james_r2

Problem solved: bought a 4x5 Thanks to all for your insight and advice

<p>Thank-you to all for so many thoughtful & detailed comments: Far beyond my "friend's" expectations.<br />Apologies if this topic has been covered - my bad. A search returned no immediately obvious hits.<br /><br />Figured 6x9 would be a poor man's LF, and have advantage over 6x6 or 6x7 in achieving familiar aspect ratio of 135 in a large print, without tossing a lot of the neg; going for wide, without resorting to panos, etc.<br />If consensus is cropping negs from 50 on Mamiya won't significantly impact final quality (all things considered), great - one less camera.<br> "large print" = 13x19 to 20x30<br> Landscape = built urban-industrial environment, + the odd desert/ocean/hill<br> 100% tripod / slow film - all types - but mostly BW<br />Nikon 9000 / digital print / special negs to pro service for drums or big prints<br /><br /><br> Thanks again.</p> <p><br /><br /></p> <p> </p>

<p>Asking for a friend:<br> Let's say you already own a Mamiya 7 with the 50mm lens, and want large landscape print capability:<br />(LF is not an option; looking for best MF landscape solution)<br> Consider 6x9 such as the Fuji GSW with a 65mm lens, or stick with the Mamiya and buy the 43mm lens for it?</p> <p> </p>

<p>Zombie Glass Backs thread:<br /><br />The glass back option required 2 things (besides the glass):<br /><br />1: An F model (3.5 or 2.8) with the internal pressure tab to lock/unlock the flat glass, and a recessed pin located next to the right hand side film gate guide rail. <br /><br />2: The correct optical glass back with a raised tab on one side of the pressure plate; when the plate is set to the optical glass position; the pin pushes the pressure plate away from the film gate - to accommodate the optical glass.<br /><br />Regarding optical glass - the differences can be subtle, and vary with the subject (buildings with flat planes vs landscapes @ f16), aperture setting, etc.<br />Opinions vary as to whether the improvement is on the edge, center, or all over: <br />My own tests have so far been inconclusive. <br />In my limited experience, if the glass is clean & clear, it won't have an effect on images, or scratch negatives.<br> <br />BTW - Rolleiflex backs are not universally interchangeable across all models: The later "White Face" film gate guide rails and corresponding film back's pressure plate are different than earlier versions: Using an older type of back will result in focus problems with a WF model: A post CLA field-test revealed this on my WF Rollei, and Harry Fleenor confirmed it. Exchanging pressure plates solved the problem.</p> <p>220 most certainly can be used with Rolleiflex models having the 12/24 option:<br />Some people report success with hacks to use 220 on non-220 fitted bodies; usually non-invasive methods of fooling the counter.<br> Note; there is no special setting on the film pressure plate for 220 - it stays in the same position as 120 - at least, that's the way my 12/24 equipped 3.5F works..</p> <p> </p>

<p>The red line a little past the halfway point towards the red panel is for calibrating the follower needle: see Prochnow's Technical Report pg 130 for F2.8 instructions</p>

<p>Note that in Prochnow's Technical Report, ppg 114 / 130, it states that DIN should be set to 15 (ASA 25) to confirm calibration of the match needle follower: all other settings are same.</p>

<p>A recently repainted M4 is losing the finish far faster than expected, and rather than brass, silver nickel is showing through.<br> Seller confirmed they didn't take finish down to brass before painting, and claim painting on nickel gives just as durable a finish: Apparently not, in this case.</p> <p>My understanding of "de-chroming" a Leica for repaint means the finish is stripped down to brass before painting, not left at the nickel layer.<br> Willing to bet most owners expect gradual paint wear to reveal a classic brass patina, not silver-nickel.</p> <p>Thoughts?</p> <p> </p>

<p>Knut and John - Paint chip confirmed by tech.<br> Tech also confirmed permanent haze on one element that was also not mentioned by seller -<br />guess the KEH people need glasses.</p>

<p><img src="/photo/17789914" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p><img src="/photo/17789916" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>A recently acquired lens has some sort of debris adhering to aperture blades: Moves when aperture is adjusted, and extends over edge into fov between f2 and f4. (see pix) Haven't got roll back from lab, so influence on IQ is unknown.<br /> Wondering<br /> 1: what it is & how it got there:<br /> sloppy tech?<br /> stray bit of metal or plastic that found its way in, or evidence of damage to the lens?<br /> 2: potential for damaging or interfering with glass or mechanics</p> <p>Thoughts?<br /> <br /> </p> <p> </p>

<p>We all have our good days and bad days.<br />Good Q.C. and customer comms is key in any field</p>

<p>Thanks Andrew for the useful info.<br> Followup: The Mt. Wilson staff were great: very accomodating to the group I was with.<br> T adapter owner bailed (would have been ok to use one), so tried handheld with mixed results:<br />The more distant objects (carbon star / cats eye / etc.) were somewhat blurry & dim due to atmospheric conditions and angle of the telescope. Jupiter and Saturn were the brightest by far. Only went for Saturn - it was quite bright; almost artificial looking.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks for the advice gents: will give the afocal method a shot, and if it isn't possible, I'll look for some nearby ducks and post the results.....<br> BTW, Mt. Wilson offers half or full night educational sessions on the historic 60" to the public; typically groups.</p>

<p>Looking for advice on taking photos through the Mount Wilson 60" telescope, with a camera/lens placed up to the eyepice: Can't find anything online.</p> <p>Choice of cameras (all with primes)<br> Canon 6D<br> Leica M4<br> Fuji X-Pro1</p> <p>Preferred focal length?<br> Any focussing / exposure / filter suggestions or pointers?</p> <p>Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>Depends on what you mean by "losing". Setting aside technical issues of sensor vs film, adapter tolerances, infinity focus, etc. you're still pushing light through Leica optics. My only experience w. adapted Leica glass has been 70s-80s R lenses on a Canon ap-c body: the "look" was there. Whether that's due to placebo, or manual prime vs autofocus zoom, I liked the result. However, the 23 & 56 Fujinon lenses are pretty impressive; but if you already have M lenses, doesn't hurt to try. You can always sell on the adaptor if you don't like the results.</p>