sorry_no_photos

<p>I'm going to revive this old thread, since Ravi describes the issue perfectly. Does anyone know if the magnet he refers to can simply be removed? </p>

<p>Thanks for the info, Ray. I was impressed by this shot of the abbey:<br>

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/plaubel-69w-proshift-superwide-center-filter-/281512759408?pt=UK_Film_Cameras&hash=item418b77d070<br>

...until I noticed that the verticals weren't entirely parallel. </p>

<p>I have the Mamiya with the shift lens (50mm), which can shift 16mm upwards. While the Plaubel can only shift 15mm, I'm wondering if the effect is greater, since the camera design is similar to a rangefinder (the mamiya is an SLR). In other words, I'm assuming that the Plaubel's lens is closer to the film plane than the Mamiya's lens is. And if that's the case, would the same shift give a bigger bang for the buck? .<br>

I've seen a photo or two online taken with the Plaubel, and the final result does seem better (ie, the image seems to show a larger shift displacement) than what I can usually attain with my Mamiya. <br>

Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>Thanks Marcelo. No, no filter was on it.<br>

<br />Thanks Edwin. The tech did mention the 4 second limitation in auto mode, so I'm positive that the mention of EV 4 referred to exposure value.<br>

Thanks Arthur. I suppose it couldn't hurt to give them a call. <br>

<br />I did a bit more testing last night. ISO 100. Found that at about EV 7.5 and below, the meter ceased to function correctly. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I received this reply from Hasselblad tech support:<br>

Light conditions below EV4 are outside the range for the the xpan light metering system. It's not sensitive enough for such a dark environment. Metering wasn't the top priority when developing this product since most users were expected to shoot manual. <br>

And here is my reply:<br>

I’m testing it a bit more, and I’m finding that even in an ambient light level of about EV 6.5, the xpan meter flashes between the negative and positive indicators, while the red dot has absolutely no tendency to light up. It is only in a light level of about EV 9, that the unit behaves properly, and the red dot is able to light up by itself. <br>

(Oh, and I always shoot in manual mode anyways).<br>

<br /><br /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think mine is toast, but someone on flickr said that xpan's don't like low light. Can anyone confirm this for me? As a concrete example, mine won't work for an ambient light level (as determined by my other cameras and a minolta light meter) of f/5.6 and 4 sec's and ISO 100. All the meter does is flash between the negative and positive sign, with no hint of the middle dot wanting to light up. Or sometimes, it will just flash the negative sign (and will continue to do so, even if I open the camera up to f/4 and 8 sec's and ISO 200). <br /> <br />The middle dot will work properly, but only in significantly brighter conditions. <br /> <br />Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>So, after a 40 year lapse, I'm going to try my hand at darkroom stuff again (35mm). I just want to process the film, since I'll then be scanning at home and sending any decent digital files to the local photo shop for printing. <br>

<br />I did a quick search and found this tutorial:<br>

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/02/16/film-how-to-develop-scan-and-print-with-no-darkroom-required-by-max-marinucci/<br>

Does anyone know of any other good tutorials? <br>

And Max just mentions b&w. Is it possible to use a fairly simple process like this on chromes? <br>

Thanks in advance.<br>

</p>

<p>Just wondering how a shift of 4mm's on a 35mm would equate to a shift of 5mm's on a medium format. I believe that's the difference on the two versions of the Noblex cameras. I'm guessing that all other factors aside, the 4mm shift on the 35mm would give more bang for the buck.</p>

<p>Another update: the 1.53mm adapter doesn't work either. peleng8.com and eastwavelens.com are (supposedly) still looking into the issue. I guess I have a few choices:<br>

--sell the lens on e-bay<br>

--buy a non-full-frame body<br>

--keep the lens for my 5D, but just use it as a macro lens (it does produce some neat results)<br>

--keep waiting for the so-called experts to find out what is wrong</p><div></div>

<p>Most recent update: eastwavelens.com says that my fotodiox M42 adapter is the wrong thickness (1.35mm's versus their adapter's 1.53mm's). So I've ordered theirs. And peleng8.com says that the rear filter that was attached to the lens they sent me is wrong (they asked me to send a photo of the filter to confirm). So now they're working on getting the supposedly correct filter. Sheesh!</p>

<p>Well, the M42 to Peleng adapter arrived in the mail today. Now the filter protrudes from the lens even worse than before. So neither eastwavelens.com nor peleng8.com seem to know what they're talking about. <br>

Now the hard part comes: trying to get my money back. </p>

<p>A follow-up note: eastwavelens.com wrote to say that it should work with an M42 to Peleng adapter, as well as an M42 to EOS adapter. So I'll try that and update this thread when it arrives.<br /> Thanks for the reply Jamie, but this is what I got when I moved 2 metres away from the subject (cropped down to 700 pixels wide). I focused as best I could with a Brightscreen Accurfocus device, but the result was terrible. With the Accurfocus, I can immediately tell whether I'm going to get a decent focus or not.</p><div></div>

<p>And from the photo above, a full screen capture.</p>

<p>So, unless anybody has any suggestions, it'll be going on e-bay shortly (I can likely sell it well before I even get a response from Peleng). </p><div></div>

<p>It's a beautiful little lens. Built like a tank. And if you take off the rear filter element, the mirror won't hit it (but then the range of focus will only go from a few centimeters to a metre). The Peleng website says that it will fit on a 5D, but I suspect that any full frame EOS body will risk damage to the mirror. Unfortunately, I found this out only after ordering it and receiving it after 3 weeks. And the people back in Belorussia don't seem to answer their e-mails. I've added a couple of photos taken with it after I removed the rear element.</p><div></div>

<p>My 5D mirror is definitely hitting the rear element of the Peleng lens. When I remove the rear element, the problem disappears, but then I can't focus to infinity. Any ideas? (I think I might have just wasted another chunk of significant cash).</p><div></div>

<p>I'm the proud owner of a used unit in ex++ condition. However, in the owners manual, there is a table on page 20 that indicates if 120 film is loaded, the LCD indicator should say 220 and the pressure plate setting should be 220. Given that someone else has already mentioned on this forum that the manual is poorly written, does anyone know what the LCD indicator really should say? I've got a 16 exposure roll of Provia 100 in there right now. I've manually set the camera to 120, but given what the table indicates, should I really set it to 220? (It seem preposterous to set it to 220, knowing that there's 120 film in there). The manual says that it has something to do with the thickness of the backing paper, but I'm not even sure if the Provia has backing paper.<br>

And help appreciated.</p>

<p>There's something magic about these slides. The heft. The Lilliputian size. The smooth finish of the plastic. The colors and detail when held between a light box and a magnifying glass (and my reading glasses). I don't think even a good print from my Canon 5D can match the visceral experience. Nor can the projection of the slide itself, which loses quite a bit of the detail on the slide and still has some of the focusing problems mentioned above. Nor can a scan, which also loses detail.</p>

<p>Just finished mounting and projecting and scanning some slides in the Gepe glass slides. Although they're still not perfectly flat for the projecter, I'm quite satisfied. I noticed a couple of slides with newton rings initially, but when projected they seem to have disappeared...and now I can no longer find them in the light box anyways. No problems scanning. No issues with the greenhouse effect...possible due to the lower temps of the halogen bulb. (I'll have to select a poorer slide and time it under projection to see exactly how long it takes to ruin the slide). <br>

I don't get obsessive about removing all the dust before mounting, but still get good results with a Giotto blower bulb (very good design for this purpose) to get rid of 90% of the dust on the mounts and slide before mounting. With a bit of practice, I found I could mount a slide in a couple of minutes. If I've got a problematic dust mote, I can often just rotate the mount so that the mote is not in a sky portion of the slide image. <br>

I may try a camel hair brush next time, though. I've heard that if you blow air on the brush, it causes it to have a small electrostatic charge, which can attract dust off of a slide. So I'll try that next time I get some more mounts from Gepe.</p>

<p>Thanks David. I did order some Gepe glass mounts yesterday, so I'll see how that works out. Good to know that they'll still permit scanning. The halogen lamp is the same wattage, but supposedly they're signficantly cooler than conventional Sylvania incandescents (and it seems the 30 degrees mentioned above supports that, though I didn't do the same test before I made the change). Do the glass mounts just have one layer of glass? If so, is the glass supposed to be on the lens side of the slide or on the bulb side?<br>

Thanks Giovanni. Yes, I have the P11, and yes, there are the two removable lenses between slide and bulb, and the removable parabolic unit behind the bulb. Just wondering if a Hasselblad projector would be appreciably better in terms of optics.</p>

<p>Thanks for those answers. I just did a scan with one of the slides that was problematic. Everything was in perfect focus from edge to edge, and I couldn't detect any bowing of the slide (other than the usual minor displacement that usually occurs without glass...I'm guessing on the order of about 0.1 mm). So if bowing occurs, it must be on a very short term basis in the projector. Is bowing due to the ambient heat? Or is there some other light frequency that causes it? <br>

A related question: if I use glass mounts, will I then run into problems with scanning? </p>

<p>I find that my 645 slides on a 1960's vintage Rollei slide projector can't be fully focused all at once. Usually there is a choice between focusing the centre of the shot or the periphery. Just wondering if this is due to the poorer optics of a 50 year old lens or whether there is something inherent to slide projection that causes this. The same slides can be put in my Epson V700 scanner and there are no problems with focus. <br>

The slides haven't bowed due to heat (I've put a cooler halogen bulb in the unit and the temp inside the unit is only about 30 degrees celsius after about 20 minutes). <br>

Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>I've also had blank frames when I've changed lenses with the mirror up. Just another thing to keep in mind. </p>

<p>Just wondering which digital bodies might be compatible with the Mirex adapters. I've e-mailed a bit back and forth with Germany, but there's still a bit of a language barrier (even though their English is light-years ahead of my German). <br>

I understand that the main barrier is the prism housing that often juts out too far. So maybe what I'm asking is which bodies have the smallest prism housing? Or which bodies have prisms housings that can be filed off without doing any intrinsic damage? <br>

On the Mirex site, it states that compatible bodies are: </p>

<ul>

<li>M42x1 </li>

<li> Canon EOS </li>

<li> Sony - Minolta </li>

<li> Pentax K </li>

</ul>

<p>My main reason for getting the system would be rises, so I assume a large prism housing would be the main concern. <br>

I'm also considering the Zork system, since I rarely use tilts. They state a compatibility with most Canon professional and some Nikon professional camera bodies (D3 and D3x digital. <br>

Would anyone know if the Zork or the Mirex are better at clearing prism housings?<br>

My preference for a body would be an older full frame sensor model, but that's not essential. (I have Mamiya M645 lenses, by the way).<br>

Thanks very much in advance,</p>

<p>Thanks everybody. Philip, I was thinking about the Mirex also, but I hardly ever used tilt (on my GX680 at least) and the Zork has a higher shift capability (more mm's). Decisions, decisions. </p>

<p>Any other thoughts on Zork vs. Mirex? Please weigh in, anybody. </p>

<p>I have a Mamiya M645 shift lens (as well as other focal lengths) and am thinking of getting a Zork shift adapter (for use on a DSLR). Would the shift lens attached to the shift adapter give me additional rise and fall? The lens gives 16mm of rise and the adapter gives 20mm of rise. Would I wind up with 32mm of rise? Or is there some limitation that comes into play?<br>

Thanks in advance.</p>