d_purdy
-
Posts
950 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by d_purdy
-
-
<p>http://www.plastidip.com/home_solutions/Plasti_Dip<br>
<br />Forced air pressure can be really strong unless you are losing pressure somewhere.<br>
I have used bulbs for several years and the problem I ran into was the bulb wearing out and losing pressure. I fixed the last one I bought by dipping it for a few coats of plastidip. I dipped the whole bulb and part of the hose in the stuff and that one still works perfectly. <br>
It might not be your problem but it is a problem with bulbs.</p>
-
<p>You could just get a couple of 5 pound weights and do regular exercise to build up arm strength so you can use the heavy pentax 645. </p>
-
<p>My guess is this.. Carlos damaged the acumat so needed to replace it in the hasselblad and then thought maybe he could cut the acumat down a bit and get rid of the damage and fit it to his pentacon 6. Not really a detective, just play one on the forums.<br>
Dennis</p>
-
<p>Biometar is just another name for Planar. I think it is the East German name. You can find a lot of discussion about the difference between Planar and Tessar. Basically the Planar is a better lens for flat field of focus and wide open focus but the design has a tendency to flare whereas the Tessar design has little tendency to flare. Planars (Biometars) didn't start being used significantly until anti glare coatings started being used.</p>
-
<p>http://imagesandcameras.com/buying-rolleiflex-tlr/</p>
<p>Looks like the Rolleiwide type 2 that offers 120/220 film is pretty rare. Only 404 made from 1965 to 1967. </p>
-
<p>If you decide to give it a go then I would set the dials at 500th and f22. <br>
On the pc there is a little wire that locks in a rollei flash cord, that has to come off.<br>
I think you might be able to leave the shutter button alone other than to lock it. If you take the cover with the shutter unlocked the button will fall out... no real big deal. <br>
I have actually done this to both an F and an FX because when the cover is off it is really easy to clean the lenses. You can unscrew the front elements and blow out the dust.<br>
When I put the F back together the dials were stuck because I managed to move them a bit out of alignment. I took the cover back off and fixed it. When I put the FX back together the shutter button wouldn't work... I had it slightly miss aligned with the wire on the bottom it pushes... I merely turned the button a bit and it was fixed. <br>
Be careful when you lift the cover off gently that some washer doesn't fall off.</p>
-
<p>If you are brave and adventurous you could take the front cover off and find it and probably figure out how to repair it. There are screws at all the corners under the leather and you have to take off the thin ring type nuts from the pc and shutter button. then put the shutter in lock position and the whole front plate will lift off leaving the lenses exposed as well as the controls. The trick is to not get the controls out of alignment with the shutter and the fstops and the meter. Find the lost screw and see how it goes back on and then carefully put the cover back on. Or you could just send it in to Krikor and have him do it. </p>
-
<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=282122">Q.G. de Bakker</a><br>
They (DHW) are still selling (!) cameras. That's quite something else.</p>
<p>No they are still making cameras. not just selling. </p>
-
<p>A rose by any other name. They are still making cameras and with great pride and are having success bolstered by the Asian market. I believe it is now an employee owned company.</p>
-
<p>As no one is replying I will give my 2cents. Seems to me if the instructions call for 2 cable releases it must also call for a leaf shutter lens, either the old 90 or the newer 160. </p>
-
<p>It is likely a convertable lens and the focal lengths are the 4 1/4 or 6 1/8<br>
that is approximately 105 and 155</p>
<p>You could go into a darkened room and take a piece of paper and hold it behind the lens while aiming the lens at something distant out the window. You should be able to see the image come into focus on the paper and that will show you the focal length of the lens by seeing how far the paper is from the lens.</p>
-
<p>Wow this thread continues on now 5 pages. I did know a photographer who thought the GX680 was perfect. He did a lot of interior shots of restaurants and needed movements but didn't want to carry film holders.<br /> But anyway you guys are talking about the good old days when commercial photography was done on film. I was a commercial photographer then specializing in table top stuff. You get a catalog job and different sizing of printed images but the art director wanted to keep the sizing the same percentage as much as possible so you used the smallest camera with a large enough image and that was always either 8x10 or 4x5 and no one wanted to invest in a GX680 for the cases you need little images, you would just use a roll film back. I shot shoes and plates and towels and all that type crap and it was up to an art director to make the product change and fluff everything up and make it perfect. It wasn't something that moved all that fast for the most part.</p>
-
<p>Alexander, I don't know what your camera's problem is, but I can assure you that light leaking in will never cause darkness in the positive image. Fog will cause plus density on a negative which will cause lightness in the positive image. Your picture there has darkening on the sides. There might be fogging in the machine printer at your lab. Fogging on a print will cause darkness like that.</p>
-
<p>Wait a minute. Again looking at your picture the fogging should be lighter not darker. Extra light would cause extra density on the film which would make it lighter in tone whether it is slide film or negative film, black and white or color. And I see the image of a number. Something very strange here. Again make sure the pressure plate is on the right setting.</p>
-
<p>Looking at your fogged picture I think you are right. I used to have a Rollei that took this flat glass and I never had that problem so I don't know how your camera came to be that way. But I do think it would not be hard to get some flat black paint and paint those unpainted sides. I just looked at my current 2.8F and it doesn't take that glass but it is flat black on the inside and only polished on the top.<br>
Another thing I am noticing with your camera is that it appears you don't have the proper back for the flat glass. So it is strange that you have the flat glass. The back should have a hump at the bottom of the outside and the pressure plate should have 3 settings. Maybe yours has it and I just can't see it. If you do have 3 settings be sure to take it off the glass setting when you are not using glass. That actually might solve your problem.</p>
-
<p>Your camera is a 2.8F from the mid 1960s. If the meter is working, when you look at the knob on the left as you hold the camera as if you are going to take a picture, there is a needle that should move in response to light. There on the same knob is another needle with a circle on the end and that should move as you turn either the shutter speed dial or the f stop dial on the front of the camera. So theoretically you would turn the dials till the circle is exactly over the other needs and then the exposure would be correct. There is a filter factor on the large black dial at the bottom of the left side of the camera. You should see where it says 1, 2, or 3. (I think, I am not looking at a camera) you should set that filter factor to 0 and then set the ASA as an ISO number.<br>
A lot of those meters from that era are still working. I have owned 4 or 5 cameras like yours and the meters worked in all of them. It isn't a particularly precise meter as it is reading a broad range of light from the sensor on the top of the front under the Rolleiflex name. <br>
I hope yours is all well in all ways and you enjoy your great camera.</p>
-
<p>As Allen said, the term Field camera comes from a camera designed to be taken into the field. Not how we generally think of field, as on a farm or for football, but outside the studio. The cameras are made with limited movements and without a rail, generally made from wood due to the strength/weight ratio. It is considered that in the field you don't need all those movements because for one thing you generally don't do close up work as on a table top in a studio. You also don't need as much bellows.</p>
-
<p>You need to open the camera back door, then use your finger to turn the number past 1 then close the back while holding the number past one.</p>
-
<p>I agree with the LowePro bag. I have one as well for my 2.8F and I love it though it is a bit larger than the mini version and I can keep lots of film and accessories in it as well. Harry Fleenor is top notch. Tell your girlfriend that it is a crappy camera not worth much and if you pay for the CLA it should become your camera...;-)</p>
-
<p>Agreed. Change your lab. </p>
-
<p>Brett Rogers, the 2.8B is rare and was made only for the US and has the Biometar, which according to Zeiss is the same as a Planar.<br>
However there were 3.5Bs made with either Xenar or Tessar that aren't so expensive. There is one on ebay now for 799 or best offer. 799 would be too much.<br>
Dennis</p>
-
<p>Depending on your photography experience, your biggest problem might be in the metering from a Rolleiflex. You probably can't count on a good one in an old camera if it has a meter at all. </p>
-
<p>this one looks awfully good coming up in an hour....</p>
-
<p>If your Grandfather bought it new in the late 50s or early 60s it was probably either a Model E or F. F being the late model. Those models in good condition are a bit out of your expressed budget. You might look to a slightly older model B, C or D, generally termed "Automats". You can find them often under 500 on ebay. There are in a lot of cases a choice between a 2.8 80mm lens or a 3.5 75mm lens. The 75 is less expensive but just as good. An awful lot of the older cameras will have issues. Hazy lens, fungus, scratches on the lens. Also the mechanical parts are likely in need of service from old lubricants gone gummy and stiff. <br>
Too bad you didn't inherit your grandfathers camera. If he is still alive maybe he would loan it to you.</p>
Light meter for my Rolleiflex and Mamiya 7?
in Medium Format
Posted