fred aspen

Google "Shutter Capping." Usually happening at 1/500 and 1/1000 for focal plane shutters. Try exercising the shutter from 1/125 and up; I did my Canon FTB about 50 times at each speed and it loosened up and I haven't seen the problem since.

That looks like plenty of development, maybe too much, but not enough exposure, to me.

+1. Definitely underexposed with hot highlights. Add a stop or two more exposure and cut development in half or double the dilution at the same development time.

<p>With the mode dial set to 'P' and the lens set to a fixed aperture, the 'M' light comes on but the camera continues to operate in P mode. At least that is the way mine operates. </p>

<p>Christopher,<br>

Where did you find it? Film Emporium?<br>

-R.</p>

<p>Two stops, hmmmm? Are you sure it is Tmax 400, not Tmax 100? That's about two stops.</p>

It is generally recommended that 250ml of stock D-76 be used PER roll of film. For two rolls, 500ml of stock solution. For

D-76 1:1, 1000ml is the proper volume - 2x250ml of stock D-76 and 500ml of water. You run the risk of getting flat negs if you mix below

these recommendations, which are published by Kodak and Anchell and Troop.

Anchell and Troop (The Film Developing Cookbook) strongly recommend that 250ml of D-76 stock solution (or 500ml at 1:1

dilution) be used per 80 sq. inches of film (1-36 exp. roll of 135 or 1-12 exp. roll of 120) to avoid developer exhaustion. I

believe Kodak also recommends the same practice.

 

I have ignored these rules in the past and have gotten flat negs. Best to go with the recommendation to get the best your

film can offer.

Also, Dave, you might have dirty contacts in the battery chamber. If a battery dies and deteriorates in place it sometimes leaves a hard insulating coating on the battery contact. Try a bit of 0000 steel wool on the contact inside and the inside of the chamber cap.

My FG's meter doesn't work properly until the frame counter advances to frame 1 or higher, but it does flash at 1 second intervals when the frame counter is on S. If you have no lights you may have a circuit failure. Film advances and fires at 1/90 manually until frame 1 is reached, then meter reads properly.

 

If you purchased off an infamous auction site, the quality of offerings has been getting progressively worse and worse. It is very difficult to get a decent, working item with all the estate recyclers and broken but not mentioned (the "I don't know much about cameras..., untested" line) gear showing up.

 

Also, when I got mine the mirror foam was sticky and the mirror would not return properly, it would only work on B and M90. Cleaned the mirror and replaced the foam and it does fine.

I've used Pliobond, an non-hardening adhesive available at your local sports store that is used in fly tying. I've read that the original adhesive is very close to this product.

David,

 

I use a Beseler 67 and I use the 6x7 mixing chamber when printing 35mm and the only difference is the light intensity is down about 1 stop from the 35 chamber but the light output is broad and even. BTW, printing times are too short when using the 35 chamber.

 

HTH

Thanks, Martin, I did get the info I was seeking. I thought the Minox crowd, which likes Minolta enlarging lenses, might have the scoop.

 

The answer is the 50mm f2.8 Minolta CE enlarging lens is specifically designed to peak at 16x20 enlargements. They do work reasonably well at smaller magnification as the aberrations present are insignificant in the smaller print sizes.

Even though this may not be the proper forum, I notice the Minolta lenses are

popular for the smaller formats and on the chance a Minox user may also own a

50mm f2.8 Minolta lens, I posted here.

 

I am searching for the magnification specification for the Minolta 50mm f2.8

lens and would like to know the general (usable range) and the peak performance

magnification for this lens.

 

If anyone has a spec sheet or knows the spec, I would appreciate the

information.

 

I understand that the Minolta line of enlarging lenses are designed for large

magnifications and don't work well for smaller enlargements.

 

TIA

 

Ron

I have had this problem with two lenses and it was relatively simple to fix. I removed the screws from the lens mount and underneath the mounting ring is a ring that has an arm that extends into a slot internal in the lens that operates the diaphragm. This ring had minute amounts of grime on it and I simply cleaned with alcohol on a Q-tip and replaced it. Worked great! This ring is spring loaded to provide tension on the diaphragm but doesn't "fly" apart when disassembling. Also, take care in aligning the arm with the diaphragm slot when reassembling. Takes about 4-5 minutes to complete. I am an ex-watchmaker so proceed at your own risk.

The exposures appear decent to me. When you ran your comparison tests, were you using the same lens on the different bodies to rule out lens variation/problems?

 

Can't tell about softness/noise from the photos on flickr - too small.

Thanks, all, for the responses. I will check at HD or Lowe's for the cement and rectify the problem.

 

John, I sent you a PM about a dress ring for an Olympus normal that I need. Anything on hand?

 

Thanks!

The leatherette on both of my OM1s is starting to lift slightly at the edges.

Does anyone know the proper type of cement to put the edges back down and not

conflict with the original cement?

 

Thanks!

I looked at the FG7 Tech Data sheet the mfr. sent me and the time at 70F for TX pan rated at 320 is 12 minutes 1:15 without SS. You can extrapolate from there.

Dave, neglected to add that longer lenses focus past infinity to accomodate variation in operating temperatures. And zoom lenses tend to have looser tolerances than primes which are built to tighter tolerances.

Dave, I have seen this anomaly with a number of cameras and lenses of various brands. Some are slightly long, some are slightly short and some are right on. However, in spite of the differences I have not noticed my negs/slides are affected by this small error as depth of field very easily takes care of the differences. The error can occur with both bodies and lenses. I wouldn't worry about it if the results are okay. I quit worrying about it years ago unless it is a serious problem, i.e., infinity focuses at a much closer distance.

Martin, I just returned from a trip to TX and did several rolls of slide film not expecting too much from the EL and its meter first trip out and set to box speed. I was more than pleasantly pleased with the exposure and color saturation from the camera. Meter was right on the money and did not over-react to hot spots. All in all, a very nice result from an ultra compact camera!

Mike, I, too, am enamoured with the older cameras/glass that produce the quality/character that I like. I bought the D70S and was disappointed with the results until I purchased the little 45mm pancake lens which will give similar results to your vintage lens. It is the old Tessar design and only has 4 el/3 groups and does a marvelous job. Not fair to compare a multi-element zoom which will have much lower contrast and less resolution than your prime lens. My two favorites after sorting out this disappointment are the 45mm F2.8 and the 50mm F1.4 prime lenses that give me a look close to European glass. Give it a try before making a rash move and selling the D80. I felt the same as you did and wanted to unload the D70S but cooler emotions prevailed and I am glad I did a bit more research. The 45 will give you contrast, sharpness, color saturation and bokeh similar to your vintage Sonnar.

Thanks, Martin.

Thanks for the response, Martin. I have read an awful lot of your most helpful contributions.

 

Can you speak to the issue of meter accuracy/voltage regulation? Should the official Minox solution of 2-3V lithium cells perform differently than my quick solution just moments after I received the camera? And does it differ greatly from the performance of the old mercury cell configuration?

Thanks!

 

Ron

I just purchased an old 35 EL that hadn't been used for many years. I cleaned

it up and fashioned an insulating sleeve out of clear blister pack and inserted

4-357 watch batteries and the camera came to life. First indications (in the

viewfinder) showed the shutter speed to be too high for the light conditions,

however, after processing the first roll, the exposures seem to be just fine

even though the meter is beyond 500 for 100 ISO film at f8 in bright sunny

conditions. My available light shots seem to be fine also so linearity is

apparently good. I judge the negative density to be excellent for so simple a

system.

 

I have read voraciously in this forum before purchasing and I have noted that

most folks don't seem to notice an exposure difference using silver oxide

(1.55V) cells in place of the original mercury battery, but some have said they

do. This tells me there is perhaps a voltage regulation circuit in the camera

to compensate for varying battery voltages.

 

Is this a true statement?

 

Secondly, exactly what is the 'Minox battery adapter' that folks speak of? Does

it contain a dropping diode such as the Bogen unit for the old Luna Pro meters?

Why is it so expensive and is there anything wrong with my approach with the

watch battery/plastic sleeve solution?

 

Thanks!

 

Ron