bohdan_pryszlak

In addition to the above, double check that the film pressure plate is correctly set to 120 and not 220 (that'll screw up

your frame spacing for sure). If I recall, you push down and rotate it 180 degrees. And finally, the thickness of the

take-up spool can cause overlapping problems. Look at the one onto which you wound the film during your shoot. If

it's an oddball then you can get overlap as well. If none of this works for you then it needs servicing which is well

worth it in my opinion. TLR's are great MF cameras and I shot some incredibly sharp images with mine. Good luck.

I had a C330f a number of years ago. As mentioned above, frame spacing in Mamiya TLR's is not precise (like a Hasselblad for example) at the best of times. Overlapping frames is a common problem. My guess is the black sky above the Arch de Triumph is covering the bottom of the frame above it. The only remedy is to have the camera repaired. I don't recall what it cost me but it wasn't all that much.

Usually, one buys the lens first and then the appropriate boards.

I would use a product called "Waxlit" on the sliding surfaces. I have some for use in my woodworking shop to coat the fences of my router table and table saw so wood being machined can slide easier. It is commonly used as a "releasing agent" in wood working, i.e. you coat the regions you don't want any oozing glue to stick to. I also use it to lubricate old wooden drawers which slide on wooden rails. If I had your situation this would be the first product I would reach for (or some paste wax). IMHO I would avoid "stretching the spring" as it just doesn't seem sensible - it's tight so you don't get any light leaking in among other things. Definitely don't use ArmorAll or WD-40 - that will screw up your very expensive camera! Here's a link for the Waxlit:

 

http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&cat=1,43415,43440&p=32092

I hear you Marios. But don't you think the heat, sand, pollen, olive-oil or whatever will have more of an effect on a 15 year old automatic and electronic SLR than on a mechanical camera like the M3? Now if you were to have said, "Take the Nikon. They're stealing old Leicas like crazy these days - you don't need the hassle", then I might get nervous and bring the inferior camera. My question is really: "Here I am in Greece and, this being a place I don't get to often, which camera will be more of a joy to shoot and yield the better images in the end? Which one will help me enjoy my vacation more?" Thoughts or comments?

Here are my lenses: F90 - 55-70 f4.5 and 80-200 f2.8 while for the M3 I have a 35mm Summaron, 50mm Summicron, and a 90mm Elmar - all are razor sharp.

Hi everyone. I am leaning towards the Leica but the Nikon is more idiot proof. Wife

will have her digital point and shoot on the trip. Any thoughts?

Mine doesn't either. Are you holding it still? Is the battery fresh?

What the heck does "WYSIWYG" mean?

Surely somebody will make sheet film. Won't they?

"Am thinking of measuring with a depth micrometer (groundglass vs. holder with a piece of film). Is that a good way, or is there a better technique?"

This is the only way and you can quickly determine if your ground glass is at all involved with your sharpness question. I have done this with a micrometer and made the adjustments myself. See this link for the specs:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00398S

I think the biggest difference you'll see will be in your bank balance and the smile on the salesman's face. Your Caltar lenses are fine. Good technique, careful focusing and a steady tripod matters more than the upgrade you are contemplating.

I used to have that camera and noticed that if you don't have a cam slotted in then it just doesn't close. Notice what the hinged slot that receives the cam does when you pull out the cam - it springs over to one side. This is what prevents you from folding up the camera. There is no other solution but to always keep a cam loaded. My Tech V folds up with or without a cam slotted in.

Jon,

The first ebay purchase I ever made was to acquire my Pentax Digital Spotmeter (smaller than the analog, digital, but not better imho). It really let me dissect a scene with the 1 degree spot reading. And as far as people go, I put the spot on their forhead and +1 the exposure (zone 6) and "bingo"! Never missed on a single one! Scenics, of course are trickier but still, the spot meter is an awsome tool. Seriously, if ever I was starving and needed to pawn all of my gear to eat, I'd keep the spot meter!

Vlad, there are lots of ways to think it through. And sometimes, you might need a grad. But in general, here's how I use my spotmeter for colour: for people, in fairly even light, I meter the skin tone (zone 5 and then spin the dial to +1 the exposure) and end up with a pleasing value. For very fair skinned folks I may go +1.5 or even +2. This should also work if you're shooting chromes and you can do the same for skin tones. Overexposing slides is, of course, a big mistake so metering requires a careful spot reading of the most important high tones in which you want to preserve nice detail. Hence, take a spot reading of these areas and add +1.5 to no more than +2 of exposure and let the shadows fall where they do. I hope this helps somewhat. By the way, I have rarely missed an exposure since acquiring my spot meter - I'd cry if I ever lost it.

I recently started using the Manfrotto 410 with my Tech V and really like it. It is way easier to level and adjust the camera than with a ball head.

I can log on but the transitions from page to page are very, very slow.

There are some and other useful templates here downloadable as pdf's :http://www.darkroomagic.com/ It's in the LIBRARY section.

"Hopefully I will be able to sell or trade the 210mm Geronar lens and not too much extra cash for a lens in the 90-120mm range"

Dave: Reality check time. Your Geronar might fetch $175 if your lucky. A "90-120mm range" will cost at least twice that and probably more. You scored with the camera price but now it's time to take the wallet out.

As far as transporting negative to the lab, you can unload them into the light proof sleeves that photo paper comes in and take them in that way or in an empty film box (once you empty one).

I find that I can deal with the anxiety caused by my exposure to these chemicals with high doses of alcohol (ingested orally) married with the inhalation of good second hand smoke from a Cuban cigar. It makes the blacks in my fibre based prints "blacker" and the highlights seem to have a more silvery luminosity.

You are going to need some development tanks. I use the Kodak hard rubber tanks - cheap and good. You can find them on the same site you used to procure your camera.

Jeez. $140 to get into large format. Now there's a deal - almost cheaper than renting the gear. Dave, listen to Michael and stay away from the "ready loads" for now. (I've never used them and rarely do I have a dust problem). Check your bellows for light leaks and get out there and shoot the bloody thing. Let us know how things are going or if you have any problems. Here's a nice link to help you load your first films. http://www.butzi.net/articles/filmload.htm

If memory serves me, I used 063 aluminium to make a few blank boards for a Technika III at one time.

SG: I've thought about trading my 150/265 for a 150 Symmar S but I'm not sure how much of

an upgrade this would be. Doesn't sound like you're all that convinced it's any different

either. Would anyone care to suggest what is the "hands down" best 150 out there? I'd be

curious to hear some opinions. The lens test web site shows a bunch of 150's but they all

seem fairly comparable. Even the APO isn't that much sharper according to the resolution

tests. Am I right?

Here's a shot I snapped using mine at 265mm. I can't remember the f-stop but it was fairly wide open.

http://picasaweb.google.com/leicafox/Linhof150265/photo#5182514200012285698