jimsimmons

<p>Wayne, that would be ideal, but no, the X-E1 does not allow an adjustment. (I just double checked the manual.) I will be buying an X-T1 soon, so I will check to see if they've added that feature. </p>

<p>I like to use the electronic level on my X-E1. But I've noticed that if I level the camera using the bubble level on my Manfrotto 410 geared head, the electronic level on the X-E1 is off, and if I level with the electronic level, the bubble level is not centred. Another test I've tried is to level a 48" carpenter's level on a table and get the viewfinder framing guidelines to line up with the the carpenter's level. When I do that, the tripod head bubble level is centred, but again, the electronic level is not lined up. This implies that the liquid levels are matching up, so are accurate, but the electronic level is off. What do you think is going on here? </p>

When I sold my CL and 40mm Summicron (separately) online a few months ago (after 38 years!) they were pretty beat up

on the exterior. Ugly, really. But I'd always taken good care of them and had given them quality service. I advertised them

as having been CLA'd by Sherry a few years prior to the sale, and I believe that is why, despite their appearance, they

sold for amazingly high prices.

 

And yeah, i've talked to Sherry on the phone. She's a trip. Passionate about the quality of her work and about the CL and

Leicaflexes of the era. we are lucky to have her in our little universe.

<p>Sorry so late to respond, gang. I updated from 3.6.1 to 3.6.2 (PC), and now my laptop recognises the puck, and I'm in the middle of a calibration right now. The first two times I attempted to download the latest driver, the file got corrupted, but this may be because I was clicking on the update button from within Eye One Match. But for the third attempt, I closed the program and went directly to X-Rite's website. The driver downloaded fine that time, and that's the version I'm using now. <br>

<br />Thanks for the advice and encouragement. That was all I needed to keep trying things - to know that someone had figured it out. <br>

Cheers, <br>

Jim </p>

<p>When I get on x-rite's website, the implication is that the last round of software they made for the Eye One Display 2 puck is for Windows 7. Anybody been able to get one to work with Windows 8? I just got a new Win8 laptop, and it won't even recognize that I've connected the Eye One device. x-rite website says I have to get the Eye One Display Pro or Color Munki. Really? Surely the people at x-rite are smart enough to write drivers for Windows 8? Surely? This couldn't just be greed at work, forcing me to buy more hardware, could it? </p>

Interesting, Loren. I'll check that out at the camera store. I wonder if, once the focus and exposure are computed, there's

no further processing to slow down the display?

Is the lag in the viewfinder of the xe1 something that can be improved with a firmware update, or is it something that is inherent in the

hardware configuration? It is perhaps the only thing about the cameras usability that irritates me.

Sounds to me like you're a good candidates for the Fuji X20. Size, ergonomics, versatility, and the new x-trans sensor

should look very good. Smaller sensor, but if you're not printing large, very film-like colour and smoothness. I am in the

prOcessing of replacing my Olympus epl1 with a Fuji xe1, but am looking hard at the x20. Fuji is doing something special

these days with its sensors, ergonomics and fast lenses.

Well, i spent time with the xe1 in the store today, and it works the way the manual says it works. When in P, S, or A

modes, +/- adjusts aperture or shutter speed, and you can see the LCD or VF image get darker or lighter. But in manual

mode, auto-gain is constant, and +/- adjustment is essentially ignored. So no way to visually preview exposure. Even the

histogram refuses to give you any useful information. It stays in the middle of the range no matter how much or little light

you let in. Weird. It ssems to just be showing distribution of light/dark pixels in the world, not on the sensor. Not as

informative as the Olympus VF2 viewfinder, but I could live with it.

 

Two more observations. VF magnification data I find on the web says the VF2 magnification is 1.15x and is .6 for the

XE1's VF. But I set both lenses (Oly 14-42, Fuji 18-55 at 50mm equivelant lengths, and the apparent image magnification

was practically identical. I'd worried the XE1 image would look small, but it was fine. The other thing I looked for was how

much sharper the higher res XE VF would be. Surprise - not all that much. Brighter, better colour, but only a bit sharper to

my eyes, with careful attention to diopter adjustment on both finders.

 

Sadly, time to sell up on some beloved 35mm gear to finance an XE purchase. Film will now be just for MF and LF work

from now on.

Here's what the manual says:

 

"Rotate the exposure compensation dial to adjust exposure when photographing very bright, very dark, or high-contrast

subjects. The effect is visible in the display."

 

That's good! I'll test that today. Does anyone know what that actually does? Do aperture and shutter speed the same and

electronics chane the exposure, or what?

I will return to the store today and check if +/- does affect light/dark in the viewfinder. I do believe it did, but could not

recall last night.

I am trying to determine if the XE1 has a feature I use with the VF2 viewfinder on my Olympus epl1. With the Oly in manual mode, over-

and under exposure shows in the viewfinder - the image gets darker or lighter as i adjust aperture or shutter speed. This allows me to see

if I'm overexposing clouds in a landscape for instance, or if I'm losing detail in the shadows. But, in playing with an XE1 in the shop today,

I could not figure out how to set the camera to emulate this behaviour. In full manual operation, the viewfinder always showed a well lit

image, no matter over or underexposed the settings were.

 

I've downloaded the XE1 manual but can't find any mention of this type of operation. Do any xe1 or X-pro1 users know how to turn this

on? Neither the shop guy nor me could figure this out.

 

BTW, I was in the shop to specifically check on how the xe1 viewfinder magnification felt to me. Well, the .6x magnification of the XE is

definitely less appealing than the 1.15x magnification of the VF2. It almost does not make up for the higher resolution. I am so wanting to

move to this fuji camera with its great lenses, but at that price I'm wanting to make sure everything I need in a camera is in it.

I never used a strap on my SL. But I carried an open top bag that it sat in (along with a CL and loads of film, flash and

meter). I just pulled it out of the bag to shoot. Straps irritate the hell out of me. ;-)

All camera repair people are eccentric. Get over it. If they were normal, they'd be doing something else. If you've ever had

the good fortune to speak with Sherry on the phone, as I have, you'd cherish the experience.

My Olympus E-PL1 did not become truly usable until I got the EVF for it. Now I would not consider buying a digital

camera without one.

The lenses I used on my SL were all 3 cam. Don't know about the optical formula diff between 2 and 3 cams, but my 3

cam 50mm Summicron was one of the best lenses I've ever owned. And the SL never broke down once. Tank.

The 67II has a superior focussing screen, but if you put a Beattie screen in a 67, it will be as good. If you can afford the

extra price, the 67 II is the better camera.

If you can afford the 7II, then you can afford the best - get a Gitzo that's the right height for you.

Nozar does not feel the older Barnack Leicas to be real Leicas? Hmmmm. I doubt Oscar would agree. I would also disagree on the Leica

CL. It was designed in Wetzlar, the critical assembly tools were built in Wetzlar, and Wetzlar staff were in the Minolta factory, working with

Minolta to insure quality control. And it has those great Leica ergonomics too.

Assuming your final image size is not huge, I'd suggest looking at a used Canon 5D and a Canon 24mm tilt shift lens. You

will get the depth of fiels you need and the perspective control. Shot on a tripod and lit well, you will have a very high

quality image.

<p>Iv'e done what you are attempting to by cutting a piece of plexiglass to fit on the film rails. I gave it a mat finish by sanding it with metal-sanding sandpaper (the black stuff) in fairly fine grits. I think I started with 800 and worked up to 1200 or 1500?It's important to lift the plexiglass up after a few swirls, as junk collects fast and then gouges occur.</p>

<p>I taped the plexiglass to the bottom of a Schneider 4X loupe and just plonked the assemblage on the rails while I tested focus. I've used this to adjust the rangefinder on my Leica CL and to get the focusing of both lenses of a stereo camera to match. It's not the most elegant technique in the world but it does the job. I used to make special effects camera equipment in Los Angeles, and sometimes just some simple techniques are all it takes to do good work.</p>

<p>Yes, David, it is common for photographers to have a few tripods, depending on the job at hand. I have a massive Gitzo 5 series for my architecture work, as it goes up to 8 feet tall and holds any camera I have rock-still. The center column is quite usable, but then it's the crank model, which is incredibly well engineered and stable (and weighs a ton).<br>

Another tripod is a Benro 3 series, which is a Chinese Gitzo clone which is surprisingly well made and operates smoothly. (As you can tell, I have no problem with the Gitzo twist locks, and I used to own a Manfrotto 055 with the flip lock legs; they were not nearly as stable as the Gitzo legs). My Benro is aluminum, but they also make carbon models that are good. I'd think the series 2 model would be suitable for your Mamiya 7, but only if you get a quality head. If you like ball heads, the Gitzos are superb. Benro makes clone heads, but I don't know if they're good or not. I use a Manfrotto 410 geared head. If you like 3-way heads, they are very compact and plenty rigid for the Mamiya.<br>

As for height, I am 6 feet tall and I don't like short tripods. I am willing to carry the extra weight to get the height. One thing to remember is that it's best not to extend the legs to their full extensions. They can be a touch wobbly when fully extended, so it's best to leave each extension about an inch from full length. You can extend a quality Gitzo all the way and it's OK, but I always had to leave my Manfrotto 055 legs short, and they'd be a bit wobbly.<br>

As for the poster who was seeking hard data on Gitzos being worth the extra money, I don't know where you'd find that. Consumer reports does not do testing on high end tripods. ;-) But if you talk to enough photographers who end up trading up to them to get what they're after, you'll see a pattern. That was certainly my experience. Tiltall to Manfrotto to Gitzo. There are other good brands, but that's been my experience.</p>

I haves used MIS inks in my Epson

R2400 for years. Same result as with

Epson inks. Passes months long fading

tests taped to window facing the sun.

Occasional clogs but temporary.

My minimalist kit (for many years) shot thousands of frames with just a 40mm Summicron on a CL. I had a 90mm for a

while but decided that anything longer than 50mm worked better with an SLR so I got a Leicaflex and a 90mm

Summicron. So then my minimalist kit was CL + 40mm and SL + 90mm.

<p>I can also highly recommend the Bruce Fraser book. Reading it will teach everything to understand what sharpening is all about. But the really nice thing is that it guides you through creating Photoshop actions for post-scan sharpening and printer sharpening, and these actions are incredible in what they achieve. I've had to go back to many scans done before I read the book and rework those files. However, the book is out of print, so may be hard to find.<br>

Another option, and very affordable, is Focalblade. I used an early version to reasonable success, but found the Fraser techniques superior. However, the latest version of Focalblade (I upgraded because of a cheap special offer for users of Version 1.0) has what appears to be a lot of Fraser's ideas baked into it. You might look into that.</p>