k5083

Thorir, I have done what you are talking about, basically the way you did it.

 

 

My reason was that when scanning software does the conversion, it applies some kind of color balance to the photo

that destroys whatever color cast was there. This is adjustable but it always embodies some assumptions about colors

that may not be true or desired. Sometimes I want to try to get at the original color temp, like I could do if i were

scanning a slide. The theory was that by scanning as a positive and color correcting based on the unexposed red

mask, I could get a more faithful rendition of the original colors.

 

 

It does work, but 90 percent of the time it doesnt produce any different results and is just more work. When it does

work usefully is when I was motivated to take the particular photo by some special lighting conditions that scanning

software would be inclined to "correct". Usually I will try to work with the software's positive conversion first but if I just

can't seem to find the color adjustment that restores the magic I felt when I took the pic, I'll try the manual way.

<p>To be a bit more charitable, although not a large hoard, there are some nice pieces there.</p>

<p>But Bueh is right, they don't count until you've shot film with each of them and posted the scans here for us to enjoy.</p>

<p>I'm aware of the AS-1 for flash and they are actually easy to get cheap, but I'm in no hurry. They interfere with the rewind crank. For flash I'd be inclined to go with a bracket grip or an off-camera setup using the PC terminal. But auto flash is one of the areas where photography has come a long way since 1976 anyway, so I just don't see flashing with this camera much.</p>

<p>The waist level finder is something I will pick up soon because I do like to get down low for some shots and I use these a fair amount on all of my cameras that have them (Exakta, Miranda, etc.). I have not actually removed the DP-1 from this camera yet. It doesn't pop right off when I work the releases, although I can see that the release mechanism is working fine. I suppose that with the finder and its rubber gasket having likely been on the camera undisturbed for 35 years, it may take a little persuasion to get it to unstick.</p>

<p>Got to get some more Nikkors too. Somehow I feel like it insults this camera to put third-party lenses on it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>My vote would be that the alarm clocks are cool. I assume the clock parts are sold wholesale to people who then stick them into junk of all kinds, and many of us have the skill set to do the surgery ourselves. I have a couple of candidates for it right here; not just cameras but lenses. If it upsets you to see Brownies repurposed in this way, what about putting a clock in an old broken Quantaray 80-200 zoom lens or something? Surely the world would not be greatly hurt by recycling such an item.</p>

<p>I have made shutter speed and ASA dials into lapel pins. Good conversation starters.</p>

<p>The seat belt camera straps are intriguing but too expensive. </p>

<p>Rather than the Electro 35, consider a Yashica Lynx 5000. They have a cds meter, manual controls, a 1.8 lens, terrific optics and shutter, and are not driven to nutty prices by collectors like the ones with 1.4 lenses. They also don't have the characteristic "pad of death" failure of the Electros although they often have dead meters.</p>

<p>Ebay tactics and ripoff/bargains aside -- not that these aren't fun, and I enjoyed the comments and stories -- I'm just starting to get to know this camera and am not sure how I feel about it yet.</p>

<p>This is my first single-digit Nikon. My only other Nikon from this era is an FM, and the philosophical connection is clear. This is also my first "professional" 35mm camera although I do own RB67s, and the F2 in some ways feels more similar to them than to a lot of other 35mm SLRs. </p>

<p>I'm just looking into the many discussions of the pros and cons of different F2 finders and of F2 vs. F1 or F3. The strength of some people's allegiance to one or the other is amusing. </p>

<p>I find the metering prism and its connections ingenious, but troublesome. The meter is maddeningly imprecise, and I can't estimate how many stops off center the needle is. If I want to overexpose 1 stop, I have to find the perfect exposure and then move the ring one click, unlike, say, the SRT where I've learned to estimate the compensation from the needle position without having to do that. From what I've heard about the LED finders, I'm not sure I'd love them either. Metering feels like an afterthought in the design of this camera.</p>

<p>That would be my only real complaint. The wind stroke and trigger feel are excellent. The 100% view makes a surprising difference with wide lenses. I don't much care that there's no flash shoe; I've got 50 other cameras that I can use cheesy on-camera flash with if I want to. </p>

<p>A lot of its most impressive and important features will be wasted on me. I'm a thoroughgoing amateur who pampers cameras, so I don't really need legendary ruggedness. I will not be using this as a system camera with motor drives and mega film backs. I tend to see this as a camera that I will use on those pleasant occasions when the experience of going out taking pictures, which includes using a fine machine, is as important or (heresy!) more so than the photos themselves. Sort of like keeping a Porsche in your garage to go get groceries with on fine summer days, not necessarily at the nearest or most convenient market. </p>

<p>I am frequently informed by someone whom I am contractually obligated to love, honor and obey that ebay is nothing but a trap where people sell junk they don't need, to suckers who don't realize they also don't need it. There's nothing good available there, and certainly no bargains.</p>

<p>And maybe she has a point. I mean, who would pay forty dollars for an old piece of junk like this?<br>

<img src="http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/Camera%20Tests/Camera1.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Well, as it turns out, no one would. Not even ebay suckers last week were foolish enough to do that.</p>

<p>Except me. I would even have been foolish enough to pay a little more than $40 for it, but did not have to. My fellow bidders let me have it for $38.88.</p>

<p>This seller did everything he could to help me get a good price on this. He listed it in the "digital cameras" category and titled it simply "Nikon 35mm camera." He timed the auction to close during business hours across the US, on a weekday. His description in its entirety was "This Nikon Camera model is unknown. It came with a lot of other surplus items. I have NO knowledge about this camera. It is being sold AS-IS. NO TESTING WAS COMPLETED."</p>

<p>Still, the decently clear pictures showed that the item was a 1976 vintage F2 with DP-1 finder in pretty nice external condition, with just some trivial brassing on the corners and sticker residue. I vaguely recalled reading somewhere that Nikons starting with F and having a single digit number are considered pretty good cameras, so made a bet on this piece of junk.</p>

<p>I anxiously awaited the arrival of the camera; would the inside look like the outside? Not exactly. Apart from some crumbling foam, it was a lot better, close to pristine. Everything worked, felt tight and right. New batteries woke up the meter, which seemed a bit erratic at first but then settled down. After replacing the foam and removing the sticker crud, there wasn't much to do except go take some pictures.</p>

<p><img src="http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/Camera%20Tests/Camera2.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I walked it to the train station this morning with my favorite Nikkor, a 20mm f/3.5, and let my friends play with it on the train to work. With the way it looked and felt, I would have been surprised if the test roll had turned up any problems, other than from my foam job. There were no problems.</p>

<p><img src="http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/Camera%20Tests/Church1700x.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>And the piece of junk does turn out to be a pretty good camera. Not my prettiest, most sensually satisfying, or most ergonomic camera, but possibly my most confidence inspiring. You push the button on this thing and know you nailed it. If this camera had an LCD on the back for chimping, it would just show the message, "What, weren't you looking through the viewfinder? Of course I got the picture, what do you take me for?" You can feel the comfort it would have given to the 70s photojournalist who had to nail the shot before the term "do-over" was coined. And of course nowadays it has a certain retro chic going for it, like so much 1970s junk does.</p>

<p><img src="http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/Camera%20Tests/Church2700x.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/Camera%20Tests/Pond1700x.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m12/k5083/Camera%20Tests/NYC1700x.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I haven't told my spouse about this acquisition yet, because I just hate being teased about being ripped off yet again. When will I ever learn?</p>

 

<p><em>August,</em><br>

<em>I didn't know there were other cameras that used 616 film! Is there a list somewhere? I'd love to investigate other possible conversions.</em><br>

Here are my two past posts on the subject. The first contains a link to a still older post by Peter Lerro that laid out the spool conversion in detail.<br>

<a href="00RMsy">Ikomat 520/15 616 to 120 film conversion</a><br>

<a href="00RyzI">Kodak Vigilant Six-16</a><br>

You'll find a lot of them with 3-element lenses that won't do justice to the big frame size. Like Chauncy says, you can learn which Kodaks had the good lenses. My Vigilant has the Anastigmat Special, same as the Monitors.</p>

 

<p>Snake chains. Why did it have to be snake chains?</p>

 

<p>How do you switch between 6 and 4.5cm formats with that thing? </p>

<p>You didn't need photos of the camera; just saying "Contax G1" makes it camera porn already.</p>

<p>Did you notice in "I got caught" the visual echo of the guy looking at you in with the guy pictured in the advertising poster just to his right? That happy accident results in a really good photo, almost with a Cartier-Bresson quality.</p>

 

<p>I'm with JDM. Those chip adapters are bad news. Too bad they are even necessary. Nikons and Pentaxes will focus confirm with any old thing up front.</p>

<p>I don't have an A2E, but am surprised it won't mirror without a chip. My Elan, 10S, and even lowly Rebel S will meter and shoot in Av with unchipped M42 adapters.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well done all around. I've done the 616 to 120 conversion with a Zeiss Ikomat and a Kodak Vigilant and, like you, I use a cheap old epson scanner (mine's a 4180) with the stock 6x12-ish neg holder. The most difficult thing about the conversion is finding subject matter worthy of all that film area when you're ready to go shooting! </p>

 

<p>Wow! That camera looks like it should be carrying an unconscious girl back to a mad scientist's laboratory. Who would have thought that the monster could produce such delicate images.</p>

 

<p>Congratulations! You have done what I am sure not even the models on the catalog cover, with their surprisingly un-Socialistic facial expressions of consumer lust, would have aspired to.</p>

 

<p>I have a Minolta Freedom Zoom Supreme EX that I like. In some markets I think it was called a Riva 125 EX. It takes nice pics but also has an almost ridiculous array of extra features: choice of average or spot metering, wireless remote control, and some useless features like in-frame date imprinting and panorama mode. The lens is a quite decent 39-125 f3.6 and the flash exposures have always been right on. It's a good birthday party camera.</p>

 

<p>I want to get exactly this type of camera, a decent quality pack film one, to show my kids what instant photography really means.</p>

<p>They have already learned from waiting for their dad to get around to uploading, correcting, adjusting, and printing photos that there is absolutely nothing instant about digital photography.</p>

<p>I sometimes use a Polaroid back on my RB67 but that's a bit much for the playground. Something like this might be perfect. Are there other options to consider?</p>

 

<p>Nice post JDM.</p>

<p>I think everybody with an interest in "classic modern" cameras owes it to himself to try out one of these.</p>

<p>Many of us remember what a game changer this camera was when it was first introduced. If you were buying a serious SLR at that time, you really had to consider seriously whether this autofocus bandwagon was something you wanted to jump onto or was just a passing fad.</p>

<p>I'm still betting that it's a fad. But the cameras are cheap enough now that I can hedge my bet and buy some AFs to use for appropriate occasions.</p>

<p>My own is a 5000 which I use with a Minolta 28-80mm 3.5-5.6, a Quantaray 100-300mm 4.5-6.7 LDO, and a Vivitar Series-1 19-35mm 3.5-4.5, and an 1800AF dedicated flash. And I really do use it. Never mind comparing it to other cameras; the gear gets the job done and has a few clever features. I don't even mind too much that it is styled like a 1985 Honda Prelude.</p>

 

<p>Wow. </p>

<p>JDM's snuff comment cracked me up, and makes me feel weird about saying this, but this stuff has got me thinking. Especially the links Antonio posted.</p>

<p>We all have at least several old cameras that are candidates for this, don't we? And it certainly would make a statement about your hobby to have one of these on your wall.</p>

<p>What I admire is the dedication in dissecting them to that degree. Experience teaches that there are some screws or assemblies that are not going to succumb quietly. I notice that some, in the links Antonio has posted, have cheated in some instances by leaving some assemblies intact; see e.g. Mr. Scocco's Canon A-1 at the bottom of the page at the first link.</p>

 

<p>I like #2 because you can see the right of way and the hills and sky provide orientation. I think I might like #1 if you had let in more of the environment at the top. It appears that the contrast between this derelict structure which nobody much notices or cares about, and the surrounding housing subdivision would combine in a way that is jarring, in a good sense. Even in California, though to a lesser degree than in eastern America, less still than Europe and vastly less than most of Asia and the mideast, we tread on the past daily while paying it so little heed.</p>

 

<p>I like #2 because you can see the right of way and the hills and sky provide orientation. I think I might like #1 if you had let in more of the environment at the top. It appears that the contrast between this derelict structure which nobody much notices or cares about, and the surrounding housing subdivision would combine in a way that is jarring, in a good sense. Even in California, though to a lesser degree than in eastern America, less still than Europe and vastly less than most of Asia and the mideast, we tread on the past daily while paying it so little heed.</p>

 

<p>When I opened your thread I was thinking that by abused you just meant used hard and showing it. That, I never feel sorry about. Cameras are meant to be rode hard and put away wet, and in a way I feel sorry for ones that still look pristine after 30 years.</p>

<p>But it turned out you meant desecration and neglect, which, I agree, is offensive.</p>

<p>I will disagree about your characterization of the XE5 as not looking good to begin with. It's a nicely proportioned body and while Minolta's decision to mix the black prism with the silver covers was unusual, I've never disliked it.</p>

<p>It's great that you got the camera working. Maybe with a little exercise the meter will become accurate again. If it does, you could consider some more refined restoration of the engraving, with some JB Weld and touch-up paint. Maybe even repaint it black if that suits your taste better.</p>

 

<p>Louis, it's a coincidence that you chose your XR-7 for posting in this thread. I just acquired this, my first K-mount camera. Gave it a foam job and am half way through the test roll. Nice camera!</p>

<div></div>

<p>These seem to have been accumulating lately. The N6006, N8008, N60, N70, and N90 are soon to be joined by a really pristine F-801x.</p>

<p>To give the modern film cam forum the sensibility that we all enjoy in the classic manual cam forum so much, we should be posting historical-type reviews of our cameras there, like JDM has been doing. I'll be doing so as soon as the weather permits me to get some more shooting in.</p><div></div>

<p>This is very unlikely to help you, but when something like this happened to my FM, I discovered that I could complete the wind and fire cycle if I wound while holding in the DOF preview lever. Don't know why it worked, but it did. FWIW.</p>