontinued right? I think only the Fuji color is currently available, and probably won't be for very much longer (speculation on my part). I recently read that the FP-3000 is gone too.<br> As far as a Polaroid back is concerned, there was a special back for the VH/VHR cameras that came with a spacer for the ground glass, and one for the infinity stops to make the rangefinder useable with the Polaroid back. This was necessary because the instant film doesn't sit at the same plane as roll or sheet films.<br> They can be found, but they're pretty thin on the ground.<br> All that being said, the Horseman is one of the rare cameras that I owned, and should never have sold. By the way, the Horseman lenses are made by Topcon, and are brutally sharp. Nice camera all around. If the price is right, go for it, and sort out the rangefinder later. You can always replace the Linhof lens with a Horseman/Topcon at a later date.<br> JD</p>

<p>RZ lenses will only work on an RZ body. RB lenses will work on an RB or RZ body. Other than that you're stuck.<br /> The Bronica is lighter/smaller by a bit, but lacks the revolving back.<br /> I don't know your skill level, but if you know what you're doing a great field camera is the Horseman VHR/VH. VHR has a rangefinder, so it's hand-holdable, the VH lacks the rangefinder. Both accept Horseman lenses which are made by Topcon and are as good as you can get. You can also use any view camera lens that will fit on the VHR/VH lens board.<br /> Both the cameras offer a full range of view camera movements, both front and back if you want or need to avail yourself of them. Being field cameras they also fold flat like a Speed Graphic for carrying. The weight of the bodies, and the lenses for that matter, is a lot less than the RB/RZ or Bronica GS-1.<br /> The cameras will take sheet film, getting scarce in that format, or roll film backs for 645, 6x6, 6x7 and/or 6x9 format. You could also use Fuji instant film but it seems to be on it's way out.<br /> Just be sure to get the VHR/VH as they have revolving backs which the older models (980?) did not.<br /> JD</p>

<p>You state that your light meter is between readings...why not just set your f/stop in between as well.<br> I can't think of a single camera that won't allow you to do this. Of course, with most cameras you can't set the shutter speeds between marked settings.<br> A lot of lenses have click stops between the marked settings that indicate half f/stops but you can even set thirds of an f/stops if you're careful.<br> If you have a camera with built in metering you might be able to tweak the exposure compensation dial to give one third or half f/stops. I could on my Pentax 67II.<br> JD</p>