alexander_nichols

<p>Cosina will make another run of the 50 f/2 and f/3.5 Heliars this fall, 600 samples each. Apparently they will come with an M adapter: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-lens/v-l-m/h50-2-3.5/index.html</p>

<p>The rainbow looks like Newton's rings to me, though they show up as arcs instead of circles or ellipses.</p>

<p>Would that be caused by misaligned element(s)?</p>

<p>I should add that the rainbow manifests itself on the outside, back element and not the doublet inside.</p>

<p>Is the rainbow caused by lens separation? This is a 2nd version 50 Cron-R, 4 optical groups where the 2nd and 3rd groups are doublets, not the outer elements.</p>

<p>Is it worthwhile to get it fixed? Going to be costly? Thanks in advance.</p><div></div>

The lens on the Minox 35 was a Tessar-design with front cell focusing as well.

http://elekm.net/zeiss_ikon/

 

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3600/speaking-frankly-rangefinder-revival.html

What is a good bet from R3 to R7? (I'm not considering the R6 models

because of their price. AE is also good to have.)

 

What is a reliable, affordable choice? I know Jay had numerous

problems with many, if not all, of them, still I'd like to take a

chance.

 

I have bookmarked Doug Herr's page and this one http://www.angelfire.

com/biz/Leica/page6.html but they don't exactly answer my question.

 

Thanks in advance!

Sandy, http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm have pages dedicated to the cameras I mentioned. http://www.dantestella.com/technical.html also has pages on the Canons.

Darn, not the R2 but R. Got it right the first time.

In case it's not clear already, I mean the Bessa R2 and late Canons are better users than Barnacks. They are also less fussy than juggling multiple LTM lenses and adapters on an M body.

Why Sandy, those are LTM bodies.

 

You don't sound like your usual, knowledgeable self in this thread. Now who's pulling whose legs? :P

Right Alan. I have a deep 55mm rubber hood and it takes up 1/4 of the 90mm frame.

 

A vented hood, if available, could be the solution.

Get the Bessa R or Canon 7 or P. Problem solved.

The built-in lens hood on the late version is rather shallow. Is it

adequate or do you use something else?

"Mamiya's were always on the lower end of the quality spectrum compared to brands like Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus and Minolta."

 

Better spread the news to the Medium Format Forum.

 

Even if we stay with the teeny weeny 135 format, Nikon and Pentax never marketed compact manual-focus rangefinders and thus had nothing to compare with Mamiya in this respect.

Any Canadians bought stuff (especially from the US) shipped by UPS

Expedited? Did they charge you anything (besides GST/PST/HST) upon

delivery or pick-up?

I have tried turning all sounds off. No change.

 

There are other theories for banding: high ambient temperature, specific type of lighting ... I've found them to be false.

 

Barely sufficient internal shielding (thus interference) and defective CCD are more plausible causes.

My F11 suffers from the infamous "vertical banding" patterns at ISO 400 - 1600. I've sent Shirokiya 3 emails about the problem since Feb 3 but they never replied. The camera is going back tomorrow anyway, with a letter demanding full refund.

 

Some F10's suffer from the same problem. Better buy local so you'll have less hassle should you need to return it.

 

Or you can wait for the F30.<div></div>

Thank you guys. Keep 'em coming!

 

PSP X seems to offer levels (histogram) control. Does it have curves too? I have Irfanview but of course it offers neither.

Please excuse the noob question -- can anyone recommend a low cost

program with the ability to use PS plug-ins? I have Pixia but it

doesn't work even with the "experimental" Ebisawa filter installed.

Perhaps he's talking about the heavier chrome version though it's not any bigger.

This is the pre-war 2.8/35 Biogon:<P>

<img src=http://www.takuya.jp/jpg/biogon35-28-z.jpg><P>

 

Compare with the post-war Oberkochen version:<P>

<img src=http://www.takuya.jp/jpg/biogon35-28-k.jpg><P>

 

I see a lot of resemblance. The 2nd lens is clearly derived from the first. The biggest difference is the rear element which was developed into a thinner cemented pair while still keeping the negative-positive profile.<P>

 

<i>"The postwar Oberkochen 35mm, f/2.8 Biogon is similar to the Jena lens, save that the rear element is substantially smaller and the thickness is about 8mm less. The lens was now of a seven-element construction."<P></i>

-- Barringer and Small, <i>Zeiss Compendium</i>

The Zeiss Softars I and II are don't give that kind of extreme "glow." The Sima soft focus lens is closer - or you can make your own: http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/soft.html

A side-by-side comparison with a Sima soft focus lens (or its home-made equivalent) would be quite interesting: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=009H8p

The N lenses were also much bigger than their C/Y counterparts, which is not the case with ZF and their Ai-S counterparts.