fred_haeseker

A Yashica 635, bought new in 1969. I liked the idea of being able to use 35mm as well as 120 film.

I agree with orsetto; I managed to pick up an early Yashicamat (probably late '50s, Lumaxar lenses), in truly mint condition, for $100. No light meter of course, but I don't trust old built-in meters anyway. The earlier Yashicas are sturdier than the later ones, which used more plastic.

I've been a user of Mike's manuals for years. When I taught b&w film photo and darkroom with an artists' society students would show up with all kinds of cameras they didn't know how to use and didn't have manuals for. I downloaded what they needed and always contributed, also for myself because I like using old film cameras. Mike provides a great service and deserves to be supported..

I've found the 35/3.5 PC extremely sharp, great for quick handheld architecture shots. I use it on an FE (meter coupling released) and a Nikkormat FT3; stop-down metering on both of course. Mine looks well-used but works well.

Not to mention the swastika.

Looks like a fake. The shutter release is wrong -- the button on a Leica is smooth on top, not threaded for a cable. The collar around the button should be much shallower. It's threaded to fit a ring surrounding the button. A cable release can only be installed after the collar is removed

I've found when using old cameras with non-standard shutter speeds that setting for the next slower marked speed almost always works well -- when using negative film of course!

Hi Marc, I never miss your thread -- it takes me back to the equipment, techniques etc. that I recall from the time I first got interested in photography. The piece by Margery Lewis is terrific, much appreciated

For me, condition is way more important than age, also mechanical soundness vs. good looks.

A Mamiya 330s with 55, 80, 135 and 180mm lenses, Ilford FP4 b&w film.

I use them to protect the camera back when I don't have a rollfilm holder mounted.

I'm a member of the Rollei Club, just logged in without trouble. I don't know about the quality of newer compared to older models of the wides and teles; I'd love to have a wide-angle Rollei, but the price has held me back! A fast look at eBay shows a tele at $3298.49 CAD and a wide at $5932.07 CAD. Too rich for me! Not many of these were made, so they're very rare. If you can afford them, I wouldn't worry about older and newer versions; the main difference seems to be in the lenses. The older teles had a Zeiss Sonnar; the newer a Schneider Tele-Xenar; the older wides a Zeiss Distagon, the newer a Schneider Super-Angulon. As for me, I'm happy with the wide and tele lenses on my Mamiya C330s. Entirely different from a Rollei of course, but the lenses are just fine.

Hello Admin, Everything seems to have fixed itself. One of those digital mysteries -- it's why I use manual cameras! Thanks for your trouble.

Firefox, latest update.

Hello admins, I've consistently whitelisted Photo Net on Ad Block Plus -- as instructed -- multiple times but the site continues to display the request to do this. I have to refresh the page or even exit the site and reload it and go through the process again. Suggestions?

Hi dzung le, I too have a Mamiya C330s and was in the same position as you. The Mamiya is an excellent camera, but heavy and bulky, especially when you're carrying a few extra lenses. For $100 on the auction site I found an early Yashicamat in true mint shape, exactly like the one described by rodeo joe. The Lumaxar lens is said to be identical to the later Yashinon and certainly performs like one (I've used both). As noted above, the early Yashicamats are built with more metal and less plastic than the later ones. The Yashicamat is an exact copy of the Rolleiflex -- identical features, minus only the loading device that automatically senses where the actual film joins the backing paper, not important for me. I found the finder image brighter than the one on a Rollei of similar vintage. Of course if budget doesn't matter, go for a late Rolleiflex, the Leica of TLRs!

I have and use a 1938 IIIa with three newer lenses.

You might want to have a look at the Ciroflex section of the Graflex website: Graflex.org :: View Forum - CiroFlex Help Ciroflex TLRs at one point were either made or distributed by the Graflex company. Many knowledgeable people on this site.

I shoot b&w and like the subtle range of grays I get using MF.

I'm jealous! The photo of the Minolta SRT-202 is a wonderful classic still life.

The "Leica glow" is a myth, i.e. you can see it if you really want to see it.The 3D effect can be achieved with any lens by using a wide aperture. It's more pronounced if you use a longer-than-normal lens (shallower depth of field). Nothing against Leicas, good cameras. I use them and like them, never mind the myths, legends and other hyperboles.

The manual on Mike Butkus' site is for the Kodak Junior 1A, the Autographic model, which is otherwise the same as the same as the Junior 1. (Send Mike the $3 donation -- his site is a unique, valuable resource.) The camera takes 116 film, close to but not the same as 120; this Google page lists various ways of adapting 120 film: Google

It's been a while, and I've only used them on still cameras, but as I recall ND filters are marked according to the wider f stop they require -- i.e. an ND2 filter would call for an exposure at f/11 instead of the metered f/16. Contrast, etc. remains the same. I can't think of any factors that would apply to cinematography that wouldn't apply as well to still photography. Nothing wrong with your plan as long as you can find the right filters. Good luck!

+1. The CV 21/4 is one of my favorites.

Nice to see that way-back-when article on PC lenses. The PC-Nikkor 35/3.5 has long been one of my favorites.