artflei

<p>Has anyone tried Efke 100 in Ilfosol and can tell me for how long to develop this film? I have the new Ilfosol 3, not Ilfosol S! I have searched the web but no result. Thanks!</p>

<p>Thanks a lot! I agree this will probably have no negative effect on image quality. I think about selling this lens and have to somehow describe this to potential buyers.</p>

<p>I recently noticed what appears to be some sort of defect in the front element of my vintage Elmar 50mm lens. This is only apparent when the lens is hit by the light from a certain direction, the areas pointed out by the arrows in the attached picture appear like little mirrors. Can anyone tell my what this is?</p>

<div></div>

<p>Antonio, thanks for the reply. I also have no experience whatsoever with large format photography, I just lately started thinking about buying a 4x5 camera. I got the book by Simmons and think it is a very good introduction to the technical issues, you will like it.<br>

Regarding the dim groundglass, I have read on another internet forum about replacement groundglass from <a href="http://www.sheetfilm.be/groundglass_45.htm" target="_blank">sheetfilm.be</a> , it is quite inexpensive and many people say it improves brightness. However, I have no idea if it actually is much brighter than the groundglass in your camera, and they seam to offer only glass for another Shen Hao model, so you would have to inquire if this fits the PTB as well.</p>

<p>I'm not using this camera but I consider buying one so I wonder what you think of it. Do you think it's a good camera, reagrding build quality etc.?</p>

Gary, I'm using a negative holder. I bought one from betterscanning.com with Anti-Newton glass (works very well, btw). The banding occurs regardless of whether I use this holder with or without glass or the original Epson holder. I think dust in the calibration area is not the cause of the problem. Right now I'm suspecting light reflecting from the holder might be... I'll have to do some further testing.

Roger, I'm using Vuescan indeed (8.4.62) but I tried the Epson Scan software as well and the effect is the same.

<p>No, the streaks cannot be on the negative. Maybe I was unclear in my explanation, here are two scans of the same negative (darkened deliberately to make banding more visible), turned 180 degrees. The banding is on the left or right in the picture, the same scanning area is affected, but not the same area of the negative.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/34368236@N00/2502590088/" title="Untitled by Arthur Fleischmann, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2410/2502590088_c42ef38c64_o.jpg" width="679" height="520" alt="" /></a></p>

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>I recently got an Epson V700 scanner to process medium format negatives. So

far I'm very satisfied with it but one problem I have is I get subtle vertical

banding near the edge of the frame. These streaks visible in the scan are not on

the negative (when I turn the negative around and re-scan they appear on the

other side of the picture) and are most apparent in pictures with large,

monotonous areas - see attached sample picture, on the left. I really hope

someone can help me with this - Thanks in advance!</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/34368236@N00/2497827588/"

title="Untitled by Arthur Fleischmann, on Flickr"><img

src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3295/2497827588_6701b0ff9c_o.jpg"

width="558" height="700" alt="" /></a></p>

<p>Thanks for your advice. I made some test shots and the flash seems to work fine on the "X" setting.</p>

 

<p>Dave, why would it be better to shoot faster film? I have an inexpensive light meter that can also be used as a flash meter, but I haven't used it for this purpose so far. I am using the Vivitar on auto settings.</p>

I want to use the Vivitar 283 flash with my Mamiya RB67 Pro S. I have a flash

cord to connect the flash to the camera, but I don't know if I have to set the

switch on the lens to "X" or "M". What's the difference between these two

settings? Thanks for your help!

Thanks a lot, Peter! That's good news!

<p>Thanks, what you say confirms what is stated in the Mamiya website's FAQs. </p>

<p>I'm just irritated by that chart in the Pro SD manual and that there it says "L" type lenses don't fit the Pro S body - see attached picture. I just browsed some current eBay auctions of K/L lenses and didn't find one that <i>didn't</i> have the "L" denomination - K/L 90mm L, K/L 127mm L, K/L 180mm L-A... (what does L-A mean?)</p>

<p>Peter, what is engraved on your lens: "Mamiya K/L 1:3.5 f=127mm <b>L</b>"?</p><div></div>

<p>Sorry, there's a type in my post's title: I meant to ask wether <b>K/L L</b> lenses work on the <b>Pro S</b> body. There's a chart in the <a href="http://www.mamiya.com/assets/pdfs/6x7/RB67_Pro_SD_v7.PDF" target="_blank">Pro SD user's manual</a> (page 37) that suggests the don't. But in the <a href="http://www.mamiya.com/faqs.asp?id=3&id2=126&id3=1543" target="_blank">Pro SD FAQs</a> it says: </p>

<blockquote><p>Q. Will the current KL lenses fit my Pro S body?</p>

<p>A. Yes they will, except for the 75mm shift and 500mm APO. Make sure you remove the spacer ring located around the lens? rear element.</p></blockquote>

<p>I'm confused!</p>

I just happened to look at an auction of a Sekor K/L 127mm L lens and was

wondering if this lens works on an RB67 Pro S body? I have read on the Mamiya US

website that K/L lenses can be used on Pro S bodies after a spacer ring on the

rear of the lens has been removed. But I understand there are some lenses (e.g.

75mm shift) that don't work with the Pro S?

 

Are there two versions of the 127mm K/L lens out there - one "L" and one "no-L"?

Thanks, people! Just bought an RB67 Pro S, I'll have to see for myself how bright the screen is, propably it will do anyway, I don't plan to take pictures of anything like star trails.

 

I figure I can still order one of those Beattie or Satin Snow screens if necessary. Could anyone maybe point me to some websites that offer them, and that ship to Europe?

I'm thinking about buying a Mamiya RB67 Pro S and was wondering how bright (or

not) the standard waist-level viewfinder is. I used a Yashica Mat 124G in the

past and the finder was quite dim, it was hard to focus in less than perfect

light. Maybe someone here has used both cameras and could tell me how they

compare in this respect?

 

I have read that the viewfinder of the RZ67 is brighter, but not if there is a

significant difference to the RB Pro S.

 

Thanks in advance for your help!

AFAIK Gilden always uses the flash off-camera.

Christa, have you considered one of those rotating-lens cameras like a Noblex or Horizon? Take a look of the work of Swiss photographer Michael von Graffenried: <a href="http://www.mvgphoto.com/">http://www.mvgphoto.com/</a>. The video is very interesting, if you scroll down there is a link to his portfolio.

<p>Bruno very nice images and great story! But please: buy a new scanner! ;-)</p>

<p>Looking at your photos here makes me want to take out my Yashica again. I haven't used it in a while... I also think it's a great camera, but I agree about the focusing, I also find it hard especially in low light.</p>

I agree, very good work! One small point of critique: For my taste you cut off peoples' heads or part of them in too many pictures. Other than that, well done! :)

To me <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=29165&is=USAW">this</a> looks like the old Tri-X (TX). D notLast, what is printed on the film? "K'ODAK TX" or "K'ODAK 400TX"?

What you bought (linked to) is TX for bulk loading, not 400TX!

Two different versions of Tri-X - TX (old) and 400TX (new)!

I once bought bulk-loaded rolls of 400TX and also noticed the "K'ODAK" on the film, so I think that's perfectly normal. Looks like the film for bulk-loading is marked that way...

I like the simple and straightforward design. I agree the pictures could be a bit larger, as it's the pictures this site is about, isn't it? ;) Also, when I went to the Cuba gallery I at first didn't realize the thumbs there represented sub-galleries... this is slightly confusing.

Bruno, I started printing on fiber paper recently (Agfa MCC) and I like it a lot, but it takes LOTS more time than RC... And I still haven't succeeded in getting the prints really flat. :(

So I switched back to RC for this series of prints. The main purpose of these small (18x24 cm) prints is scanning them for the web anyway, and I think the difference between RC and fiber would be hardly visible in the scan.

Instead of Ilford developer I used Agfa Neutol Liquid NE, works ok with the Ilford paper, the tone is quite warm, though, especially considering that NE=neutral tone.