g_lindzey

I hate this new site

sorry messed up my replay. This is normal behavior.

<p>Thanks for all of the responses. </p>

<p>I have always tended to buy the fastest lenses I could (given avaiabiity and affordability) for a given focal length and camera. This was partially based on the ease of focusing a 35mm SLR film camera with a fast lens over a slow lens.<br> I am currently thinking of moving to a mirrorless system camera (specifically the fuji x-t2) and I started wondering if the electronic viewfinder was brighter with faster lenses or if the electronics compensated for slower lenses so that the image remained the same brightness. Does anyone know if there is a difference in brightness in the evf for different speed lenses?</p> <p>thanks</p>

<p>In terms of the firewire issue. There are a couple of options. 1. some of the older laptops had a pci-e slot and there are pci-e firewire cards. Alternatively there are thunderbolt to firewire adapters and a number of lapstops now have thunderbolt ports. I know of any current laptops that have either firewire or pci-e card slots, but there may be some.</p> <p> </p>

<p>In order to attach a lens to a hasselblad, both the lens and the body must be wound.<br> 1. Make sure the body is wound.<br> 2. If the lens is not wound then use a coin, screw driver to manually cock the lens.<br> On the end of the lens that attaches to the camera there is should be a red arrow around the cocking lever indicating which direction to turn it.<br> Turn it (clockwise I believe) until the slot points to the little red dot. Then the shutter will be cocked.</p> <p> </p>

<p>From trip to Iceland</p> <div></div>

<p>and finally</p><div></div>

<p>another from iceland at Hverir near Myvatn</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>All from Iceland, using hasselblad</p><div></div>

<p>North Canyon in Grand Canyon hasselblad 50mm</p><div></div>

<p>Here is an image that should show up the red tint problem better.<br /> It does not seem to be the same on every image.<br /> I don't see anything on the negative.</p><div></div>

<p>I am scanning some portra 800 film and I have noticed two strange characteristics of the scans.<br> These were taken with a Hasselblad so the film travels vertically through the back.<br> 1. There seems to be a red tint on the top of the frame.<br> 2. On both the left and the right there is something outside the frame border that appears to be part of the picture.<br> see attached (i hope) image.<br> I am worried that this scanner may need repair and wondering if there is anyone who repairs these since Nikon stopped selling them some years ago.</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>Send it back and wait until you can buy a complete camera. Short of that you cannot be sure a camera is working.</p>

<p>Were these flash pictures? If so what was the shutter speed you used?</p>

<p>I believe the shutter release button has a little lever on it that is used to hold the shutter open for long exposures. Perhaps that has been rotated thus preventing the rear curtain from closing. I think this would actually prevent you from winding the film and releasing the lens. Although I am not sure about the dark slide business.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>Would it be sacrilege to suggest the parents find another church where photography is permitted?</p>

<p>The mirror in the 503cx is the older non-gliding mirror. The path the light takes with a long lens such as the 250mm sonar is such that some of the light misses the mirror and is cut off in the viewfinder but not on the film plane. I am sure someone on the site can offer a full explanation of the physics. All I can tell you is that this is not something broken in your camera. The 503cw has the newer gliding mirror and does not cause vignetting. I believe you will also see vignetting if you use some of macro equipment with this camera. I am certain that there are a lot of posts on the medium format forum relating to this issue. Probably one of them has a full explanation of the phenomenon.</p>

<p>Thank you that is exactly correct. There are two solutions. It now makes perfect sense.</p>

<p>Looking at the massive development chart I noticed some dilutions noted as 1+1+8.<br> And while a dilution of 1+1 is clear the meaning of the +8 eludes me.<br> So I am hoping someone here can enlighten me.<br> Also if anyone has experience with FX-1 developer with Pan F+ 120, I would love some suggestions on development time to begin my testing with.<br> Thanks and yes I did do a search for this but might have missed something.</p>

<p>I second Mr Cox on the all mechanical aspect. There are 1950's Hasselblads and Leicas that still work perfectly today, and will continue to work long after our auto everything cameras have landed in the landfill.<br> I would in addition suggest that medium format is really not the best format for hand holding. In my opinion my medium format pictures are much better than either my 35mm pictures or my digital pictures were/are. The reason isn't the camera all of my cameras are a lot better than I am. The reason is that when I am using my medium format camera I use a tripod, meter carefully, compose carefully, use the prerelease, and then fire the shutter with a cable release.<br> Just the time required to set this up and go through the mechanical aspects of this process have me thinking about the picture.</p>

<p>Let us know how you like the pictures the m9 takes in 50 years compared to the pictures an m3 will be taking in 50 years.<br> I only say this because I have a 50 year old Nikon F that has never had any issues and still works perfectly. The same for my 30 year old Hasselblad. However I have gone through a number of modern autofocus, and digital cameras during this same time. Granted none of them have been Leicas, and moisture (in small amounts) and dust (in large amounts) destroyed them.<br> In addition there is something about a purely mechanical camera the attracts me. I still look longingly at Leica M3 adds.</p>

<p>If you are sitting there with only a body you need to get a back, any back, and a lens and get to taking pictures. You might find out you really like it and decide to spend the kids college education on other lenses, backs, and accessories. Or you might decide you hate it.<br> You can get a24 backs in black from B&H for about 50 bucks.<br> If you look have a lot of patience and look you can find black a12 backs on the auction site for reasonable prices. You will also see highway robbers trying to get over 1000 dollars for a black a12 back. Resist, look at the sold listings to see what people have been paying. Making do with a chrome back or a really cheap a24 back now might save you a lot of money in the future by letting you be picky and choosey in the future.<br> Black a12 backs have sold for 100 dollars at auction recently. Have you decided on a lens?<br> It is really sad that KEH has such a low inventory. I am guessing that everyone is selling direct via auction sites, or people are buying very decent price KEH puts up to turn around and sell it at auction for a profit.<br> You might also check craigslist.<br> I did not look closely at the backs I saw barely noticed them as I was only dropping off film.<br> I have to go back monday and I will try to take a closer look check if they are matching. They were 99 dollars each not 2 for 99 and it is even possible I misread th tag.</p> <p> </p>