glenn_mabbutt

<p>Keep in mind that KEH isn't field-testing the products - they do seem to have fairly knowledgable staff who basically check the products out, but it seems not all are experts at all equipment, and if anything at all is questionable or unknown, it seems to get a BGN rating. So, sometimes you can get some really good deals on things marked BGN with only cosmetic wear/damage. But, you do take the chance of a significant defect, and as already mentioned, you can return it but you have to eat the shipping costs.</p>

<p>Tony - I stand corrected, I had forgotten about that as I haven't seen that brand around locally. The speculation is, though, that it's rebranded Kodacolor, which is Kodak's older emulsion.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Kodak is in the rebranding game through Freestyle. The Arista Premium 100 and 400 are Plus-X and Tri-X respectively.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>True, and as I mentioned up-thread it's being speculated that currently distributed Agfa CT Precisa slide film is actually rebranded Elitechrome, but so far Kodak's colour neg hasn't shown up anywhere as rebranded, which is what I meant by them not being in the game (as that's what usually shows up as "drugstore brand" film). Sorry for the imprecision.</p>

<p>Because there are so few manufacturers, you can get a pretty good idea from the country of origin. For colour film, "Made in Japan" is Fuji, "Made in Italy" or "Made in EU" is Ferrania, and if Kodak gets into the rebranding game, "Made in the US" would be them, but I'm fairly certain they don't do that at this point.</p>

<p>Nice find. KEH also has a Retina IIIc (small c) labeled "inoperative" for US$49. Given what these go for in working order, I'm tempted, but from what I've read apparently it's tricky to replace their gears (if that's the problem with it). If anyone is mechanically inclined, I'd say go for it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>re: Agfa's demise - there's a decent summary <a href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=85737">here</a> (you have to dig through the thread a bit), but the long and the short of it as I see it:</p>

<p>- when the writing was close to being on the wall, they split the company into a holding company and a bunch of subsidiaries for legal reasons</p>

<p>- a few of those subsidiaries went bankrupt, including the consumer film division(s)</p>

<p>- prior to going bankrupt, the consumer film division created a whole bunch of master rolls of film (particularly the APX b&w films) that they knew they couldn't sell before bankruptcy, but knew that these would be frozen, ultimately sold, cut and redistributed by others so the films would live on</p>

<p>- the Agfa holding company licensed the names and trademarks "AgfaPhoto" and "APX" and other film names to a new company called "Lupus Imaging". Lupus also bought some of the remaining master rolls. They are now selling AgfaPhoto branded films, using Ferrania's equipment to cut down the rolls and package and resell them. Rumour has it they are out of the original Agfa colour neg and slide, so the current colour neg is actually Ferrania's (same as "Solaris"), and the slide is possibly rebranded Kodak Elitechrome.</p>

<p>- Maco also bought some of the APX master rolls and resell them as "Rollei Retro" 100 and 400.</p>

<p>- at least 1 of the consumer division's film coating machines was bought by a new company made up of former Agfa engineers called "InovisCoat", who I believe are currently coating some photo paper for Maco, and hope to resurrect new batches of classic APX (or as close to it as they can)</p>

<p>So, that's my best summary of the situation :) Also, apparently the Belgian Agfa plant is still going strong - surveillance film and the like.</p>

<p>Others know more about this than I do, but that's my take when I tried to make sense of it all.</p>

<p>The only ones I'm familiar with that don't have distributors in North America are the mainland Chinese films - Lucky, ERA, Shanghai. These are available from eBay from various sellers in Hong Kong and Taiwan, usually pretty reasonably. </p>

<p>I know that Fuji has a few films that are only sold in Japan - Natura 1600, Industrial 100 and 400, Fujichrome Trebi, and others. You can still get them from <a href="http://www.japanexposures.com/shop/index.php?cPath=24">Japan Exposures</a>, but, of course, shipping is a factor.</p>

<p>I would like to try the Natura 1600 at some point - supposedly a very nice high-speed colour film, which is unusual.</p>

<p>I'm not an expert on this, but from what I've read the late Garry Winogrand often developed his exposed Tri-X a year or more after shooting. It's not 100% known what speed(s) he rated it, but given how fast he moved and his comments about shooting at f/8 or f/11 it sounds like he was frequently rating the film around ISO 1000.</p>

<p>So, I guess my point is developing later *can* work for some films, at least in theory.</p>

<p>I'm Canadian, although not a lawyer. I looked at similar questions a while back. Research for yourself, but what I found was:</p>

<ul>

<li>you generally have the right to take pictures of people and things on public property, except of military/gov't secret locations</li>

<li>publishing what you take pictures of is another matter - for example, several provinces have passed fairly strict "privacy" laws that prevent publishing someone identifiably (eg, their face) without their prior explicit consent, regardless of where the photo was taken. In Quebec, this was even applied to someone who appeared in a photograph of a crowd in a public place.</li>

</ul>

<p>I believe that there is some language in the Youth Criminal Justice Act about not "identifying" youths arrested/charged under that act, which is why news footage frequently has their faces pixellated if they show them at all. So, I would imagine you wouldn't be able to publish those photos anywhere anyway.</p>

<p>Just to chime in on #4, I've found Rodinal 1+200, room temp, agitate for 30 sec. initially (about 5 slow "torus"-pattern inversions), then leave alone for remainder of 2 hrs. works for all films at all speeds I've tried so far in 35mm and 120 - Tri-X, Plus-X, HP5+, FP4+, Delta 3200, various Foma, and probably others I've played with (also pushed/pulled Tri-X). For me, it's become my standard, because it doesn't matter what film or speed I'm developing, because it's being developed to completion.</p>

<p>I don't doubt Peter's observation that it doesn't work well with "low key" shots for himself, but I've tried it a few times (primarily Plus-X and Tri-X) and I think they look just fine :) Your mileage may vary...</p>

<p>I bought a 110 that was converted for me to use 120 film (makes 6x12 negs). I don't use it that much as you have to count turns of the film advance knob, which I tend to lose my place :( But if I really concentrate it makes great negs. If I did it again, I'd consider a 4x5 conversion or one that enables me to use Fuji instant packfilm.</p>

<p>As for value - I'd say in it's unconverted state (as mentioned, the film it was designed for is obsolete and no longer available fresh), in perfect working order including shutter speeds and rangefinder calibration it's worth about US$50-100, depending on if someone is looking for one, of course :) The close-up kit is fairly common - maybe $10-20. The Wink Light is basically a weak flash - but it uses a long-obsolete 45V battery. If you do some searching there may be a way to use something like 5 x 9V batteries in series if you wanted to (and the bulb in it is still good).</p>

<p>So, yes, you got somewhat of a deal, but it's not really practical to use in it's current unconverted state.</p>

 

<p>Just curious, a local studio photographer is retiring and is selling his "Nue-View 4x5 with Ektar 137mm lens", I believe with at least a couple of film holders.</p>

<p>I am not an LF guy, but I am curious about moving up. However, I have no idea what this setup is really worth. I have tried searching here and generally via Google, and current and completed auctions on eBay, but I'm coming up empty.</p>

<p>Any ideas of a rough current market value? His studio has been around since the 1960's, with at least 1 fire in the early 1970's, so I'm not sure exactly how old this camera is...</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>It definitely varies by chain and store. My local Walmart scratches my negs heavily and the "techs" don't wear gloves, however, the local Costco gives me clean negs and they all wear gloves (35mm C-41 only, though). They have a Noritsu that I'm pretty sure is still wet-process, but I believe the negatives are scanned before printing. They print on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, which I quite like.</p>

<p>The only time Costco messed up noticably was when I was in a hurry and dropped off a roll of Portra VC, the scans of which came back muted (eg, someone hit the button for "Portra NC" colour correction instead). Turned out OK in the end, though.</p>

<p>So, the moral of the story is keep checking around and hopefully you'll find a chain where they actually care about the product instead of hiring the cheapest labour possible. </p>

<p>For general JenaZoom info see <a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00PHCD">this post</a> (look for info by "Rob H"). </p>

<p>As they have cult status in some circles for zoom lenses I went looking for any in K-mount a little while ago - they seem to be pretty rare, unfortunately, so I gave up.</p>

<p>My flea market find for the day was a Tokina Tele-Auto 135mm f/2.8 lens in M42 mount. Great shape, aperture works, no scratches for CDN$35.</p>

<p>I can't find any info on this lens - anyone here have any experience with it (love it, hate it, strengths, weaknesses, etc)? (There is some info/opinions on the Tokina 135mm version that says "RMC", but mine does not have that marking at all, and says "Tele-Auto" instead, apparently.)</p>

<p>I love mine in M42 - in fact I have 2, an earlier and a later model (I haven't calculated the precise date based on serial no, mostly because it's irrelevant to me).</p>

<p>I think the Helios is a different lens formulation completely (the J-9 being a Sonnar clone) and by reputation is sharper.</p>

<p>I use my J-9s regularly for people shots (just for my own amusement/practice) with good results. The coating on the earlier model isn't the greatest, which results in increased flare in certain lighting conditions (and without a hood), which in turn can lead to muted "pastel"-like colour renditions. I usually shoot B&W with that one, but tried colour on a whim recently with side window light - interesting pastel-like effect on flowers. Probably less flattering on people :p My newer J-9 seems to be fine with colour renditions.</p>

<p>That said, I really haven't used any other brands of 85-90mm lenses, mostly because the price of the J-9 is so good especially in comparison, and I like the way my Bessaflex and Spotmatic F handle in general.</p>

<p>Also, there is some speculation that the J-9s in some mounts are more susceptible to people trying to fix them incorrectly (the LTM version in particular), but I haven't had any trouble in M42.</p>

<p>The collapsible FED-50/Industar-22 is fun, mostly because it's a functional lens in such a compact package.</p>

<p>Diddo the M42-mount Industar 50-2. I picked one up online for $20 - I actually wanted the above-mentioned Pentax 40mm pancake, but considering the I-50 is 1/5 (or less) of the price and I already had a M42-K-mount adapter, it was a no-brainer (although I lose the auto-aperture).</p>

<p>The Apotar on my Isolette III folder is nice as well, although I believe it's a 3-element lens instead of the Tessar's usual 4-element.</p>

<p>Earlier this year at my local camera club the local Nikon rep said "nigh-kon", but the official company product video clips he played said "nee-kon", so I assume it's officially the latter.</p>

<p>"Pentax" is just so much easier :p</p>

<p>Actually, according to: <a href="http://www.konarka.com/index.php/site/press/konarka_opens_worlds_largest_roll_to_roll_thin_film_solar_manufacturing_fac">http://www.konarka.com/index.php/site/press/konarka_opens_worlds_largest_roll_to_roll_thin_film_solar_manufacturing_fac</a> (sorry, having trouble inserting a link), a new company has already converted Polaroid's equipment to produce flexible-film solar panels.</p>

<p>This means production of films has already stopped.</p>

<p>If you don't have a yellow square at all in the center of the viewfinder, then yes, it seems something is broken inside the mechanism, which may be expensive and/or awkward to repair (and with the something floating comment, it might just be dead). Try looking directly in a bright light - is it there at all? If it's just faint the rangefinder window might just be dirty...</p>

<p>I was planning on doing some shooting with a Jupiter-9 on a Zorki 4k, with a light red filter and Pan F+, with flash. However, as I was testing the setup the flash sync on the Zorki just died. Completely. Tested with 2 different flash units. Grrrrr!<br>

<br /><br />So, plan B, I've done some shooting with a J-9 in M42 mount on a Spotmatic F with a light red filter, Pan F+, and flash. I didn't really want to do this as focussing in dim room light is a challenge through the filter, but it was actually a bit easier on the Spotmatic than my previous attempts with a Bessaflex (different focussing screen, maybe?).<br>

<br />I'm almost done 1 roll, then I'm looking forward to developing :)<br>

<br />I might pull out the Mamiya C330 for New Year's as well - it's become a joke amongst my friends on which "exotic" camera I'll show up with :)</p>

<p>A quick search for "x-ray 35mm camera" turned up <a title="this reference" href="http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/collection/database/?irn=151454">this</a> - no pic, but a mention that it attaches to the X-ray machine itself somehow. </p>

<p>Interesting to think at some point someone was interested in 35mm X-ray pics - most body x-rays these days are 8x10 or larger. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>He-he that is not just a camera, that is a status simbol. Just screw in Industar 50 (7 roubles in 1983 or $1.25 black market value) and impress few chosen ones. Seriously I am not going for that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I've used an Industar-50-2 on my Bessaflex - what are you suggesting? :p</p>

<p>Interesting to know the Bessaflex has actually appreciated in value - probably the only one of my cameras to do so :) I like it, primarily for the bright viewfinder and I really like its ergonomics - it just feels right in my hands. However, I have trouble reading the LED meter properly and have a tendency to underexpose with it (might be just me, though), so I end up using it for Sunny 16 and/or shooting with a flash bracket attached.</p>

<p>Also a while back a friend sold me his Spotmatic F at a reasonable price, which I've just had CLA'd - I haven't put any film through it, but I also like its ergonomics. Good to know about the Helios getting stuck on it, though.</p>

<p>So, yes, I do like my Bessaflex, and although it's now out of production it's probably the most recently produced M42 camera, so in theory they shouldn't need CLAs quite yet and new factory parts should be readily available (haven't tested that yet). However, as others have mentioned M42 has been around long enough that there are numerous cameras that will work just fine.</p>

 

<p>Not sure which book you're referring to, but this was confusing me, too, so I took a local lighting course this fall.</p>

<p>To clarify: High key = low contrast ratio between light sources, eg, little difference in the power settings on your lights (so portrait is "bright" with minimal shadows). Low key = high contrast ratio between light sources, eg, large differences in the power settings on your lights (such as "film noir"-style).</p>

<p>In general, "key" light is the main light, so it should be the brightest.</p>

<p>I'm generalising, but that the gist of it. </p>

 

<p>I was just given a nice "focus free" Bell & Howell 706 Auto Flash 30mm lens camera.<br>

<br />There's not much to it, but as I can't find much info on it, I'm just wondering if anyone knows what the settings on it (roughly) are - minimum focus distance, aperture, shutter speed, etc.<br>

<br />Thanks!</p>