leo_grillo

<p>Anyone have experience with Rodenstock's Apo Sironar Digital Lenses on MF view cameras? I am considering a set. The MTF charts look amazing, but field work will tell. Thanks.</p>

<p>Salgado was a Leica man his whole life, and with Genesis he now shoots the Canons. Check out his Galapagos work before your trip. Tommy, thanks for a look at some terrific photos!</p>

<p>Hi Ganz, <br>

Chris Weston (UK) can be reached through our site:<br>

www.animalsontheedge.org<br>

He's a great guy and will answer freely. He's also been to most places. Mention that I said to email him.<br>

Good luck --<br>

Leo</p>

<p>Martha, thanks! That is exactly what happened!<br>

I don't use the info screen much -- this camera is for one purpose and today I doubled it for something else. It just blew my mind that there was no explanation anywhere -- even about it being automatic. Glad I remembered these boards -- there are no answers anywhere else! Thanks again!</p>

<p>Matt, it's everybody's user book too. Everything seems to be working fine -- just a missing piece of the puzzle. Thank you guys,</p>

<p>PS: I had been scrolling to a non-programmed file number, like "#9" instead of #1-3 where my non-cpu data resides. I did this "in case" but I shouldn't have to go to an empty slot. That got me looking for an answer. In all the manuals from all the cameras that have this feature, none say a thing about what happens when you put a CPU lens back on.</p>

<p>Shun, thanks ... the lens appears to cancel when the CPU lens is returned. But if I hit the info screen on the back of the camera, it still says "non-cpu" in the SHOOT menu line, though it's registering the settings from the CPU lens.</p>

<p>Shun, it is all working fine, but the INFO screen still says "non-cpu" -- though the cpu lens works fine. Bothers me that there is a contradiction --and nobody has ever stated how to cancel the manual non-cpu selection.</p>

<p>Thanks Joseph,<br>

#222289 -- I think it's a bug in the firmware that there is no way to cancel this. If it were automatic, I'd expect the info screen to reflect that. But it still says "non-cpu" lens, though the newer lens works fine.</p>

<p>AI-s ... but it's the camera program that is the issue. </p>

<p>My partner (Chris Weston) lives in the UK and he travels the world photographing endangered species. He also has written over 20 books, many "how to." If you'd like, I can post the web site here, through which you can email him for more tips. But as these things go, I don't want to do it without permission lest I am accused of shameless promotion! </p>

<p>I have my D700 set up for light, fast work. 50mm, 85mm primes. Last night I needed a 24mm and I remembered that I had one in the old film kit. So for the first time I found myself using the non-cpu program. <br>

But ... I can't find it in any manual on any Nikon Dslr, in any third-party book, or in any posts here ... how to "de-select" the "non-cpu" choice when the cpu lenses go back on! <br>

Moreover, my "info" screen still says "non-cpu" when I put on the newer lens again. Anyone know this one??<br>

Thanks</p>

Has anyone seriously compared the new NC emulsion with the older one just discontinued? Resolution

and grain situation is supposed to be improved. thx

PS: I guess I was just whining last night! A thought ... the fine art photographer, Michael

Smith, fought back when Kodak discontinued his Azo contact paper

(www.michaelandpaula.com). He organized a bunch of fine art guys and had another paper

manufacturer make the Azo for them. I think he raised well into the six figures and pulled

it off. So if enough people want the polaroids ... or we can go to Fuji and ask for special

runs of the other products. Anyone know someone at Fuji who can push the button on

8x10 film?

Paul, I was at Photo LA a few weeks ago ... the gallery show ... and almost all color work

was film -- mostly negs -- scanned and printed on Lightjet. These are big bucks prints for

collectors. I say "almost" because I might have missed a print from a LF capture originated

digitally (don't see how though) -- but many of the contemporary B&W photographers

were shooting digital and printing monotone with inkjet.

 

Ellis, any word on your testing the D3 tonal and dynamic ranges against the current MF

digital backs?

Years ago Peter Gowland built a wonderfully rugged binocular reflex viewfinder for my MT

... beats rangefinding, especially since you can see your movements. For handheld

portraits he built a 4x5 twin lens reflex ... tall camera but effective. These days I am using

the Sinar F2 monorail in the field and the Mamyia 7II for handheld. The MT is sidelined yet

again.

I have been using Fuji in all but 8x10 anyway. But does anyone have any ideas on 8x10

instant proofing? And I just bought a new Calumet (wonderful) 8x10 processor for 809!

Thanks Michael ... so the generic lensboard is actually causing a rise in the lens and so I

am vignetting. ok. I knew it was something fundamental. This is the last piece of the

puzzle.

 

To explain this point to future surfers ... on my monorail, extended to the 135 focal

length, and the lens being centered, the bottom of the front standard is raised so that the

lens is centered on the GG ... but on the Linhof the botom of the front standard is on the

same plane as the bottom of the GG, so the lens would actually be raised to the GG and

not

centered. Linhoff engineers therefore lowered the lens hole in the lensboard to drop the

lens back to center position. My vignetting is caused by the rise built into lensboards that

are not made by Linhoff and do not have this compensating lower lens hole. Thanks

everyone. This is not descibed anywhere or even in the Linhoff manual.

Ahhhh ... now THAT's an interesting thing ... I have noticed that some lensboards are

offset and the generic are centered. This one is centered. Nowhere in the manual does it

discuss this. Bob S. any comment? That might be a compensation for this center tilt

problem.

 

"I am assuming a front tilt with the centered hole lens board is not an "on axis" tilt, since

the center of the lens is not projecting on the center of the GG." I thought the center of the

lens is projecting on the center of the GG with the centered lens hole. In fact, I wondered

why Linhof allowed the lens NOT to be centered with the offset board.

 

"Can you compensate for the vignetting by raising or lowering the lens?" I played with this,

and yes you can, the way Keith describes. But it takes longer on my clock and makes the

monorail more appealing.

 

Bob Salomon and the offset lensboard hole ... any notes? thx all.

Thanks Keith -- this is the direction I was going, and your explanation makes perfect

sense. The vignetting is seen first on the polaroid, hardly visible on the GG.

 

I have a project that demands setup speed in the field (too close to highways and fast

cars), so I timed my setting up the Sinar F2 (monorail) camera and then the MT. MT was

50% faster ... but the vignetting dropped the confidence level and I am sticking with the

F2.

"A tilt is a rotation. In mechansims design the point the object rotates about *is the instant

center*. One camera can be rotating the lens about a different point than another; so there

really IS some shift going on too."

 

This is all I can think of -- different axes. The lens has an almost 8-inch circle at f22; but

with the center axis, the circle flattens out quickly and the 5-inch film width has damaged

corners.

No Bob, just regular landscape. If you have a 135mm lens and polaroid back I can send

you the camera. (I'm using mine on the Sinar.) It needs servicing anyway -- getting pretty

stiff from sitting. I'm in Los Angeles if you have a local service center.

Thanks Michael, nothing is in the way. Without tilts the lens is fine. With 3 degrees or so it

is fine. Real landscape tilts, 5-10+ degrees: vignetting. I am going to send this camera for

service and ask them what is going on. Now, when they say everything is working

perfectly, I still have this riddle. One thing I noticed in watching the circle's shape without

a lensboard attached: that circle sure narrows down fast with Axis tilting, looking more

like a flying saucer as the tilt grows. Maybe that is the difference with the Sinar's

assymetrical tilt.

Thanks guys. I took your suggestions, but it's not the bellows as far as I can see. I played

with it without a lens board attached ... and aimed it at a light. The circle of light changed

shape perfectly according to forward or backward front tilt. I DID realize a difference

between the cameras though, that I had forgotten about ... the Sinar has an assymetrical

tilt and the MT has an axis tilt. I can see where the axis tilt is more radical to the image

circle. Perhaps this is all it is ... though I have trouble buying that when I see how much I

can tilt the Sinar and not be able to even GET a vignette with this lens.

This is wild ... I can't figure what fundamental issue I am missing. Let's take the Rodenstock 135mm

lens. It has a 7.5 inch circle of coverage and I'm shooting 4x5. On my trusy old Sinar F2 (monorail), no

problem. Wonderful lens and more tilt than anyone could need.

But for the helluvit, I pulled out my old Linkhof Master Technika and mounted the same lens. Other

than square on, any amount of tilt caused vignetting. We're talking 3-5 degrees!

I measured the film plane to lens board and they are the same on both cameras ... as well they should

be. But the Linhoff vignettes badly and the monorail doesn't. I am stumped. Your thoughts?