chris_m_ller

I've got a sneaky suspicion thst the adverts that turn up on these forum pages are

generated by keywords found in the body of text of the discussion - I start talking cine/

bolex and up turns an advert for the NY film academy on the page the next morning ...

I just bought a Bolex 16mm RX4 motion cam

woohoo ! - the frames are so small - but I can do lots of weird and wonderful time effects

with it and a intervalometer... (sort of a stepper/sequencer) - or simply use it for a stills

cam with a roll film back holding 20000 shots! >>grin<< ah yes - it can do 64fps also,

for super slomo motor drive

anyone else into 8mm or 16mm film ? (or even 35 ??)

sorry to blab - just quite looking forward to it

http://www.trademe.co.nz/structure/...asp?id=28930964

Hi

I have been asked to do some photography for a performance artists show, apparently for

archival purposes but also with the possibility of exhibition ?

I don?t have then full info yet, but I will be shooting indoors with I?m guessing flouro and

possibly a small amount of window/daylight, which is fine for me with candid snappy snap

doco style photography, I would probably use a little fill flash and just follow my nose after

doing test shots in Polaroid?

I do however also have the job of photographing the artist (an ex girlfriend) in what she

expects to be a more ?studio? type shot of her after the event - this is where I need help!

The kind of shot I imagine she is after would be similar to the shots of similar work to hers

? check out:

http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/visualarts/Museum-Exempla/

MatthewBarney-CremasterSuite-C-prints_in_self_lube-Frame-1994-2002-2-600pix.jpg

http://www2.uol.com.br/tropico/pscm/img/2005/1/i-1786.jpg

http://www.c3.hu/events/97/cremaster/images/c5.jpg

http://www.michaeljamesobrien.com is the photographer if you are interested

As you can see there is a fair amount of makeup involved ?

All I have at my disposal so far is my own gear: A Mamiya RZ (50, 90 and 127mm lenses)

and two Metz CL45?s (one with hotshoe connector the other PC so I can trigger them both

with the RZ) ?

Can I simply rely on the Metz?s with bounced flash ? what is the best method with this

setup ? or is it simply not going to achieve the effects of the above samples ? - I can add

to the budget some hire lamps/studio flashes ? but don?t have any idea about this ? any

recommendations would be great - umbrella reflectors things? white bag diffuser things?

Simple tips, whatever would be great (I?m usually a landscape person)

Also, which film ? I want to shot transparency, but am unsure which ? I mostly shoot

Velvia 50 outside, and haven?t been around cameras too long so don?t have any

experience with others? Velvia is too intense with skin tones ? Astia ? Provia ? 100 ? 400 ?

Push / pull ?

Any help appreciated,

Cheers,

nick

Hi,

I am new to large format and plan to build my own 8x10 in the near future - learning on

the way first by making a 4x5 which I have bought an old Zeiss lens for (I am also plan to

use a Rodenstock enlarger lens as well) ...

I am too busy to start work so far but have been offered in the meantime a selection of old

military lenses that may or may not be good for an 8x10 - does anybody recommend any

of the following:

- Zeiss Jena Tessar 'XII' APO 64cm F10 - ~90 No. 625245 - the cement(?) between the two

rear elements is separating a little at one edge, but by stopping it down to about f16 it is

no longer 'seen'

- Unbranded but seller suspects either a Cooke or Taylor-Hobson 5" f4 - ~32 No.158157

'ree 14A/1101'

- Unbranded again and again suspect its a Cooke or Taylor-Hobson ANASTIGMAT 14" f5.6

- ~128 No. 280729

All have the 'A~M' logo on them which I think is something to do with 'Air Ministry' / Air

Force - they were apparently used for aerial photography, and are probably pre-WWII era...

I am after a wide lens, which puts the Zeiss out of the picture, but am wondering if the 5"

is either too wide or would not have the coverage for 8x10 ? (it is a smaller lens also) -

Altho not wide for 8x10 is the 14" the safe bet here ?

As I mainly deal with long exposures (minutes+) I usually am stopped down quite a bit,

does this affect the size of the image circle ?

What sort of worth are these lenses ? all clean except Zeiss (see above), no shutters - if the

Zeiss APO is a good price should I just buy it on principle ?

wowsa,

A heap of questions there - looking forward for any help - hope I can return the favor one

day

cheers,

nick

Hiya, I am after some info re. the four pins found in the port for the attachment of the EM

shutter release... I am assuming two of them are the logic/switch for the shutter and the

other two are for the hotshoe that is a part of the optional grip attachment - specifically, I

would like to know:

A: am i correct in this assumption ? if not.. what indeed are they for ? ... and

B: if I am correct >> looking from the front from left to right >> which is which ?

If you dont know what I am talking about then you prob wont know the answer ;)

I want to use sensor triggers with logic outputs (ultrasonic, IR, sound, light, mercury etc..)

to trigger the shutter (I have the winder also)

cheers for any help here - and anyone please feel free to mention any trigger setups they

have played with - any info is good, especially what you may have used them for and the

resulting pics - nature photogs, lightning, arty farty ?

Nick

for $1200 you could buy 70 Holga's - the rest could be spent on an RB or RZ and a good

complement of lenses for the students you can trust ;)

well if anyone is still following this thread - i bought the 50mm (non ULD, d for

*dispersion* whoops)

and it is great...

I own a 50, 90 and 127 - the 50 through choice and the others came as a part of a deal -

Before I bought the 50, I almost exclusively used the 90 for the wider shot in landscape,

for that reason I personally would go for the nominally wider 110, which is also faster, I

think smaller, and probably newer than the 127 -

Cheers for that Frank - I do agree that what you say is helpful - but everyone has to begin

somewhere and my knowledge of lenses is lacking (I bought my camera about a month

ago) but now the cogs and wheels are turning and things are getting clearer (partial mixed

metaphor and no pun intended) - so I understand that your description of the simple

drawing is basically a hardcopy version of the calculator there is a link for huh ?

I have now figured why so many lens flare hoods have that shape (the 4 curvy protrusions)

- Mamiya world isn't as clear with things technical as I would appreciate ... including

having normal lens hoods (excluding the fisheye) - which not being a rectilinear I dont

think follows the rules you state any how - if it has a view angle of 180 then its focal

length must be zero ...

thanks bruno - I had just thought of that question after having looked at all the funny lens

flare hoods on some lenses and pondering the shape... (not the RZ series interestly tho)

then it came to me...

Frank - I understand what you are saying - did you tho by chance read my question?

I was asking what the 'angle in between' that you state is so easy to find actually is - i.e. Is

it the angle measured from the wide edges, the top and bottom or diagonal ?

I find your comments have a condescending tone that I don't appreciate in such forums.. I

am here to learn, and hopefully one day to contribute meaningfully also - and I am

guessing from my limited experience here that it seems that most other people,

passionate or not would identify with the same ideal ...

The question I asked was answered in much less space by other photo.net users in a

helpful and friendly tone... which I would have thought was the norm

So why if it was such a 'simple question' as you say, did you take so long *not* to answer

it ? especially since 3 other users had already done so before you wrote your response...

Well, to answer your question (Had any geometry lately?)

I finished a BArch degree last year whilst also studying linear algebra part-time so I could

start the bachelor of engineering (mechatronics) that I am currently studying in first pro

year...

So I have done a little geometry, not tho as much as I would like

But this is boring anyway...

So>> thank you Ellis, Michael and Stephen - hope your year is going well - and sorry, to

go off like this to a fellow photo.net user, I guess I've had a long day ...

and thanks also Denis for the calculator!! It's helpful (now;)

When a lens specs state it view angle is say 82 degrees (eg. the mamiya RZ 50mm) - is this

measured against the long dimension as in 70mm (or whatever it really is ... 60

something?) or the short dimension 60mm (again or whatever it really is ... 58mm

something?)

or perhaps is it measured for the diagonal between them ? then is it the diagonal between

6x7 or 6x6 or 7x7 ? - this question could be just as relevant for 35mm film ... just change

the dimensions i gave

cheers!

nick

I have access to and have played with image distortion fixing software - I

remember it being a laborious procedure, and the images have to be

scanned at very high res to get a good output...

Although yes, it is a good option (costly if you aint into pirating your software) I

bought my RZ as I wanted to get away from all the digital imaging and video I

was doing at the time and get back into old school 'physical' photography that

I had enjoyed at school (smelly chemicals etc...)

It has been interesting to see how much PS and its myriad of filters/plugins

have settled themselves comfortably in the world of film photography...

especially surprising to see how many of the gallery pics have been altered in

PS - well beyond the reach of traditional darkroom methods that is ...

back to the rectilinear vs. fisheye question tho>> totally forgot about lens

rentals! - I can just hire the fisheye whenever I need one (and should have

thought of this before I stated I had no access to either lens to try)

I thought it maybe interesting to take a fisheye up a low hill and do some

astrophotography - point it directly upwards and get the180 horizon for about

an hour exposure - there happens to be some spectacular meteorite activity in

NZ at the moment - not many per hour, but some big bright ones that leave

long trails - you would be guaranteed to catch them with the fisheye - has

anyone seen shots like this before? (with the full night sky in shot)

I am pretty sold on the 50mm - and I must say that is a great photo Paul (I hope to make

images as good as this one day) - I have found a new 50mm for US $650 and at this

discount have decided the ULD can wait (unfortunately it isn't offered at such a great

discount as the standard) - and $650 new is great compared to a E rated fisheye's around

the $1000 mark - will upload some pics!

cheers again -

Nick

oh - and Eddie - re. 'ULD' - its 'Ultra Low Distortion' (I thinks its Ultra) - anyways, check

mamiya.co.uk ...

Hi,

The widest lens I surrently own for my RZ is a 90mm RB lens - I more often than not want

a wider lens than this as I particularly enjoy landscape photography and also would like a

wider lens for action/people shots where I wouldnt have to worry so much about framing

the shot (just shoot, and hope the lens gets the action somewhere on the film) - (not to

mention the added depth of field ...)

the options are the 50mm (not worried too much about distortion so I wouldnt be after the

ULD) or the 37mm fisheye - However... I have no access to either to demo and would love

to see some shots taken with both (especially comparitve shots!) - does any one use these

lenses ? any advice ? I can only budget for one and my gut tells me the fisheye as it would

give me more angle to spare - but then if I didn't want the distortion I would be cropping a

lot of my film and not to mention expensive camera functionality away post exposure...

would love some advice before i spend the money...

cheers, as always for your help

nick

thanks for that - its helpful to know as I wanted to be sure before going back to the

seller...

(;

hi, I own two RZ67 backs - one orignal and a pro II (pro II body) - I have a problem in that

I dont know if the original back is faulty or designed differently from the pro II version -

what is happening is that the film advance knob on top of the original back rotates in both

directions, because of this it is not providing enough tension for the film around the

takeup spool, consequently letting light spill onto the film edges once it is removed from

the back for processing - the radius of the wound film is wider than the spool flange so

light spills around the flange that would usually protect it...

The problem only occurs with the original back and the film advance knob on the pro II

back only moves in the direction that the film should wind therefore keeping tension in the

film with a sort of 'clicky ratchet' system.

basically my question is>> do i have a faulty back? or are the original RZ back's different

in that the knob rotates both ways?

cheers for any assistance,

nick

I have a RZ67 pro2 body using RB lenses (series 'C' if that makes sense) - I

have two questions -

Q1>> as I have to set the shutter dial on the body to the 'RBL' setting for the

RB lenses how can I then use bulb/B setting exposures? as the two lenses I

have only go to 1 sec shutter speeds and 't' ??

Q2>> I have found a RZ67 (original) AE prism finder for sale via auction at

what may well be a reasonable price, it has been apparently 'upgraded' for it

will work with the pro2's 1/2 increment shutter speeds - however is this a

waste of time without having RZ series lenses ? Is there still some added

value of having a prism even though I would be switching from the 'AEL' to the

'RBL' setting - or does the prism need RZ series lenses to work in the first

place ?

thanks for any help - nick