simon_fallon

Hi all, for some time now I've been thinking about trading in my trusty (but

fiddly to operate) Olympus XA for a Ricoh GR1v. Before I do so however, I'd

like to learn a bit more about the Ricoh's spec. I have trawled the web and

Photo Forum's older pages to little avail. Can anyone point me in the right

direction? Ricoh's own page(s) have been of little use; it's always the oh-so-

important details that make such a difference, such as manual focussing? Bulb

setting? Threaded cable release, flash sync speed etc etc... Any help greatly

appreciated.

I recently asked Forum members if anyone felt that it was worth having fungus

professionally cleaned from my Pentax 6X7 lenses. Response was typically

helpful and one or two of you asked me to post the results. Well, I've had them

cleaned by an independant - in every sense of word!- chap who's been working

with cameras and lenses for years. His shop looks like an explosion at a camera

fair and when, thinking of Lex's ammonia/hydrogen peroxide recipe, I asked him

beforehand what cleaning solution he would use he gave me a conspiritorial

smile and said "Spit!" My reply was "That's what YOU think!" so he explained.

Apparently human saliva (he claims) has unique properties including being a

very efficient fungicide. I was sceptical to say the least but with a quote of

?40.00 per lens I figured it was worth a try. Two days later I collected two

spotless lenses. I should re-emphasise that the fungus was still in early

stages, and of course so is the cleaning job he did - I guess only time will

tell. Still, he assures me that if, as many of you also advised, the lenses are

now kept out of humid conditions, the problem won't come back. So far so good,

fingers crossed. My regards to all.

Gerry, it might take a while but I'll keep you posted re the results (watch this space). I guess one potential problem is that not all lens cleaning jobs (car repair jobs, patio construction jobs, etc etc..) will be equal, so that one lens doctor's thorough herbicidal decontamination will be another's quick wipe with a moist Kleenex. Still, at least now I know about the ammonia/hydrogen peroxide method; perhaps I'll get an idea of the bloke's professionalism from his reaction when I suggest it..

Kelly, advice noted. I think that because I never had the problem before, despite not taking particular care to avoid it, I was lulled into comlacency. I'll definitely try to be more careful in future. Thanks again guys.

Sounds like the concensus is to have them cleaned. On balance, I probably shall now as no-one seems to have an expensive horror story to relate. I guess I was worried that the spores would remain alive and sneakily infect my other lenses but from what you've all suggested so far this sounds unlikely. Useful advice guys, thanks to all who've responded.

Hi All, I have two Pentax 67 lenses which both show early stages of internal

fungal growth. Do any of you think it's worth having the optics professionally -

and expensively!- cleaned? Apparently some people believe that the problem will

recur. Are they correct? Can anyone tell me from personal experience? I live

in England and don't normally have a problem keeping lenses warm and dry; I

guess I must have been careless one time after a rainstorm and then not used

the kit for a few months. Grateful for hard facts on the matter. Thanks, Simon.

Thanks everyone, I had no idea it was such a hot potato! The reason I asked is that now and again I come across a formula (can't think of one right now) which calls for Methanol, and, like many other darkroom enthusiasts I'm trying to stock up on any chemicals which I may one day have a use for whilst they are still legally obtainable. I have been unable to find a stockist for Methanol, and it's surprising how many outlets don't seem to know what it is. Anyway, at least now I know it's not "meths" and if anyone knows a UK stockist I'd be grateful for the info. Thanks again.

Hi all, Is Methanol the same thing as Methylated Spirits? I've also heard (or

read) that it is the same as Methyl Alcohol but no-one I've asked seems sure.

WJ, to be honest (and I hate to sound like a wimp) the weight of an F4 is a bit daunting for a general, all purpose camera that could be round my neck for several hours. Its size also draws attention to the photographer - bad news for candid street photography here in paranoid London Town. These were just a couple of the reasons that the dainty little F80 appealed to me.

Debra, I shall indeed try to sell it on as you suggest - shouldn't be difficult. I didn't realise that the F4 "matrixed" with ai/ais lenses; this, and the fact that the F4 actually has a threaded cable release make it a more tempting proposition than I had thought. But to be honest, matrix metering isn't really a priority, spot and/or CW will be fine (the F80 offers none at all with manual lenses). Also the F4 is now getting on a bit which increases the chances of a secondhand one giving problems when you least want it to!

Lily, on balance I agree with you. Just a couple of years ago it might have been different because price would have prevented me buying even a used F100. However, they are now available at such low prices even here in the UK that I should probably have just done this in the first place. Ah well, live and learn.

Heartfelt thanks to all of you who've responded, great to hear from you guys. Warmest Regards, Simon Fallon.

Thanks for the speedy response guys. Shun, you've told me all I need to know. It's odd though that Nikon don't actually seem to understand that backward compatibility with their film cameras/lenses has always been one of the main jewels in their crown- for me, the fact that I can use my treasured old manual lenses on a F100 would be one of the main reasons to buy it. Radford, you are of course correct. I already own an F90X but in comparison to the newer, more ergonomically shaped cameras it handles, in my opinion, like a brick. I also miss the creative opportunities afforded by multiple exposure facility (which the F90X doesn't offer) and, occasionally, auto bracketing would be a Godsend. And yes, I did try fitting an MF26 back to my F90X to provide these features but IMHO it was a strong contender for the title of Most Fiddly, Infuriating And Least User-Friendly Accessory Of All Time. I still have nightmares...

Basically, is it?? I recently bought a mint secondhand F80 and was very very

very very VERY p....d off to discover that all metering functions are lost when

coupling an AI or AIS lens to the body-Nikon UK told me that "..virtually all

manual lenses will work on the F80.." Hmm, they obviously have a more elastic

interpretation of "work" than I do. As always, grateful for all responses.

Simon Fallon.

Mark, as Elliot says, the F8 I mentioned definitely isn't a cat lens, although the company (Opteka) do also offer a number of those including-I think- a mirror zoom. And it's not an older make, far from it, they seem to specialise in what they call "HD2" (high definition) optics, marketed as Cutting Edge Technology. I agree that tried and tested Nikon glass is probably the way to go, but with the accelerating pace of technological advancement one can't help wondering if what it cost Nikon a small fortune to produce thirty years ago can now be manufactured for pennies; after all, we all know that anything sold as "Photographic" entitles the distributor to charge us twice what the item's worth (at least here in the UK)!

Hi all,

for some time now I've been looking for a bargain priced 400mm ED Nikkor and

whilst trawling Ebay I keep encountering "buy it now" auctions for Opteka

telephoto lenses. They are described (of course!) with such glowing

superlatives and are priced so low- 500mm F8 $79.00- that they must be too good

to be true; after all, we get what we pay for, right? And yet...

Has anyone any experience of these lenses? Or have you heard anything, even?

Grateful for any feedback. Simon Fallon.

Oh, and in case anyone is wondering why I would want to downrate a fast film, even rated at ISO 1000 you still gain more than a stop over a 400 film and the tonality, gradation and fineness of grain are astonishing.

I've never tried Neopan in either DDX or Xtol but I think Tmax dev must be hard to beat. The only minor drawback is the short development time so I give my films a plain water pre-soak for a couple of minutes with tank tapping and agitation to help minimise the risk of streaking or uneven development. On a dull day I rate the film at its nominal speed of 1600 and give an extra minute in the dev, on a bright sunny day I usually rate it at 1250 or even 1000 and chop 30 seconds off. As always, treat this as a starting point, but it works brilliantly for me. Good luck.

David, you've asked a question that I have long wondered about. I recently bought a 2nd hand TC301 - designed to be paired with lenses over 200mm - meaning to look for a bargain priced 300mm or 400mm prime to go with it. However some of the postings here cast doubt on the advisability of this and I now wonder if my converter purchase was a mistake - my first disappointment was discovering that its protruding front element doesn't fit into my (very) old Sigma 400mm. Has anyone had a positive experience with this converter paired with a 300mm or 400mm ai or ais Nikkor? Raymond, at the top of the thread you suggested that David does exactly what I was planning to, what made you change your mind? FWIW I've used an old TC201 with a 180mm and the results were excellent, even at F2.8.