psychophoto

<p>Just wanted to reply to this and see if anyone had anything to say now about the DM-23. I'm considering one as my new ball head to replace my OK but beat-to-hell Bogen head when I get a new tripod soon.</p>

<p>Anyone have any thoughts about it?</p>

<p>Found this thread last night when I was looking for a starting time for 100ss in HC-110. I did a couple batches at the following:</p>

<p>EI 80<br />

HC-110 <strong>Dilution G</strong> (1:31 from <em>stock solution</em>)<br />

22 minutes at 68ºF/20ºC</p>

<p>The negatives look very good. I did two rolls at a time in a stainless tank with stainless reels. Agitation was initially 30 seconds continuous, then five seconds every 30 agitation thereafter. This film has a bit of a tint to the base that does not seem to have anything to do with fixing/washing. </p><div></div>

Rich - thanks for chiming in. If I pick one up, it'll mostly be used for a mix of editorial, portrait, and cycling photography. Based on other Mamiya optics I've had, I'm inclined to think that this will be well-suited to my needs in terms of quality.

Seems I forgot to actually finish posting this question earlier. Second try...

 

I'm looking for actual user experience with the 200mm f/2.8 APO for the Mamiya

645. Reviews and tests are nowhere to be found, and I think this lens would be

perfect for my uses, but I don't want to buy a lens I know nothing about in

terms of real-world performance if I don't have to. The f/2.8 aperture is

important, so the 210mm f/4 won't do.

 

Anyway, anone here have one? How's it perform?

Excellent! Knowing what they're actually called makes all the difference in the world. :-)

 

THank you!

You know those little numbered stickers that photo labs use to keep track of film rolls/

orders? Does anyone know where to get these? I have been looking all over and can't find

them to save my life.

If you feel like experimenting with pushing Tri-X again, try it at EI 1600, developed for 16

min at 20? C in HC-110 Dilution B. I've had some great results with this combination.<div></div>

All of my B&W will be developed by yours truly. As for keeping the color straight at the lab, I

think you could reasonably ask the lab to just keep the appropriate catalog # with the

appropriate rolls of film, written on the sleeve or something.

Thanks for all the quick responses. To respond to some of the points made:

 

-I wish all of the film I use were available in 220. Unfortunately, though, they aren't. Fuji

NPS and Kodak TXP are the only two that I use that are available in 220. Neopan 400,

Acros, and Delta 3200 are not.

 

-Regarding Fast Prime's suggestion to drop B&W film and just convert to mono in

Photoshop, I'm afraid I've found that I can only get the look I want using the specific films I

use as I use them. If this wasn't the case, this would help streamline things.

 

-Paul mentioned film cases built specifically for the purpose of hauling film around. Can

anyone point me to a specific example of one of these?

 

-Does anyone know where I can find the paired serial number stickers that labs use? They

would definitely be handy to have around.

 

Overall, I think the system I'm leaning towards is using numbered stickers to keep the film

cross-referenced to my notes, keeping the superspeed stuff sorted out for easy retrieval

for hand inspections, and keeping everything in bags in some sort of larger case, probably

a medium-size gray Pelican case. If my budget allows, I may try FedExing some film back

ahead of my own return, but I'll admit I'd be nervous letting it out of my sight!

So put yourself in this situation: you are working on a project that has you overseas for

3-6 weeks at a time on multiple occasions. While there, you are shooting medium format

exclusively, and are consuming as many as 80 rolls per week. The film is a mix of color

and B&W negative, effective speeds ranging from, say, EI 100 for NPS to EI 3200 for Delta

3200.

 

You need to be able to organize all of this film effectively and in an intelligent manner.

You need to be able to extract the high speed stuff for hand inspection at the airport (let's

assume you're not going to worry about the low-speed in the carryon x-ray). You need to

be able to label all of the film on a per-roll basis and cross-reference it to your notes. You

need to be able to keep the film physically safe while travelling to multiple locations, both

when taking everything with you (when going from city to city) and be able to take some of

it with you (daily excursions).

 

Finally, you need to be able to make sense of these hundreds of rolls of film when you get

home.

 

So: how do you do it?

<p>I will not have a vehicle with me. However, I did just get the following information

from Quantum:</p>

<p><em>You can use a solar panel to charge the Turbo Battery, using the QT46 Vehicle

Charger. The solar panel must be able to supply 500 mA or more preferably, at 12 Volts. It

will take up to 12 hours to charge.</em></p>

<p>It looks like it won't be too hard to do what I need to do. The Brunton solar panel was

just one of the first that I found - I'm not absolutely sure which product I'll use for this

application, but I will post follow-up on the subject once I get something working. Thanks

for the quick responses - anything other ideas people might have are very much

appreciated.</p>

<p>I have recently bought a Quantum T2 and a Turbo battery. I will, in the long term,

occasionally be using this flash for work in places where I cannot readily access AC power to

recharge the battery. As such, I will need an alternative method for charging the Turbo

battery.</p>

<p>What I would like to do is to construct a solar charger for the battery, most likely using

something like a <a href="http://www.brunton.com/product.php?id=256">Brunton

Solaroll</a> as the source of the power. Creating power from the sun is the easy part -

having it channelled into the battery properly is where I get a little unsure. It shouldn't be

terribly difficult, but I'm wondering if anyone here has ever done this particular sort of

adaptation or knows how I should go about it. Thoughs? Suggestions? Thanks!</p>

I have an 80mm f/1.9 for my Mamiya 645 that I absolutely love. There's really only one

problem with it - the focusing is a little heavier than I would like it to be. Can anyone

recommend a good place ot have the lens re-lubed with a lighter lubricant? I am not doing

this myself, so please don't suggest I start hacking away at it myself :-). The lens is no

longer under warranty so that's not an issue either.

 

Thoughts? Thanks!

Thanks for the replies. I may play around with this sort of thing in the future, and if I do

I'll post results here (photo.net). I'm just really interested in adapting nontraditional optics

to use on a dslr, particularly superspeed lenses.

All day I've been chewing on an optics problem, and I'm hoping someone here can throw

me a bone.

 

Let's say you have a lens you want to adapt to use with a camera. Let's say the camera in

question is a 35mm SLR and the lens in question is a non-retrofocus wide angle

rangefinder lens. At the proper distance to focus at infinity, the back of the lens is inside

the mirror box of the camera and would be in the way of the mirror.

 

What I'm thinking of is this - would it be possible, without modifying the lens itself, to use

an external lens attatched to the camera lens to convert a non-retrofocus design to a

retrofocus design? Functionally the opposite of a screw-on closeup filter.

 

So, what say you, optics geeks? In practical terms, my application of something like this

would be to adapt ultra-speed scientific and special-purpose lenses for use on a dSLR.

If it's the threads, just be careful and keep some small needle-nose pliers on hand. If it's

the slot in the head screw, there are special files made specifically for cutting new slots in

stripped screws. Once you've got a bad screw out, sometimes the best option after that

for re-assembly is to get a new screw and tap the hole if necessary.

So.....I'm guessing this means that as far as anyone here knows, such a filter does not

actually exist. Vignettes, lomos, long hoods, etc are all well and good but do not

accomplish what I am looking for. Using a technical pen on an old UV filter is closer, as it

would reduce exposure towards the edges of the frame to any extent I wanted, really, but

it also adds the factor of diffusion, which I do not want. Exposure reduction yes, anything

else, no. No black edges or cut-off corners, no diffusion. Such a thing would be pretty

easy for a filter manufacturer to make, but at this point I'm guessing that nobody actually

makes it.

This is a "does it exist" question more than anything else. I'm thinking of a filter that is

the functional opposite of the type of center filter used on wide angle lenses for large

format cameras to correct for light fall-off. Center filters are darkest in the center and

graduate to clear on the outer edge and help even out exposure across the film. This filter

would do the opposite. That is, the filter I'm thinking of would actually

induce light fall-off towards the edges of the frame while leaving the center portion

unaffected. So

yeah....does it exist?

Well Mr Stone, I think you'll generally find that if you compare two 50mm lenses of the

same vintage and manufacturer, one of an f/1.4 maximum aperture and one of an f/1.8

maximum aperture, the slower lens will generally be sharper wide open as well as have

less falloff, distortion, etc. I have seen test results many times over that have come to this

conclusion. It is not absolute, of course, but tends to generally hold true. I've seen test

results of contemporary Nikon AF, AIS, AI, Canon MF and AF lenses, Leica RF lenses, etc

and this is how it generally works out. It's just harder and more expensive to make a

faster lens with the same sharpness, etc as a slower lens.

 

I don't know what kind of axe you've got, but please refrain from using me as your

grindstone.

Any chance there's a place you can go and handle both lenses? I don't think either will let

you down in performance, and if your OK with manual focus I see no reason not to go with

the AIS.

 

As for Bjørn Rørslet, I still say make up your mind for yourself. The 50/1.8 is sharper wide

open than the 50/1.4. People say it's the better lens. But you know what I shoot with? All

the time? Wide open? The 50/1.2. It's all about what works for you.

Virtue: it does everything and lasts forever

 

Fault: it makes a way funky martini

 

I'm sorry, I couldn't resist...but it really is a solid developer...

Well, that's the kind of contrast I like, so they look pretty good to me. If it's too punchy for

your taste, you might try just lessening the agitation a little or knocking a little time off

the development.

I wouldn't. It's that simple. :)

I've bought a lot from them. I've had a problem or two with a couple items, but the VAST

majority of stuff I've gotten from them has been better than expected. I usually buy

camera bodies and accessories in bargain condition and lenses in as good a condition as I

can afford - always Ex or better. Very easy to order stuff online form them - something I

really like since I tend to make equipment buying purchase late at night...which, for the

record, can be a little risky since sometimes you're judgement isn't at its peak at that sort

of hour. But that's a whole different thread...

I think it was about 70 degrees Fahrenheit.