neil_rankin1

<p>Lily W, love the shot on Denali on the link you posted. Mt. Foraker looks incredible.</p>

<p>Thanks so much for the great advice! Definitely want to keep shooting film, so this is the way to go for me. I've been climbing for over fifteen years and now that I'm in my 30s I'm bummed that I don't have many pictures to go with the memories. Lilly W, thanks for the link and the beta. Photo.net is still holding.</p>

<p>I'm looking for a nice lightweight point and shoot 35mm camera to carry on my harness while rock climbing. Climbing cliffs and mountains is a real pain with an SLR. I'm certainly not going to take my Mamiya RB! <br>

I'd rather have film because the cameras are lighter (weight is very important for me) and slide film is more bueno. I'd prefer a bit of zoom coverage (28-100 or so) and a single lithium battery instead of AAs.<br>

Of course, there's hardly any of these things being made any more. Does anyone have any suggestions? It's kind of a tough one, I know, because I want as lightweight and compact as possible, <em>and</em> I want some extra features. I'll go to the used market if necessary. <br>

To give you a better idea of what I'm after, I've posted this video of world class climber Steve House discussing the gear that he used on his recent ascent of the Rupal Face on Nanga Parbat. Just before the sixteen minute mark he talks about his camera. I can't see brand name of the camera, but it looks perfect, just what I'm looking for. <br>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIkmYiwbZWg">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIkmYiwbZWg</a><br>

I wasn't sure if this was the best Forum for this topic. If there is another topic Forum that I should post this under, please let me know. I'm envisioning a bunch of pro sports photographers with twenty thousand dollar rigs reading this post from a guy looking for a point and shoot film camera. Hilarious! <br>

Thanks!<br>

Neil </p>

Hi, I just got the motorized back in the 6x7 size, but recieved no manuals. At 94 bucks, I'm not

complaining, but I would love to have the instruction manual. Can anyone help me find the manual? It's

not on Mamiya's site.

Also, I'm interested in the the 6x8 size motorized back as well. Does anyone have any experience with this

back? How do you like it? Thanks.

Yeah, August, I've experienced the same thing on other cameras, but in this case, the back needs to be overhauled before it can be used.

I called KEH this morning, and they apologized for the bad back,and are being sending me another one 2nd Day Air to help me get one by the weekend.

Bummer of the story is that RB backs seems a bit chincy. I wonder if the RZ is better in this regard?

So, I just picked up this Rb67 from a friend in very, very nice shiny condition. Really excited, except the

120 back needs to be serviced before I can use it. No biggie, I'll just have it serviced, and I bought one

from KEH, graded Excellent Plus to use in the meantime.

Well, I get the Ex+ back today, and it doesn't work very well. The winder does not return to its original

position after film advancement, so you have to hold the little tab to the left to return it manually. Not only

is this an inconvenience, but it screws the winding sequence with the counter, and is basically a complete

pain in the ass. Are all Rb67 Pro S 120 backs so chincy?

Is this Excellent-plus 120 back? The thing doesn't even look that great, when I compare it to Ex+ gear I've

bought from KEH in the past. So what do you think? Did KEH send me a lemon? Do they have a policy with

fim backs that is different? I don't see how they could. WTF?

Neil

I tried. I may be screwed. Not worth sending it out. I just got a new camera, rB67, but it makes me sad to put this one down.

Sorry for the drama in the subject line, but I'm really bummin'. My F2 has never failed me, but when I

reached to it today to load film, the winder became stuck, and wouldn't complete its movement, and thus

enable the shutter to be released. The small winder release button is stuck up in the baseplate, and will

not come back down. I had the camera serviced by Sover Wong a couple years ago, and its never had any

problem like this, or any other problem for that matter.

So I tried to take off the baseplate, and quickly discovered that I need a spanning wrench to get the plate

off. I've never tried to repair this camera, but I would like to fix it if I could. At this point, I don't know if

the camera is worth the money to have repair, but I've had it for years, and I'm super attached. Anybody

have any advice on how I can fix my problem? I'm willing to get a spanning wrench and I'll try to get a

repair manual. Has anyone else had this problem with their F2? What to do?

Lenses are C lenses. The camera has been well cared for, but I would need to clean the

lenses, probably have the camera refoamed, etc. I haven't checked the PC on the lenses, but I

will get to it. How about the metered chimney finder? Anyone have experience with this thing,

or maintenence issues with it? Honestly, I'm not that into the chimney, except that it looks so

bizarre and cooky on the camera, but I would like to know if the meter is reliable, and is it

servicable.

A friend just dropped off an RB67 Pro S with a 180/f4.5 and a 90/f3.8 lens,

waist level finder, metered chimney finder, and 120 back. I'm checkig it out,

and may buy it. Wow, what a bazooka of a camera! My first impression is that I

like it, and I believe it will suit my shooting habits (tripod, more time spent

per exposure).

This Pro seems to be in pretty good condition, but needing to be cleaned. I

wouldn't feel comfortable depending on the camera unless I had it serviced. Who

would be good to have this equipment serviced. What are the particular issues I

should look at for the equipment before I decide to buy it? How much would you

think I should expect to pay to have it serviced? If I buy this camera, I'll

have more questions I'm sure, even with the manual that I just downloaded. Can I

the camera's history based on its serial numbers? If so, how? Thanks.

Thanks for sharing. A great article.

Check out these two sites: http://www.mamiya.com (go to customer service and you can

download a pdf manual of the pro tl), and http://www.keh.com (and browse through the

various prisms for info.)

I like the compostions. You have a natural strenght here. They seem a little flat in regards to their tonal values. Good job.

They're fine. Soap and hot water should do the trick.

My guess would be overagitation. Do a search on this site for agitation issues, and you will

come up with some other examples of overagitation.

This is a interesting thread, full of a ton of speculation. But the fact remains, that all business

is driven by demand. As long as people want Kodak film, there will be production, even if

things change hands. The truth is, Kodak has gotten too big for its britches, and they have

little chance of continuing at there current size. I'm not worried. What cracks me up, is that

people freak out over the future of film production. Film is really easy to produce compared

to a digital camera.

I shoot portrait with either HP5 or Tri-x. For me, I like a bit of flattery in portraiture. I find

ways of getting what I want with these films.

The last time I bought 35 mm 100ft rolls it was around 30 bucks on B&H. Now it seems the

USA version is 42 bucks. I think I was buying a different manufactured version when I was

getting it for 30; maybe it was USAW? Either way, still pretty reasonable at just over two

bucks for 36 exposures. However, I'll pobably buy some up the next time I see it for less, if I

do.

I think Ronald has made two very good points. One, when using metal tanks and reels, drop

the reel into the developer, don't pour the developer into reel. My lazy gene doesn't like to

fumble with chemistry in the dark, and I get stressed about when I do I start my timer, yadda

yadda, in the dark. Two, the first minute is a very critical time in the development procedure,

so this could make a big difference.

Bob, it sounds like most people think this is some sort of washing problem. That could be

the case, but I can't really tell much from the image you have posted (nice composition by

the way). However, I will tell you of my development struggles with HP5 and how I solved

the problem.

<p>I really, really struggled to get even development with HP5. My problem seemed to be

an obvious case of an agitation issue. So, I experimented with my agitation technique. I

tried many different varieties...from changing from inversion to cocktail shaker agitation;

from four to six inversions per minute, then per half a minute; from soft to hard inversion.

I did every thing I could think of, one at a time, but I still could not achieve even agitation,

w/o losing atleast a frame or two.

<p>Until....I quit using steel, and went to plastic reels and tanks. Once I started using the

Patterson set-up, HP5 started to come out perfect...perfect. My theory, is that HP5 is

difficult to develop in regards to agitation technique. I don't know why, but the swizzle

stick agitation with the Patterson tanks cured my problems, and now I can confidently

shoot HP5, and it is one of my favorite films.

<p>While I'm sure people can agitate correctly with steel tanks and reels with HP5, but no

one was able to help when I posted the topic here. I don't know if this will help you at all,

but its worth a shot. My favorite high school photo teacher used to post signs in the

darkroom that said "Plastic reels are for photo weenies." Oh well. I may be a photo weenie,

but atleast I'm using HP5, and loving it.

I'm not a big fan of bulk loaders. I'm always afraid that I'll expose the film in those things.

They all seem cheap, and the light traps seem sketchy. So, in the dark, I just take the roll in

hand and cut off about five feet, b/c that is the lenght of 36 exposures, tape it on the spool,

and wind it up. I store my roll in a light tight box. Takes about a minute, and seems safer and

easier

to me than using bulk loaders.

That sounds exciting. When you get around to acquiring a spot meter, I would recommend a

Sekonic 328 to start with. You can pick one up at auction for just over a hundred bucks, and

then pick up the spot attachment for another 30 or 40 bucks. Great value.

The funny thing about Pan-F is that it is extremely fine grained, but not an especially sharp

film. I love it, and would recommed it specifically in contrasty situations. It can be challenging

to print, however, but I take pleasure in its effects, especially in big enlargements.

Jedidiah,

You may have already heard all that you need, but I really like this thread, so...I think your

struggles b+w landscape are quiet common. Compostionally, b+w is much less forgiving

than color. Continue to explore your use of depth in your images. I like the color work you

have displayed in your gallery, but learning to invision how things will look on a b+w film

is difficult, and may take more time to get a feel for it. Sometimes I will return to a

compostition that I like for better lighting or exposure. If may take several trips, if this is

possible, to get exactly what you're after. As far as your materials go: I would recommend

a polarizer, red and yellow, as well as a soft neutral density filter (Cokin P-series is very

user friendly and good to start with). Also, if you like to shoot in daylight, I find Ilford Pan-

F is a very nice film, while HP5 is also a favorite of mine. Pan-F can handle a very contrasty

situation, while HP5 can take more even lighting and yield a broad range of values. The

percieved sharpness of these films are quiet different, and it still amazes me the difference

in the properties between these two quality films. One other thing in regards to your

format. You don't need to change your format. You can produce wonderful images in b+w

with 35mm. I recently left my medium format at home in favor of the 35mm because it

more suited what I was after. Adams created some wonderful images with large negatives,

no doubt, but who cares. Why reinvent the wheel? Traditional b+w has so much versatility,

you don't need to try and copy Adams like everyone else. Explore and take risks.

Most reponses here have addressed the films that I would use for grain. What I would add is

that more even lighting will help you get good results. My best reults with grain have been in

lighting that would maybe be too flat 'normally.' Good luck.