mlg28

<p>The lines aren't straight, so I don't think it's just a simple mechanical "dragging the film along a sharp something" problem. Might it happen while you are loading the film onto the reels? Like with a ring, watch, that sort of thing? And is it for the whole length of the roll or just a few frames near the end(s)?</p>

<p>My 15-year-old daughter signed up for a summer course in photography. As she was preparing for it, she asked me at dinner time, a bit confused...<br>

"Dad?" <br>

"Yes?"<br>

(reading from class description) "For my course I need a, um, manual, 35, er millimeter, um film single lens, what the hell is that, reflex? Do you have such a thing?"<br>

"Why yes, yes I do."<br>

So my lovely Nikon FM2n came off the shelf, a nice Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8 went on the front, and presto...another goes over to the good side of the Force!</p>

<p>No problems at all. I use a push-pull 80-200 f/2.8 and a 300 mm f/4 AF (non AF-S) and it focuses plenty fast enough. I don't use the focus limiter. My bodies are a D200 and a D600. Both lenses work great on both bodies for field hockey.</p>

<p>I'd suggest an 80-200 mm f/2.8. I used one on a D200 for years to photograph my daughter's basketball games.<br>

The lighting in most school gymnasiums is weak. At ISO 1600 and f/2.8, I was lucky to shoot at 1/250 s, which is marginal to stop action. And of course that ISO on a D200 is also barely useable. The D90 being one generation newer may be able to get useful results at higher ISO></p>

<p>After a week or so of using my D600, I started leaving my FE2 at home. The F100, FE2, and FM2 haven't been used in over a year, and the FA went on Ebay. The D600 is light and small, works well with my my AI'd lenses, my AI lenses, my AF-S lenses, and my AF-D lenses. The user interface is intuitive, after several years of shooting a D200 as my "good" digital camera. The only thing I don't like is that all 39 AF sensors are grouped in the center...might as well just have one.<br>

As much as I like the look and feel of old mechanical cameras, and as much as I'd like a dedicated knob for exposure compensation, I can't see paying that big a premium for it. The D600 and D610 do everything the Df does, plus more, for less money. All that extra money and the Df still has the lame AF sensor from the D600!<br>

Sorry, Nikon...I must've owned more than 10 Nikon bodies over the years, but this loyal customer is not buying a Df at that price. For *less* than a D610...maybe.</p>

<p>Yes, I used a G lens on my N80 and it worked perfectly.<br>

For awhile I had both an N80 and an F100. The F100 feels nicer in your hand, and has a beefy autofocus mechanism (you can feel it torquing the glass around) but the pictures aren't any better. The F100 has not flash, but I found the built-in flash of the N80 to be quite helpful to fill in shadows. The lightweight and cheap price meant I took the N80 places I wouldn't take the F100.</p>

<p>Do tell us which model, please, Julie. But if it is indeed an FA, I seem to recall that it does some odd things until you put film in it. I sold mine a year ago.<br>

In any case, I second the fresh batteries suggestion.</p>

<p>For what you want to do, I submit you don't need FX. I have a D200 (i.e. DX) and a D600. For me, the biggest improvement was in low-light capability, since my D200 is 7-year-old technology. For you, given that you have a D7000, the only significant differences will be:<br>

- More choice in wide-angle lenses (a good thing)<br>

- The D600's AF sensors are all clustered in the middle of the frame (a bad thing)...might as well just have five!<br>

So, since going really wide was not among your problems, I'd say save yourself $2K, or more to the point, spend it on lenses.</p>

<p>I'd ask myself this: do I need the shallow depth of field that a f/2.8 lens can provide? If yes, go for the 24-70, otherwise, choose the slower, cheaper lens. The D600 is so good at high-ISO -- I've had mine for a week and a half -- that the extra stop won't matter in the aperture/ISO/shutter speed sense, but DoF is an important artistic tool.</p>

<p>As for the better quality of the 24-70...I'd ask myself if a) I am savvy enough to tell the difference, and b) I am skilled enough to exploit the difference? For me, the answer to both is no. Only you can answer for yourself.</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3667779">Subbaraya</a>n, I always enjoy the photo tours of your neighborhood. Thanks for the posts, and well done, as always.</p>

provia 400x was my default film, but that last price hike put me over the edge. I'll stick to 100 for now.

A bit off-topic, but I have to ask...how did your camera get run over by a car? It was obviously not hanging around your

neck:)

Yes. Please send me a complete hasselblad set. It is no longer able to make photos, so get rid of it. I will be happy

to dispose of it for you.

<p>I just put the beaker with the diluted developer in an ice water bath for a few minutes until it drops to the temperature I want. I've also used an ice cube or two as part of the diluting water. I usually try to develop at 20 deg C just to remove one variable.</p>

Hey, for a thread that started out with "I really screwed up," this one has some nice photos. I'll try to screw up my next

few rolls like that!

<p>I bought a 300 mm f/4 AF-D lens on Craig's List for $550 a couple of years ago. Perfect condition, and an excellent lens. I use it on a D200 and F100 body, on both of which if focuses quickly and accurately. My usual subjects are gliders and airplanes.</p>

The calm professionalism with which Deedee accepts harsh criticism suggests she will go far in this or any other career she

chooses to pursue.

Lovely photo. Congratulations and many happy years together.

Gentlemen,

 

http://xkcd.com/386/

 

Thank you,

Martin

A manual for the extension tubes is here:

 

http://www.edvanderaa.nl/foto_doc_files/bronica/bronica_doc_files/manuals/MPW%20extension%20tube%20E.pdf

<p>Quite a bargain! Enjoy it, and please post some photos taken with it around your hometown.</p>

<p>In my early days, I had improper loaded problems. They looked a lot worse than this...when the film touches, it looks almost undeveloped. This looks like uneven development due to poor wetting or uneven agitation.<br>

No offense intended, but did you use enough developer to fully immerse the film?</p>

There was indeed an E-14 extension ring in there. Once I figured out how to remove it, the lens focused normally.

Duh.

 

Clearly this camera was designed for professionals...or at least amateurs who RTFM. Hint: it's not sufficient for the

shutter to be cocked, although that is required. It is also required for the shutter pins to be held all the way CCW in

their grooves, alignedd perfectly with the green dots. Otherwise, the lens release pin on the extension tube can't be

pushed in. I'll take a photo when I have a little time...with my DSLR :)

Paul, I think you hit the nail on the head. Now I have to figure out how to remove it. Thanks for the advice, folks.

Hi,

 

I just bought a used 150 mm f/3.5 for my ETRS. It won't focus farther than about six feet when set at infinity. It focuses down to

about four feet when set to it's closest focus. It does not look broken, and nothing sounds loose. The focus ring turns smoothly and

silently. It has no closeup lens attachments, and no apparent macro mode.

 

Anything else I should look for? Thanks in advance for your help.