paddy_macmahon1
-
Posts
52 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by paddy_macmahon1
-
-
<p>I've just taken a long term loan of a Sinar 5X4 monorail camera. The chap who leant me the camera also threw in some Polaroid 55 film and holder. In the film box are several cannisters containing a kind of gel stick with plastic handles, which are for fixing the negative, apparently.</p>
<p>My question is this - how do I use these sticks? Are they an alternative to using sodium sulphite? Should I wash the developer from the negatives first? How liberal an application do I need? I don't seem to be able to find any info on the internet, so any advice would be gratefully received.</p>
<p>Paddy</p>
-
<p>Being on an economy drive I was recently comparing film prices here in the UK. Here are the cheapest deals I found, all based on ordering 20 ISO 100 films:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ag-photographic.co.uk/rollei-retro-100-35mm-36-20-rolls-757-p.asp">http://www.ag-photographic.co.uk/rollei-retro-100-35mm-36-20-rolls-757-p.asp<br /> </a><br>
£31.50 delivered - £1.58 per film (Rollei Retro 100 aka Agfa APX100)</p>
£46.75 delivered - £2.34 per film (Legacy Pro 100 aka Fuji Acros 100)</p>
£38.96 delivered - £1.95 per film (Fomapan 100)</p>
<p>Anyone else hunted down any bargains in these recession hit times?<br>
And what about developer - how can I most cheaply develop my 20 rolls of Rollei retro? I'm guessing Rodinal at 1+50...</p>
-
<p>Just bought a Z1-p (seems like a great camera; makes my old MZ-5n feel like a toy).</p>
<p>Bojidar's site mentions the FDP grip strap, which is a hollow shell to attach to the bottom of the camera - has anyone tried converting this to a 4*AA cell battery pack? And does anyone have one they no longer use and would be willing to sell (particularly if you're in the UK).</p>
-
<p>It's clearly an alien mothership hovering over ther city, invisible to the human eye, but recorded on the film. I'd get straight on to Mulder and Scully if I were you.</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>There is NO SUCH THING as a safe chemical</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes - be very careful. I consumed a couple of litres of Hydrogen Oxide today and I'm really worried. Should I see a doctor?</p>
<p>Only believers in homeopathy might worry about the chemical footprint of small-scale home development - be economical with your fixer and stop bath (i.e. use it with as many films as you can) and chuck everything down the sink.</p>
-
<p>...And I have checked the Foma data sheet and digitaltruth.</p>
-
<p>I've bought in a bunch of Fomapan 100 (it being cheap as chips compared to other B&W films here in the UK). I also have a couple of bottles of Ilfotec DD-X which I'd like to use, but I can't find any info on developing times.</p>
<p>Any advice?</p>
-
<p>Thanks again for all the responses. I'm beginning to feel like a bit of an expert on this matter...</p>
<p>Anyway I've come to a 'stop-gap' decision, which I reckon will give me the best 'bang-for-buck' for now: the Z-10 (aka PZ-10). Bodies seem to be available for around the £20 mark here in the UK so I'm going to give one a whirl until such times as I can afford the longer term solution: a Z-1p (aka PZ-1p) or an MZ-S. I'll have to do without depth-of-field preview, mirror pre-fire and a pentaprism for the time-being, but at least I'll be able to control all those flashes!</p>
-
<p>The Rolleiflex is also utterly beautiful - mechanically and aesthetically. Sling one of them round your neck and you will immediately attract interest and admiration. It really is a wonder of German engineering too - everything just works and works well, and the negatives are amazing. The only thing it will let you down on is macro work - even with the close-up lenses you'll find it near impossible to accurately frame and focus.</p>
<p>The TTL prism on the Kiev 88, on the other hand, is downright ugly. Shame on you for even considering going out and about with a monstrosity like that.</p>
<p>Rollei, Rollei, Rollei.</p>
-
<p>Thanks for the responses.</p>
<p>Douglas - the depth of field preview is definitely important to me, as I do use a macro lens (SMC Pentax Macro 1:4/100) directly on the body at times, so I guess that restricts my choice.</p>
<p>I had the feeling that the TTL flash control on the MZ-5n did not depend on having 'A' lenses - certainly with my three flash set-up the flashes did not discharge fully each time, or at least that's what I remember. Am I wrong?</p>
-
<p>My MZ-5n (ZX-5n to some of you) has gone to meet its maker, leaving me with a gap in my system.</p>
<p>I did not often shoot with it, having gone 'back to basics' slightly - I mainly use an MX or a Rolleiflex TLR, and only with black and white film. However I did use the MZ-5n for macro work, making use of its ability to run three flashes with TTL control, and would like to do the same again. Used MZ-5ns seem to command quite a premium, so I'm thinking of a cheaper MZ (ZX) body. My macro lens is a 'K' model and does not have an A setting, so presumably it will be useless with some of the more basic models; by my reckoning that leaves my options as: MZ-3, MZ-6 (ZX-L), MZ-7 or MZ-10. The MZ-3 is more expensive than the MZ-5n, so let's leave that out.</p>
<p>So, given that I will only be doing on-tripod macro work, with dedicated macro lens or extension tubes and reversed lenses, which of the remaining three from my list will give the best value for money? Will they all do TTL flash without lens communication (i.e. is the TTL flash control independent of the lens attached)? Would any one of them give better results than others?</p>
<p>Lastly, do I need an autofocus body at all? Would a Super A (Super Program) control my flashes correctly? The flashes I use are an AF500FTZ and two AF240FTs and various 5P connectors. Bojidar Dimitrov's pages suggest they are only compatible with autofocus bodies, but I'm wondering if that simply means that <strong>full </strong> functionality is only possible with AF bodies.</p>
-
<p>Thanks for that, Andrew - I realise neither is ideal, but there's a major advantage of both the AF500FTZ and the AF240FT from my point of view: I already own the former and two of the latter, having rigged them up for macro work with my MZ-5n (RIP). Since your post I've popped the AF240FT on the MX and fired - all is OK, but it will of course be a purely manual flash.</p>
-
<p>Can pentax flashes designed for TTL control on autofocus bodies be safely used on a Pentax MX? I realise there can't possibly be any auto controls, but will the voltages, etc be compatible - firing the flashes won't fry the body's contacts or vice-versa. Does anyone successfully use such a set-up?</p>
<p>Paddy</p>
-
<p>I've been pondering this issue for a while, and am thinking of taking the plunge with a Fuji GA645i (although a Pentax 645n or Bronica rf645 might get a look-in). Nobody has mentioned any of the 645 format Fujis - but having looked at the various cameras available, this one seemed to scream out "hand-held", and comes in far cheaper than a Bronica rf645 or a Mamiya 6/7/7ii, at least here in th UK 2nd hand market. Any thoughts on it? I'm presuming given its essentially 'point and shoot' design it gets largely used without a tripod.</p>
<p>I do possess a Rolleiflex 2.8E, and that's easily hand-held with the neck strap; in fact I have never put it on a tripod, and get readily printable shots down to as slow as 1/30.</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>I think people who buy these lenses (another similar one: The A* 85/1.4) buy them for a collection, and not to use.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Not true. I use my A* 85/1.4 almost as much as my standard lens. Though I didn't spend anything like as much as 2800 euros on it.</p>
-
<p>... an SMC Pentax A* 200mm f4 Macro. Was keeping an eye on this:</p>
<p>thinking it might fetch somewhere in the region of £800. Even when the pound was worth something 2800 euros would have been way out of reach.</p>
-
<p>Less is more. Buy a 35mm prime and take only that.</p>
-
<p>I have virtually ruled out the possibility of replacing the MZ5n (smashing camera though it is); indeed everything I seem to be enjoying about photography at the moment is heading backwards in time, from developing and printing to forcing myself to think about exposure and lighting. I even felt bad about running a <em>colour</em> film through my Olympus Trip 35 (the film was lying around and my Ulster presbyterian roots wouldn't allow me to bin it) as I had to take it to Snappy Snaps. I can see the convenience of modern bodies (analogue and digital), and I've even had to buy a digital point and shoot since Mrs M demanded snapshots for the family album, but my heart is with manual cameras. So the 43mm has to justify itself purely on its manual focus, B&W film performance.</p>
-
<p>It hadn't crossed my mind to sell both the 43mm and the f1.2 and leave myself with the f1.7, but that would certainly be a financially attractive option (and would leave me a bit left over even after buying the Mamiya 6 I've been eyeing up).<br>
I do use the f1.2 wide open - simply setting the shutter to 1/30th and pushing Ilford Delta 3200 to 6400. I haven't had issues with sharpness, but then I haven't enlarged much beyond about 10 by 15. I love the feel of the lens - it's weighty and feels 'precise' when focusing and adjusting aperture (perhaps even more so than the 85mm A*).<br>
I used to use the 43mm on my MZ5n (RIP) almost to the exclusion of anything else and it was fantastic. It looks lovely (I have the silver version, by the by) and delivers great results. I'm not wild about the feel of the focusing on the manual bodies, but it's better than other FA lenses and is very nicely balanced with the MX. I do, I think, slightly prefer the wider aspect of the lens over the 50mm.<br>
Looking back to some older snaps taken on Ilford XP2 with an ME Super and the f1.7, I can't really find fault, and it too is a beautiful lens in use and has the huge advantage of being really cheap to replace. And that Mamiya 6...</p>
-
<p>I find myself with a surfeit of standard lenses - the question is, if I were to sell, which would get me a higher price? Or should I keep them all?<br>
My current Pentax equipment comprises: Battered (but beautiful) MX body, SMC M 28mm f3.5, SMC FA 43mm f1.9 Limited, SMC M 50mm f1.7, SMC K 50mm f1.2 and SMC A* 85mm f1.4.<br>
I shoot exclusively in black and white, and cannot see myself ever upgrading to digital, it being the devil's work. Since my MZ5n died I barely use the 43mm f1.9, but it does couple nicely with the MX and is a fine lens. So here's my quandary:<br>
Do I: i) sell the 50mm f1.2; ii) sell the 43mm f1.9; iii) sell them both and get a SMC A 50mm f1.4?<br>
Which of these options leaves me with the best combination of money in my pocket and quality 35mm outfit? I don't see any point in offloading the 50mm f1.7, as it will raise next to nothing, and I may well grab myself another MX body for it to live on as a 'take anywhere without worrying about loss or damage' camera.</p>
-
<p>There are any number of cheaply available 6 by 6 format folding rangefinders on the second hand market. It seems both Fuji and Voigtlaender are bringing out modern versions, but these will come in at the £2000 mark, I'd imagine - a second hand model in reasonable condition will cost a small fraction of that. Look here:<br>
for some advice on models. For travel you have the following advantages: compact, cheap and rugged.</p>
-
Black and White Photography is indeed excellent (and has a regular column from Mike Johnstone, incidentally). For excellent photos, rather than techniques, try Private Black and White Photo Review (not a top-shelf publication despite its title), produced in Italy. It knocks Lenswork into a cocked hat, IMHO. 'The Source' is an Irish photo magazine, also excellent, though not exclusively B&W.
-
Hin,
I can only applaud your decision to go backwards with your technology.
You now need to invest in some developing and enlarging equipment (if you're in the US, get a Beseler 23C; if you're in Europe get something by Durst or LPL).
You will also soon tire of this 'autofocus' nonsense with the PZs and decide to invest in manual focus kit - you will be amazed at the increase in build quality in pentax manual lenses over the F and FA versions. When you take this plunge, I would recommend a Program A body, but soon you'll start getting the feeling that even this is doing too much for you and you'll have to buy an MX, preferably with a broken meter.
You will then dispense with lenses altogether and build yourself a pinhole camera. This will bring you great satisfaction, I guarantee it.
-
The other advantage of course is that when this 'digital' fad passes you'll still be able to use the 35mm f2 on pentax film bodies, what with its nice large image circle...
'gel' fixer for polaroid 55
in Large Format
Posted