jim_gardner4

Hi, I am thinking of buying a Nikon S rangefinder from the states which has a

Nikkor H.C F2 lens serial number 634***. I have read this lens uses "soft

focus" elements but I am unsure what the results would be. Does any one who

has used one of these lenses have an opinion on how "soft" they are? Naturally

I wouldnt expect a 50ish year old lens to be the same as a new one but I would

want to use the camera / lens to make prints up to 10x8 or poss 9.5x12. Any

idea how theselenses compare to a 1970 AI? Also does any one know who CLA's

Nikon rangefinders and lenses in the UK? Thanks.

Get a film for it and use it then do a print, show your mates and say "look at the camera I took this shot on". Call me sentimental but if we dont look after these cameras and use them, they will all get thrown away. I have / had older relations who had all sorts of nice cars, bikes etc and when they needed repair they would let them rot. Nowadays people would love to see them let alone own them. Your not going to get rich on it and it will take up little space. Have a few hours fun, get out there and use it.

Arif, Good for you. I also started LF about six months ago and bought a Speed Graphic with Wollensak Rapax 127mm lens and 3 double dark slides on e bay for 300 pounds. Although I have since bought a Toyo and lens for well over a 1000 pounds, the Speed graphic is still great fun and produces very acceptable results. Also if I am nipping out somewhere on my bike I can put the graphic in a back pack and not worry about it too much and use it hand held. (some people will chuckle when they read that but occasionally the fun is just in using it). Have a go and enjoy it.

Many thanks for the answers above, they all make sense. I think I will give a little more exposure from now on and develop to suit. It seems a shame that new shutters / lenses / bodies that can cost a lot of money cant all run the same but every now and then I get a result that makes it all worth while.

I have been using Nikon 35mm and Bronica medium format for many years now and

mainly use Delta 100. I generally rate the film at 80 ISO and dev for the

recommended time with good results in shadows and highlights. Regardless of

which boby or lens I use, the contrast and neg detail is the same. I recently

brought a large format camera with a Schneider Apo-Symmar lens and the

contrast in the negs is very high with the shadow deyail on the thin side.

Developing methods are the same and I use the same light meter. I understand I

could over expose slightly and reduce dev times and would get a similar result

to other lenses but my question is this; If I need to adjust exposure and dev

times depending on which lens I use, I would need to note every body / lens

combination for every shot taken. As I often go out with four bodies and

perhaps two lenses for each body and may take 25 shots over a couple of hours,

this would seem impractible. Whats the answer? I have looked through pevious

questions and found one in 2002 that stated lenses all heve very differnt

contrast. How then do people cope when they go out with many different lenses?

I have had an 80-200 from new and it has always made a faint high pithed noise but on mine at least, it is quieter than the older AF lenses and much quieter than the shutter.Go outside, get someone to hold the camera and focus while you are standing 30feet away (or however far you will use it closest) and see if you can hear it.

Been a long time but from memory Todra gorge is well worth it so is Ait ben hadu (my spelling is probably well off but goggle it and it should come up). The whole village is made of earth but unfortunately its dissepearing fast and its been 20 years since I was there! I am not sure how far these places are from Marrakech but while you are in Marrakech the outdoor market is great for teeth pulling, snake charming etc. etc. especially at night. The dye pits for leather are very colourfull. Be very careful with your camera, a lot of people dont like it and will tell you in no uncertain terms. Also remember you may have a camera thats worth more than some people have and some of them BUT BY NO MEANS ALL may try and releive you of it.

If it were me, I would spend spare cash on lenses in your position. I have all sorts of Nikon bodies from an F to an F5 and if I use the same lens on each, you just can not tell the difference in results which is to be expected as its the lens doing most of the work. Personaly I prefer primes but would never buy a lens with more than a 2.5 X zoom. I.E. 80-200 or 18-35 ok but not 18-50 or 70-300. I have tried 3 X and tried to tell myself they are as sharp as 2.5 X or primes but to my eye, they just arnt. Obviously its up to you but why not try and borrow or hire the lens you may buy and test it next to your existing lenses?

Get a Lee filter holder and rings to fit your different lenses. The holder fits on to the different rings and holder takes square or rectangular filters. Therefore any filter you buy and insert into the holder can be used on lenses you have a ring for.

I am in the UK and although I almost never use colour now, I used to in the past. Coming back from various trips abroad I would send film to the "best" proffesional lab I could find. Results, terrible and I mean really bad. One day I was walking round a shopping centre and had an exposed "fun" film on me and dropped it off at Snappy snaps. Results, fantastic. Next time I came back from abroad I walked in and spoke to the young assistant. I said my films were very important to me and I was very keen they wernt harmed (which has also happened in pro labs). I was told not to worry and to come back in a few hours. Results that time, stunning. Honestly, if I ever do take a colour film now, it goes to Snappy snaps simply because they seem very good at what they do. (or was it just the person in that particular lab)?!

Hey I like that and might try it some time soon. Thanks for the idea.

We could spend hours here talking about zones, scales and all sorts of other things but I assume the scene has gone and cant be repeated. If the shots are very important to you but you could afford to loose one or two, you could cut a third or a half of the film and dev that at the recomended time and see how it looks. If contrast is much to high, do the next third at a lesser time and look at that (when dry).

All the shots I have taken in the last month or so have been in overcast flat conditions and I have added about 15% to dev times. On the otherhand if subject contrast is more that about 7 stops, I may decrease dev times depending on how I want the print to look. I wouldnt be surprised if your film was a stop or two under exposed as going by Ilfords recomended times should give you a printable neg if exposure is "correct".

Leica 111g or late nikon range finder. You lot are so lucky in the States. A Nikon SP for $1200!! They would be twice that here and a 111g would start at $2000.

I have been through some fairly rough airports where the x-ray machines almost glow with radiation and have taken films from 50-1600 iso and infrared (all b+w). I have never asked for film to be hand checked and have never had a problem.

I bought a s/h F5 a few days ago and just tried it. No noise. Try it again with lens off and battery pack out.

Sure. Every time I get hold of another camera body I shoot a roll of slide film to check it plus I shoot a few rolls a year for the pleasure of it and viewing them. If i am using an older body, slide film for colour and projecting them is the way to go (for me). For MF stuff I found a really old projector at the local tip for 10 quid and it works a treat. Also part of me wants to keep using it to keep it alive.

Thats a hard one but how about this. Water going through a length of plastic pipe where water equals light. The longer the pipe equals the longer the focal length ie you would be getting something further away. The amount of time you let the water go through it equals shutter speed. The diameter of the pipe equals aperture. The faster the water is pushed through the pipe equals faster film, ie it would all happen a bit faster but the aireated water (now with little bubbles in) would mean the image is a little bit "fuzzey" / grainier. Great question.

Agree with above. I now never pre soak films, either 35mm, medium or large format and never have a problem. Years ago when I did pre soak sometimes, I would still dev for the normal time.

I was going to ask the same question about fan vibration but thought I would do my own test first so i cut the wire that feeds the fan!! and put a switch in it. Guess what? I cant tell the difference in prints from having the fan on or off. I will try the suggestion above re glass neg carriers for 5 x 4 if I can locate any.

I use Kodak HIE film in various bodies always with a red 25 filter. If the camera you ure using had TTL metering, set the film speed for about 50 asa to start with and bracket if you are not sure. Dont forget IR film focuses differently to normal film so check to see if your lens has a little red dot on the barrel. If so, focus through the lens, make a note of the distance on the barrel then line that distance up with the little red dot. Go on, try it.

I reckon Patrick Gainer has hit the nail right on the head. I have trouble getting bromophen in anything less than 5 litre packets of powder. If I mixed it all it would go off before I was half way through it so I would shake the packets to mix the contents up then weigh out half the amount and mix that into liquid and never had any adverse results. Nowadays I either use an Ilford liquid dev or, because 5 lites is only about ?7 I think, I may mix it all, use it for up to 6 months and throw the rest away. That may sound extravagant to some but after buying the camera/lens/film then going out to get the shot, then deving the film, contact print etc, I would hate to mess up my final print for the sake of ?3.50 every six months.

I had the same problem on an F4 (although there is no lcd) so it was just the blinking error light. I did send camera away to be mended which was great for a couple of years till it did it again. The second time it went wrong I was using an orange filter and auto focus. As soon as I removed filter it worked fine. Could have been mere chance but worth checking?