riccardo_mottola

I have both cameras and they eventually perform similarly.

I think the handling of the 620 is superior, the viewfinder is better, the autofocus is better... and Canon glass is excellent.

No intention to start a Canon-Nikon war!

 

However if you use the camera in P or in shutter-priority, there is almost no difference in usage, in Aperture-priorityon the canon you use your dial, on the nikon the aperture ring.

 

What makes the difference? The glass you have! Now I have more Nikon glass and it is cheaper to find apparently, so I use the F90 more, but when I my Canon glass sufficies, I use it!

The F90 is much heavier... but takes Alkaline batteries, which last less and weigh more, but are readily available. So... it is up and down.

If you leave your Canon "on" it will eat your batteries in a couple of days, at least, mine does.

<p>I'm 29. I use manual and mechanical cameras. I love my Rolleiflexes, Leicas and the Linhof. I just love the handling, I started early and I love the feeling of having don my image. For me the image is done in the camera, not as an afterthought "what Photosop filter can I apply?". I like the feel of metal and the manual focus.<br>

Digital gives me no satisfaction, it is only convenient.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, I find so few people that think like me and are of my age. And, even more depressing, is the number of more or less serious photographers and amateurs who sold off fine medium format gear or Nikon gear just to "go digital", like it was something which makes you more hip.</p>

<p>Black Leicaflex SL Mot (without motor, of course). With summicron-R 50/2 Wetzlar on Ilford Pan-F.<br>

The film is drying and looks promising...</p>

well you know, here around most E6 labs closed down! it takes me several days just to get a 35mm or 120 roll of Fujichrome or Ektachrome processed.

I can't buy Kodachrome if not from a mail-order catalogue, at high prices and to that I should add development? No clue on how to pay either, where to ship. So I never did. I would love to. I can wait the time needed, but prices and shipment must be certain.

 

After all, a lot of people whined when original Agfa slides (not E-6) went away. Recently I have seen many examples and was astonished by their colours and grain (of course, latest examples by Agfa and Orwo, although I have seen a scan from a pre-war image which was amazing... even inf a bit faded and not retouched)

there are plenty. To my mind comes the "osservatorio fotografico", "new old camera" for the connoisseur, "fotocamera" and a couple of other places.

If you can travel up top Bergamo, there is a nice store near the hospital, Gianni Limonta. Just seeing the shop windows makes you drool.

I bought also from that seller, several times. He is imprecise, often incorrect and doesn't stay to his words. I got an unreliable Praktica that he described as "excellent". He agreed upon some "nice extras" at the next purchase, no need to add that even when remembering him that, he forgot. I got a nice folder but for the wrong format. I got an agfa (in "perfect opt condition") that was so dirty that only after cleaning I found the lens was scratched and a diaphgram blade broken. I scrapped the camera after unsuccessful repair.

 

I believe the guy has a bad character but is mainly inaccurate, posting everything together with no checks. I also dislike that he usually sells the camera bodies without the lens and you can see the lens offered separately. Even caps and straps. Sometimes not, I don't know which criterion he uses.

 

I have a fine Canonet, a fine Rollei 35XF... so if it looks fine in the picture, it usually comes fine.

 

The advantage is he lists a lot of interesting stuff sometimes, starting with low bids.If the price goes beyond my risk feeling and the photo is uncertain, I stop. He had a Sonnar, a Rolleiflex, a Contax.. I stopped bidding if the price went over a threshold, even if it was still very good.

 

I did some bid on exposure meters recently, lost them all, maybe even on yours. I'm glad I lost, but I think you may just had bad luck. Items always corresponded to the photographs for me.

I believe you referred to this:

http://carduus.chanet.de/astra/cameras/repair/miranda/index.html

 

unfortunately, I wrote little text back then and now it is too late to add from memory.

operation paperclip?

 

I guess that in any case they must be exceedlingly rare.

the scans are soo lousy you couldn't distinguish it from a better lens here, so you should get some pritns and judge.

Well, to double check: if the film shows no frame but the film marks show along the sprocket holes (manufacturer, frame number...) then it is your camera, else a bad film or developer.

You have a typical problem. I'm happy for you that you have a good camera now. But claiming something in "working and in perfect optical condition" when the whole thing was so dirty you couldn't even see and after a dismantle I discovered a scratched lens and a broken diaphgram blade. The only thing buzzing was the compur... amazingly.

I wasn't able to fix it, I threw the camera away, luckily I didn't spend much so I wasn't harsh with the feedback, but still sent a note. Also because if a seller specializes in camera he should slowly learn what he is selling. Look what the other guys sells: if it is unrelated stuff he might indeed not know anything about it, but some people have home-conducted shops!

My PIV works like a charm, while my Nova instead has a bad curtain and seems not to be extremely reliable with the mirror return, but works. The camera mechanisms are not very complex, so you can open and peek inside, but they are well studied. Quality seems good to me.

It is like a simple but well done camera. Not a complex badly made.

 

And note to Mark Hansen: My Tessar 2.8/50 Jena from the early sixties (PIV) is excellent. I compared it against Nikkors, Miranda, Leitz Elmar and Summicrons. That underrated lens is up to the Tessar name: sharp and contrasty with a good bokeh. Even at 2.8 pretty good.

David M: Yes, the only drawback is the lack of manual or at least a priority setting. Also, 800/30 ISO would be nice.

It is a tad larger that the other Rollei 35s. But the RF is a good thing, I also calibrated it.

 

I already asked on the Camera Repair Forum and got no answer...

 

There is little information about this camera on the net apparently and few people use it.

 

A scheme of the Lens formula would be nice too. 40/2.3 Sonnar.

I have that small ittle jewel. As many cameras it requires Mercury. It is also

many years old. I opened it up, but could find no where a place were to adjust

the exposure meter (a trimpot or such) and in case I would even attempt to

recalibrate it for higher voltage batteries.

There is one adjustment behind the coil instrument,but it is for zero-adjust

only and it is correct.

if you verified the Problem on several bodies you can exclude the misalignment of the mirror/ground glass. Thus I would saythe correct is the focused image, not the marked distance.

Well, I didn't comment earlier in this thread because of a simple reason: I know of no repair shop for old cameras here in Bergamo, Italy. They are building a new hospital, the old one barely 70 years old wasn't enough anymore and bet it occupied the area of a small village. At least they will retain the nice architecture...

 

But my old Miranda? My Original Fujica? My two Exaktas? They sit there broken. I cannot fix everything myself, I don't have enough time and knowledge to repair everything. Small works yes, but... shutters are complicated. Thus valuable stuff can be maybe shipped, but a shop is different. I love talking to the guy operating.

The camera is fantastic. One of the finest 35mm camera ever made! I envy yours working, one of mine has shutter troubles and the other one leaks light. It seems to me though tha tone of your picture isn't perfect either...

The quality of the lens is excellent. I wouldn't mine testing it against modern lenses. The build quality is high and I have seen recent 50mm lenses with barrel distortion which my Zeiss doesn't exhibit. The bokeh is smooth and neutral.

Most version are T-coated (*later exemplas don't have the red T because it was now standard). Sure it is not SMC, T*... so you get a bit lower contrast in some situation, but I found mine performing well at f4 or f5.6 even with backlit scenes and sparkling light on water.

 

To bad my exakta leaks light now form some place I don't know, or I would use it much much more.

 

As far as aperture: my version is some strange kind of semi-automatic: you set the aperture in a similar way to preset lenses (by pushing the aperture ring while setting it) and then you charge the mechanism with a lever. It will stop down at exposure time, but won't open again until you cock it anew. I guess it was state-of-the-art in the fifties, you can never do wrong,w hile with preset lenses you easily can leave it open!

in these "american" days, 4x5" is pretty common, but several kind of films were and are still produce in 6x9 and 9x12 plate formats. APX comes to my mind, FP4 too and Adox/Efke films too., Foma I think too.

 

Some people use a small cutter in the darkroom.

 

One problem I see, to which I don't have a solution, is the difference between plates and sheet film. Today all film is sheet film, that is some synthetic support, once it was nitrate, now it is polyester, acetate, ESTAR or PET or I don't know. ANyway something thin like 135 or 120.

Glass plates were thick. So More "modern" cameras came with some sheet film holders in which you slide the film in and then put the whole holder in the plate holder. So that it also has the correct thickness and the springs or holder tighten the sheet.

 

What to do if the sheet holders are missing? I have no idea if they are still available somewhere. They used to be in the sixti0es as "upgrades".

Another problem is then what to do if you don't have or have only few plate cassettes. Some are compatible, some are of strange kind...

 

But if you do, you can have like 4, 5 shots compact.. never have the trouble to "finish" the roll.

 

Loading and unloading needs to be done in the dark. It is not that difficult, the sheets have a marker to know which way is up.

I guess that with a 100film package and a changing back you can even change plates in a tent and have virtually unlimited supply!

 

For b/w development is easy: either done in tray like in good old times or in tanks. Easy, just unusual today.

I will try to clean it better then. The inside of the cylinder looks very clean and the piston has no marks.

 

Should it move freely without the caps? It doesn't here neither with nor without. I guess it should move even faster since it has a constant pressure on both sides.

I am trying to repair a Compound shutter which is doing always the same time.

 

With much patience and following some instruction on the net, I was able to open

it, although I needed to essentially fill it with unblocking liquid.

 

Anyway, the cause is the air cylinder: it is almost stuck. It moves very hardly

even when cleaned gently with paper and esane. The piston and the cylinder look

without scratches, immaculate. The cylinder is still shiny brass and bears no

traces of "beats".

 

Ideas?

 

The piston is asymmetrical, on one side it has a hole for a screw which doesn't

reach the center hole though.

that is luck... I go to flea markets too, but I rarely find cameras there and if, they ask like 50 euros for a broken zorki..... I have little luck there lately.

as Wayne wrote sometimes it is contacts. Sometimes the cell goes bad, but sometimes the coil of the instrument goes bad. I just attempted a repair of my polomatic and was pretty happy to be able to repair the coil, it is an extremely tricky business, most repairmen refuse to do it. Unfortunately the whole thing doesn't work reliably anyway due to the weird and unreliable "auto exposure" and regulation system before the lens. But that is another story.

Hmm, I suspect your Radionar might not be really clean? I used a radionar on 35mm on my Adox Polomatic and I got very nice results! it is a Radionar L though and well coated.

 

I have also used in the past a very early Radionar on 6x9 with an unknown camera... The camera had focusing problems even on infinity, but I didn't notice any strange halos. Only the out-of-focus zones have strange effects which I have seen with other lenses too.

Manually try out all beginnings of the screw threads one by one... There is only one position. It took me half an hour...