tom_smith22

<p>Gday all. Would someone be able to provide a manual for a Courtney Solarflash2500? If thats not possible, what bulb does it take? cheers</p>

<p>I'm pretty much commited to LF now, but Ty how dare you say that! ha, I think I'm going to stick with 4x5, as good as 6x7 would be, considering price limitations.</p>

<p>My thinking is if I'm going to be carrying a whole lot of weight like the RB67 I might as well get the biggest negatives I can from it. I also suspect if I go the MF route one day in the future when I look at my first LF neg I'll kick myself for not having done it sooner.<br>

www.largeformatphotography.info/ is a good resource.</p>

<p>Twice, like the others.</p>

<p>Thank you very much for the responses everyone! This was just a feeler, hence lack of info.<br>

I have a tripod rated at 5kg, I only want 1 lens to start off, I have an Epson V700 scanner avaliable for my use, printing costs are not an issue. In short, I'm in a fairly good position. The truth is after I wrote that last night I all but decided on MF. However now I am 9/10 convinced 4x5 (at least) is the way I'm going to go. As for portability, I am on foot a lot, and will be for quite some time. It is an issue, but I don't mind lugging around quite a bit of kit.</p>

<p>I love film precisely for the reason that each shot matters, unlike 'cheap' digital. Idealised, I know, but I enjoy taking my time for each frame.<br>

Having said that, I'm looking to rush into this purchase. I want a camera on the way within a week. Looking back thru this thread (I havent touched LF forum yet, will do) Shen Hao and Chamonix are mentioned twice. I'll be looking at these brands closely, but for the meantime, I've got two questions: what is a ballpark figure for a standard-ish (ivegotnoideawhatimtalkingabout) LF rig with a single lens, and is it customary to develop at home? Again, thank you, Tom.</p>

<p>Gday all.<br>

I shoot landscapes for commercial purposes with a 40D, and what I do is montage pictures together to give acceptable sharpness at sizes generally up to 2 metres. However I've now got to a point where I cannot get the shots I want with multiple exposures, problem areas being mainly star trails and ocean waves.<br />I've got no choice but to upgrade formats, but am at a bit of a loss where to start. I know it is difficult to give a hard and fast ratio of format to output, but given a 60" wide digital print, is there a sub-$1000 6x6 system that gives good results if used correctly? I've been looking at the Kiev range, 88 mainly, and they seem cheap and good.<br /><br />However I know the holy grain is large format, and I guess it's a question of just what quality I'm after. I can't give any answer but 'the best', but my wallet (loudly) disagrees. LF is the standard among professional landscape photographers for a reason, but then I think that 135 scanned at 4000ppi at 20x30 looks adequate from a metre away, so surely 6x6 would do, at least for now? <br /><br />I'm sure many other photographers have faced this problem, so your 2c worth would be worth a lot more to me. Portability is an issue also.<br />Cheers, Tom</p>

<p>I recently got a new flash foot for my non-HV 285. I had added a 3.5mm jack to the foot on the old one, worked fine, and I also use a 1.3A battery for power. However after I hooked up the new foot, all sorts of bad things started happening. The circuit board burnt out, I had to add a wire and try again after rearranging the trigger circuit (red/white to centre pin, black to ground, had opposite before for some reason), in vain it turns out as it burnt out somewhere else. Not having electronics knowledge, I'm at a loss. Why is this suddenly happening now? Picture attatched, for what it's worth.</p><div></div>

<p>Acetone works a treat. Got rid of everything, even invisible dirt on the T90. Will definitely be using it a lot more but yeah, I was nervous about it seeping into the edges. It could wreck havoc on the internals. If you havent tried using acetone before, give it a shot.</p>

<p>Thanks Fritz, Ill give it a go then. I do stop down to f/22 routinely so it is an issue, also I dont think canon are in the habit of replacing FD glass, at least not anymore. Thanks for the responses - Tom</p>

<p>Not much, a very weak burst of spray paint that's probably not affecting image quality a great deal, but I'd like it off anyway. Lens cleaner doesn't work, and Im not sure about acetone, as I cant seem to find what the S.S.C. is actually made of, but Im guessing its far too powerful. Does anyone know of a safer way of taking these dots off, or am I stuck with a chickenpoxed lens?<br>

Cheers for reading.</p>

<p>Deleting and reinstalling the driver worked a treat. I really should think more, huh. Cheers Andrew.</p>

<p>There is an Epson tech coming, but there might be a quick obvious fix to this problem, worth trying.<br>

We have an Epson 9900 in a fully colour calibrated lab. It has worked fine up to yesterday, then suddenly one canvas had no shadow detail (we didnt realize it was a problem until today when we reprinted the print to no effect). We reprinted a section of the canvas using both RGB and the custom profile, same result. Then we tried the same thing on paper, using photo black, same result. This led us to believe it might be a nozzle problem, but all the checks show no problem. Running a cl1 clean on the black nozzle under service mode did nothing.<br>

It is a really odd problem. On some prints it's almost like any section of the picture below a certain brightness is reduced in brightness significantly but not blocked out, while the lighter parts are fine. This leads to a software problem.<br>

If anyone has an idea I'd love to hear, otherwise Ill post back in a few days what the Epson tech found.<br>

cheers, Tom</p>

<p> </p>

Thanks for the responses. A mate of mine has a Hasselblad, so Ive got no interest in buying a specific camera for this.

I didn't think about the film flatness. I suppose Id have to deal with it and pass it off as something Ive done delibrately.

Those look good Kevin. What youve done to the 120 spool sounds like what I might be after.

I was just wondering if it was possible to shoot 35mm film using a Hasselblad, so you use the entire film surface

for artistic stuff, etc. Specifically, with an A12 back on. I'd be self-loading the FP4+ from the box it came in.

Thanks, Tom

Okay, for future reference, it helps to have the lens set to 'A' to avoid panic.:D

Used this lens (a Sigma 50mm f/2.8 DG macro) a week ago, worked fine. Now I just

picked it up and it won't work. It was stored mounted onto the camera in a

proper camera case. Lens has never been used apart from a few dozen test/play

around shots.

<br>

<br>

The other lens I've got here, a Sigma 18-50mm, works fine. From a visual

inspection, the aperture signal pins on the 50mm 1:2.8 are seemingly stuck in

the 'open' position, in contrast to the 18-50mm, in which the default position

for the pins makes the aperture diaphragm close, and the act of rotating the

lens when you mount it causes the pins to move into the correct place to cause

the diaphragm to open up.

<br>

<br>

Pic:

<br>

<IMG SRC="http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/6298/pentaxlensesgy5.jpg">

<br>

The pins on the 50mm are obviously in the wrong place, and will not move at all,

unlike the 18-50mm pins which move when pushed.

This equipment isn't mine, and I'm prepared to buy a new lens for the time being

for the original owner if there is no easy fix to this.

<br><br>

Thanks, Tom

I believe one of the excuses Canon uses is that the special elements in the lens, such as UD, DO and fluorite elements, are much more susceptible to heat distortion than just normal optical quality glass.

Whether this effects optical performance enough to warrant painting thousands of lenses white is a whole other debate. Looks cool, though.

Well I've got dozens and dozens of flash cubes, and now I've gotta use them. All I've got are Canon 35mm SLRs, so I would use them just for the novelty.

I've just come across a Minox F110 flash. Just wondering, are these collectable

at all? It comes with a custom fit, unused, unmarked leather pouch with 'Minox'

on the side, in original styrofoam with places for both the pouch and the flash,

with 'Minox 110' engraved in the syrofoam, and an original cardboard box that

fits over the styrofoam with all the info on it.

 

Also, is there any way I can get flashcubes to be triggered by a hotshoe?

 

-Tom

Where can I send an L-series super-telelphoto to get refurbished? In Australia

if possible.

 

I remain convinced not a great amount of water got into this lens, and after a

few days I can see no evidence of corrosion anywhere.

Can refurbishment get rid of mould on the inner elements? There isn't much, but

enough to annoy me. And it's only going to get worse. I've heard that this eats

into the glass and hence is unfixable, but I may be confusing that with

something else.

 

Thanks!

Gear isn't covered outside the property, according to the person on the phone. Can't find that in the policy, but anyway.

And I've got (still to be developed) pics of the lens in use, and digital pics of the broken camera and lens with sand and water in it. Suppose that's a plus.

Even though I haven't actually got insurance on the lens/camera itself?

Well the hood is damaged, meaning it's going to take a helluva lot to get to the screws at the front, and everthing aperture-realted at the back was replaced, and they used resin or something over the screws, so they're also hard to get out. So about $5-600, I was told.

 

Also, I don't know of too many shops around Melbourne, Australia, that carter for FD gear.

The lens cannot be opened for various reasons for anything less than about $600, not including repairs.

Would giving it a very VERY good, careful wash in fresh water be any substitute? As I said, there's one small drop of water on the inside of the front element which I of course can't get to.

I guess I should be thanking my lucky stars the thing isn't chock full of electronics.