mark f

<p>Well, I've had a variety of 70's rangefinders, a decent Fed2 and an M2. The 70's rangefinders are a bit delicate, but the rangefinders and lenses are generally pretty nice. The Fed 2 is pretty rough and very tough. The rangefinder isn't very bright. I also went through 3 Russian rangefinders to get a decent one. The Industar 50mm 2.8 is reasonably sharp with lots of character. The M2 is infinitely better than all of them. If you have an appreciation for mechanical things (the motorcycles and Hassy says you do), an M2 is the ticket. Get one from KEH in Bargain condition for $500-600 and get a 50mm screw mount that you can afford....a rigid Summicron or a screw mount Canon would be nice. Yes, they cost more than your limit, but I'd say that it is the least risky approach. I went through a pile of cheaper options before the Leica....I didn't exactly save money with the cheaper options. You can easily sell the camera for what you bought it for if it doesn't work out. Based on my experience, the Leica is a bargain.</p>

<p>If you want fast, go with Frank's suggestion for the light-tightness. I'd wait on the sink for now. A utility sink is really not great for a darkroom...way too deep and tough to use. Leave room for at least 6 feet of sink. I have 8 and it seems a bit too short! For now, just have the trays on a piece of countertop or sheet of plywood and have a tub full of water to dump the prints before they can be washed properly elsewhere. I did this for years. Ventilation is important. I use a large panasonic bathroom fan mounted outside the darkroom blowing in through a furnace filter. You need a lot of CFM to get decent ventilation. My outlet goes to the outside through a dryer vent to the outside. </p>

<p>I think cameraleather also sells these....</p>

<p>I believe that that is the one from the 1930's (folding x-shaped struts connecting front and back?). If it is, this is not a screaming bargain. Look at ebay completed auctions to get an idea on price. </p>

<p>I use xtol and Rodinal/Adinol. If you are already using D76, I'd try Rodinal. Xtol is great, but acts like an improved D76. Rodinal is completely different. Give it a try!</p>

<p>From what I understand, China has become a big buyer of Leica cameras. I have a friend in China and he mentioned that the art market has also gone crazy there. I think there is a lot of new money looking for a place to be spent.....and fine German cameras are not a bad place to spend it. All those M9s and M43 cameras being sold can't hurt either. I'm glad to have what I need. </p>

<p>Strange. I'd try taking the camera in a dark room and shine a flashlight into the camera from the ground glass side and look for leaks. I'd guess it has something to do with the lens/lens board. </p>

<p>Forget the camera.......the images are really quite nice. Clearly the camera suits the way you photograph! You make it sing...</p>

<p>If the Voightlander 50mm is too spendy, try one of the black Canon 50mm. They are amazingly good and not all that expensive. An f1.8 (or is it 2.0?) is about $200 and the f1.4 is maybe $250-300. Honestly, you have to work really hard to find a bad 50 from any manufacturer. For your SLRs, they are dirt cheap so try the all....(:</p>

<p>Here is a bit different thought....if you are sticking to a 50mm, I'd get some sort of rangefinder. If you shoot handheld, your results will be better (I know mine are) simply because there is no mirror flopping up and down. In screw mount, consider the Voightlander 50mm f1.5 (now discontinued) or one of the more modern Canons/Nikkors. I have a Canon f1.4 and it is pretty nice, but a bit big for a rangefinder (it is on a well used M2). The other screw mount I love is a Industar f2.8 on an FED2....it isn't supposed to be good, but it is. In the M world, it would be hard to go wrong with any Summicron or a Zeiss M. My next purchase will probably be an M3 with a Summicron-M or Zeiss f2.0. I've used a number of 70's era Japanese rangefinders, but I seem to make them break quickly so I gave up on them....they took great images, though.</p>

<p>I think I have it.....start with an old Hasselblad body and couple of backs (say $400)....get a Holga and cut out the lens.....better yet, make that an old Diana (a silly $100)....mount the lens on a Hasselblad lens cap.....find the crappiest, out dated 35mm film (10 rolls, $10) and spool them by hand in the dark into the backs. This way you get the coolness of a Hasselblad, the crappiness of the Diana/Holga, the unpredictability of rolling 35mm on 120 spools and the crazy look of pictures on sprocket holes. This will be the envy of all your friends. Wait, I still have $100 left. Go ahead and cover it in white cobra skin (<a href="http://www.cameraleather.com/colors/b&wcobra_snake.htm">http://www.cameraleather.com/colors/b&wcobra_snake.htm</a>) That would be seriously awesome.</p>

<p>I use two drops of photoflo per tank plus a capful of 90% isopropyl alcohol in tap water (we have good tap water from a surface source, not well water). I used to use photoflo premixed at half concentration and I still had problems....plus things seemed to grow in it sometimes!</p>

<p>If you are only going to use it with a fixed normal lens, you might consider one of the many 70's era rangefinders. Many of them have a 1.8 or larger aperture. One Yashica even has an f1.4. If you do want to stick to an interchangable lens camera, I'd either get a Voigtlander new (R2 or R3) or a Leica M2 in well used condition. I've had a Bessa R (OK, but cheap and nasty feeling...newer ones are better), a bunch of 70's rangefinders and now a well used M2. If you want to go really cheap and can deal with a tiny finder, you might try a FED2. I have one and it is definitely better built than the Bessa R, but on mine the rangefinder is pretty dim and no meter (of course). If you do go with a FED, you should buy it from a dealer like fedka.com. He can service it and will take returns....important with a FED.</p>

<p>I recently installed a griptac kit on my OM1 and it makes the handling noticeably better. The OM is supposed to be one of the harder ones to do, but it took me less than 15 minutes to strip the old and install the new.</p>

<p>If you haven't tried the Hasselblad with a 45deg prism, I'd try that before you give up on the Hasselblad. The non-meter versions are cheap enough that you should definitely try it. I have an incredibly ugly NC2 prism and love it. That made all the difference to me. Lots of folks like the Pentax 67 too, but I just am too lazy to haul around that camera and the required tripod.</p>

<p>A camera that is quite different and worth considering is the Olympus OM-1 (or OM-2). They are very simple, small and have wonderful ergonomics. The OM1 takes an obsolete battery so it would need to be converted to a modern battery or use a hearing aid battery (OM2 battery is common).</p>

<p>Tri-x in D76 or Xtol. It is a classic look that holds up well to 16x20 if you don't mind some grain. It won't be grainless, but wonderful. I don't use anything else in 35mm. It will give you a look clearly distinct from digital.</p>

<p>Hasselblad with extra backs or at least extra inserts</p>

<p>I finally figured out the key to consistency in my work: use a really long lasting developer. My problem is that I didn't use developer quick enough to get through 4 or 5 liters. I now mostly use Rodinal or HC110. They both work beautifully on FP4 and Fuji Acros. With HC 110, mix it straight from the bottle using a medicine syringe (free from Walgreens around here....ask at the pharmacy). These combinations work the same for me every time.</p>

<p>Another vote for Tri-x.....remember, though, grain is good.....I shot a series on county fairs (still working on it!) and I think Tri-x in d76 or Xtol is an excellent choice. If you aren't developing it yourself or you are scanning, you might try Ilford XP2 or the Kodak equivalent. Also, try to shoot wide open or close to it. Fairs are visually confusing places and isolating the subject with short depth of field is definitely a good thing. <br>

If you do want color, stick to color neg film. It will handle the huge contrast ranges better that you will see at a fair. Black and white is even better.</p><div></div>

<p>I still use the OM1MD I bought used in high school in 1977! I can't imagine a better camera to use....tiny and intuitive. Although, and OM4T is certainly tempting as I use spot metering with all my non-35mm work. </p>

<p>Kodak Medalist. I love the idea and the quality of the images, but operation is just crazy difficult. I probably could have managed to get used to it, but respooling 620 was more than I was willing to put up with. </p>

<p>If you get a chance, pick a copy of Barry Thornton's old book. He talks about the tradeoff of fine grain and apparent sharpness. I tend to agree with him and I find that the best tradeoff for me on 6x6 is Acros in Rodinal. I suspect I'd like it in Xtol also....probably finer grain and a bit less sharp. Pan F, Delta 100, TMX and Acros will all give very fine grain developed properly, but they all look different. The difference in developing is probably the biggest difference between them in terms of grain. If you underexpose and under develop, the grain will be smaller yet!</p>

<p>If it is out of alignment, my guess would be the joint between the base and the rail. I have one and it is pretty much a given that there will be some sag there given the construction. Personally, I plan on using back tilt for most pictures anyway so it probably wouldn't make any difference to me. Unless I am taking pictures of flat, vertical walls, I usually need some tilt anyway.</p>

<p>For roll film, EI 80, Rodinal 1:50 at 20C, 12 minutes with one gentle inversion/min. I used to develop for 11 minutes when I was using a condenser enlarger. I did the same for 4x5 in a Combiplan tank when I used Acros in 4x5. I am spot metering. If I use an in-camera meter, I usually expose at 50 and cut the development to 10:30......I don't use Acros with an in-camera meter much, though.</p><div></div>