findranger
-
Posts
32 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by findranger
-
-
It appears, along with the updates to the Portra line, Kodak is also
discontinuing 100T, as stated in their Q&A pdf regarding the new Portra films:
"Due to declining volumes, KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 100T Film will be dropped
from the portfolio by year-end 2006 as supplies run out. For applications
requiring tungsten balance, we suggest using one of the other PORTRA Films with
appropriate filtration."
With the apparent loss of 160NC in 5x7 as well, the introduction of these
updated films has been accompanied by disappointing news. Inevitable perhaps,
sad nonetheless.
-
FWIW, I did some more digging and found the following discussion on Google Groups regarding the lens (one participant is the esteemed Richard Knoppow): http://tinyurl.com/mc9m2 (or you can just do a Google Group search for "toyonon")
There isn't much additional info there, but Richard suggests the "P" stands for "Polaroid," oddly enough. The original poster, who seems quite fond of it, mentions "a division of Minolta."
Either way, it appears to be a nice, little lens.
Just another fold in the mystery...
-
"Press" was my assumption as well -- makes the most sense -- but you never know with manufacturers' cryptic nomenclatures. It also seems redundant unless there were other lens lines that made such differentiation necessary. It appears this was the only lens Toyo offered (at least for this particular camera).
-
Hello, all.
<p>
My Toyo Super Graphic came with this P-Toyonon lens and I'm trying to find out
more about it. There is essentially no info online (including a google and
photo.net search) regarding it.
<p>
Is it just a Toyo clone of the 127mm Ektar or Optar (assuming Ektar since it has
the f4.7 max ap)? What does the "P" stand for?
<p>
Does, or did, Toyo even produce lenses, or is this a re-branded lens? If so,
what's underneath the badge (who manufactured it)?
<p>
It doesn't appear to be multi-coated (reflections are all the same color). It's
in a Copal #0. And considering the Toyo Super G was made from 1979-1985, I'm
assuming the lens to be of the same vintage.
<p>
Anybody have any experience with it, or can shed some more light on its origins?
<p>
Thanks.
<p>
~ J
<p>
<center><img src="http://www.smokepress.com/auctions/p-toyonon.jpg"></center>
-
Thanks for the response.
Is that a Graflex or Kalart product? What's the magnification? Is it much of a help?
-
This is a continuance of my previous thread, but more specifically about the SG
eyepiece.
Considering the RF eyepiece of my Toyo Super Graphic has internal threads, is
the eyepiece of the top-mounted RF Graflex Super also threaded? Has anyone
discovered a magnifier that will fit it (or been able to rig one up)? What about
one of the Kalart Focuscopes?
Any info appreciated. Thanks.
-
Thanks for the responses.
I had come across Troy's posts in my intital research. Lewitt, with your experience corroborating it, the Cambo solution seems to be one of the best options.
There is this post which mentions some other alternatives: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=008swX
But its not clear which of these backs would work. The MP4 seems more suited to the Crown/Pacemakers. And the Toyo 1.5x Magnifier Hood (like the other Toyo viewers), which the OP mentions, may or may not work on the Super (probably not, without modification). He never specifies that it does (I've contacted him to find out). Nor does it sound very useful, especially with such low magnification.
I came across a seller on fleabay listing a "Graflex Speed/Crown Graphic Angle Finder", but, according to him, it won't fit on the Super, considering its different back. Whether or not it could be modified, I couldn't say. It could just be a question of pins.
The standard 110mm Toyo boards won't fit as I measured the board that came with mine and it's 96mm. Nevertheless, I contacted Jim at mpex, and they have some chrome boards for the Supers (but not wired, and no black) and they still carry the cams for $29, even though they aren't listed on the site.
The good folks at the Toyo Parts Dept. (at MAC America) were unfamiliar with the Toyo Super Graphic. They requested some photos, so I'm still waiting to see if they can help with parts/accessories, particularly as I am looking for a replacement accessory shoe. If not, I'll see if Toyo Sakai Japan can help.
-
Hello, all.
I've recently picked up a Toyo Super Graphic and would like to verify its
accessories compatibility, especially with Graflex Super G's lens boards and
rangefinder cams. Realizing that the Toyo is essentially the same camera (if not
identical, except for the hotshoe), am I correct in assuming that the
boards/cams are interchangeable?
Lens & Repro has some (Graflex cams, that is), and mpex/Fred Lustig supposedly
as well (though I'm not sure if that's still the case, any update?). Anywhere
else? I've already contacted Toyo-View. We'll see what they have to say.
Considering the widest FLs the "official" Graflex cams are offered for -- 86,
88, and 90mm (according to graflex.org)-- is it possible to make/obtain cams for
ultra-wides (say, 65 or 75mm), or is there some internal limit to the RF mechanism?
Which reflex viewing backs are compatible? Same question for the universal zoom
finders. The Toyo version is hard-to-find (harder than finding the camera, at
least), but how about the Horseman or Linhofs? Will they mount properly? The
Linhofs look to be proprietary.
The RF eyepiece is threaded on the inside. Are there accessories, like a
magnifier (which would be ideal, considering how disappointingly tiny it is),
that fit it?
Any assistance appreciated.
~ J
-
I recently received Calumet's latest flyer in the mail and it has a decent list
of some of the more well-known inkjet papers, with comparative weight,
thickness, base/surface, compatibility, etc, and a couple of blurbs about paper
differences in general. And no, I don't work for Calumet.
It's available currently online as a pdf (the chart's on pgs 6 & 7):
http://webres.calumetphoto.com/webres/pdfs/US_MayJuneFlyer_05_05_06.pdf
You can dump it into Photoshop or Acrobat and just pull those two pages out and
make your own new pdf, if you want.
It's missing a few papers from some of the manufacturers, as well as some of the
other well-regarded makers (RedRiver, Hawk Mountain, Innova, PremierArt), but
its still fairly comprehensive. Some of this data is hard to come by, even on
the manufacturers own sites, though I can't vouch for it's accuracy.
I was in the process of compiling my own reference spreadsheet when this
conveniently arrived.
Might make a useful primer for those uninitiated.
~ J
-
It should. I've had both cameras and though I never had occasion (or need) to swap them, the eyecups look exactly the same, as do the eyepieces themselves. Can't speak on the older Mamiya Deluxe or Standard.
Considering the rest of the accessories for the Super 23 and Universal are largely interchangeable (except for the obvious G-adapter and Polaroid backs), I would assume the same for eyecups.
-
I have the GG "spring" back for my Universal that accepts the Mamiya Pack Film holders (there was also a "plain" GG as well) which are proprietary. I used to have the Pack Film holders and they were specified as being 6.5 x 9cm (2.5 x 3.5in.) as marked on their original boxes (image area size), but they obviously seem to be smaller overall than your wooden holders.
Most, if not all, of the components of the Mamiya Press system are proprietary, with the exception of being able to use some accessories from the RB67.
Good luck with your project.<div>
</div> -
Here's the front page image:
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/pageone/scan/index.html
and the story it's part of (with some additional, iconic images; particularly the shot of the woman and the tide of riot police. powerful stuff. not sure if that's the "page 8" shot referred to by the OP):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/02/international/middleeast/02mideast.html
-
An interesting thread is going on over at APUG relating to this with participation by Simon Galley (Sales Director European and Export Markets for Ilford):
http://www.apug.org/forums/showthread.php?t=20862&page=3&pp=10
According to him, it may very well be a Delta 25 (among other products) that's being discussed, not an XP2 iso 25. Either way, it's good to hear an iso 25 anything is possible.
-
<a href="http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=marketsNews&storyID=2005-11-09T062246Z_01_T6880_RTRIDST_0_TECH-JAPAN-OLYMPUS.XML">Here's </a> a Reuter's piece about Olympus affirming the above-mentioned sentiments.
<p>
Seems Nikon was smart to release the D50 when it did, before the D200 (despite the fact many people would have preferred the latter).
-
For what it's worth, when speaking with the Ilford folks at the PhotoPlus Expo in Oct. about what, if any, new products were in the pipeline, they mentioned development of an ISO 25 version of XP2. Couldn't confirm any timetable, though.
As an XP2 lover as well, it sounded very intriguing (though I'd probably still prefer a traditional B&W iso25, if they were to produce anything, particularly with the absence of apx25).
I concur with a little bit of overexposure going a long way with grain-reduction. I almost always give it a 1/3 or 1/2 stop.
-
From what I've gathered, that's precisely the issue, especially considering Olympus' financial woes and the current shifts in the overall market.
Other manufacturers are feeling the same crunch (with the exception of Nikon/Canon).
-
For all intents and purposes, yes. Olympus has been phasing out the C-7070 as well as the C-8080. Rumors of this have been floating around for a while now. With the push towards entry-level dSLRs, most manufacturers (at least those with a DSLR lineup and lenses - Oly, Canon, Nikon, KM, etc) seem to be doing the same with their prosumer digicams. It appears Oly is emphasizing their "SP" lineup now for p&s.
Speaking with the Olympus folks at the PhotoPlus Expo in Oct., they confirmed it, also saying that "the last shipment" had just gone out around that time. So, production has effectively ceased.
I was researching (and ultimately purchased) the 7070 myself in Sep./Oct. and it was getting difficult to find even then. It's been slowly disappearing from inventories for weeks, if not the past couple of months.
Lately, I see on *bay prices have jumped to $600, when just a month and a half ago you could get one for $325-350 new from online retailers. Hello digital inflation!
Too bad, as I agree it's a quality camera with a good set of accessories, as the C-series in general has been. Something of an end of an era, which I suppose explains the exorbitant price jump in the secondary market. Could be destined to be a cult/classic digicam like other members of the C-series.
-
-
-
Here's the story:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/25/eveningnews/main796442.shtml
Here's the man:
If you google: "photographer large detail gallery close-up" you come up with the link above.
Hello back, from NYC
-
Actually, like the artixscan 1800f, the 4990 can scan 8x10 as well - that's one of it's primary advantages over the 4870 which could only handle up to 4x5 (with the max trans. scanning area on the 4870 being about 4"x9").
And unless you're wet-mounting, maintaining film flatness and at an optimal distance from the glass with any of these flatbeds would seem to be problematic, especially with larger film sizes (not sure how the creo's work, though). I have enough trouble scanning bowed 120. The fact that the Artixscan 1800f allows you to scan film without needing to use the glass would seem to give it the extra edge.
-
In fact, the one in Miami is one of the few scala labs left period. Duggal in NYC no longer handles it themselves and ships it to colorreflections. There had been a lab in Toronto, but, I believe, they are also no longer handling scala (don't remember the link though).
I think the only one other lab in the US that does scala anymore, is Main Photo Service in California, besides dr.5, which is unfortunate. Lovely film.
See the scala lab listing on agphaphoto:
http://www.agfaphoto.com/en-GB/photography/professional-photography/films/scala/scala-labore/
-
Here are some links you might find useful. They were for me when I first got my Universal setup:
<p>
-http://echobox.com/mamiya/ <br>
-http://www.rondayvous.com/Mamiya.html <br>
-http://digilander.libero.it/clabo/mamiya/ <br>
-http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/mliu/medpresscompo.html
<p>
6x9 "S" backs are fairly easy to find on ebay. They usually come up at least once a week. I believe there is one up for auction right now. The multiformat backs are rarer, and thus more expensive, but they do come up occasionally. But, as you've commented, the reason to get this camera is for the larger 6x9 and 6x7 image size (and their versatility), making the multiformat backs less useful in my book. If they had a multiformat back allowing 6x9 and 6x7, it might be more practical. <p>
As the previous poster mentioned, there's really no point in bothering with the RB backs (or Graphlex/Singer) unless you're interested in the compactness of them (but at the expense of film flatness). Not sure if the Polaroid 600SE backs would also work, though if they do, most likely it would be with the Universal only, considering they're nearly identical cameras (though the lenses aren't compatible).
<p>
Enjoy the Press. Nice system.
-
According to what I've read, these "new" inks can only be used on the new line of PIXMA printers. They aren't compatible with the older i-series or even the previous generation of PIXMA printers. (re: http://www.photo-i.co.uk/News/Aug05/Pixma.htm)
We'll have to wait for a new A3-size PIXMA version of the i9900, which I expect will be coming sometime in the next several months considering it's long overdue (at least by Canon standards) for an update.
Though I have to say I'm not very impressed with these "ChromaLife" inks, at least from what I've been reading. Sounds like marketing hype to me (much like the original PIXMA line, overall). I don't see any difference between the stated longevity of these new inks and the old ones. As I recall, the previous inks were also rated for "10 years" unprotected with Canon Photo Pro. I'm sure they'll have a wide color gamut though, like their predecessor. We'll see.
Imacon 949 bulk scans
in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing
Posted
<p>
Anyone with experience getting 35mm slides bulk scanned via an Imacon 949 batch
feeder?
<p>
According to <a
href="http://www.gt-photography.com/articles/Imacon%20949%20Slide%20Feeder%20Review.pdf"
target="_blank">this article</a>, since the film (mounted only) is not using the
"virtual drum" operation, there is an apparent loss of edge/corner sharpness in
the scans (which the reviewer considers "insignificant", though it's still
noticeable in the samples he provides).
<p>
Given that, does using the batch feeder essentially negate all the benefits of
the Imacon over other dedicated film scanners, or is there still an advantage
over the usual desktop suspects (Coolscan 9000, Minolta Dimage Pro Multi,
Artixscan 120) even with the edge sharpness issue?
<p>
How do the results compare?
<p>
Any info appreciated. Thanks.