paul_cohn

<p>Thanks everyone for your answers. I found that I get the same result whether I point the M6 at a dark brown door or at a white wall. I am wondering now if I need a CLA, if the meter if "off." Is that possible?</p>

<p>Hi, I am trying to figure out how to best use my Leica M6 TTL to get an accurate meter reading. I metered a room of my house at night with the lights on using a Leica M6, a Fujifilm X100s, and a Sekonic 401-208. I got these readings:</p>

<ul>

<li>Leica M6 TTL: 1/4 second at f/2.8</li>

<li>Fujifilm X100s: 1/30 second at f/2.8</li>

<li>Sekonic reflective: 1/250 second at f/2.8</li>

<li>Sekonic incident: 1/15 second at f/2.8</li>

</ul>

<p>I then used the Fujifilm to shoot all four exposures, to see the histograms. Naturally, the 1/30 and 1/15 exposure had good histograms, the 1/250 was too dark and the 1/4 was much too light.<br>

I've also seen differences of roughly two stops when I'm outside using the Leica M6 vs. the Sekonic in overcast conditions.<br>

How, then, can I use the light meter in the Leica M6 TTL accurately? Do I simply need a CLA, or is there something about metering with the Leica M6 that I don't understand? <br>

Thanks!</p>

@ richard - paper tabs?

@ richard - paper tabs?

@Colin, there are characteristic light leaks, and light leaks that destroy the exposure. I have the second type.

@Rob, has anyone come up with an estimate (like one full rotation for the first 3 exposures, 1 1/2 rotations for the next 3, etc.)?

@Richard, there's a little red window already; does your method cut the light by darkening the window?

<p>I have a Diana with terrible light leaks on the top center of the image (bottom center of the frame as the film is loaded). I assume it comes from the red exposure counter window. Has anyone figured out how to fix this problem? If I put black tape over the window, I won't know how far to wind the film after each exposure (since it's not a constant number of turns throughout the roll).<br>

Has anyone figured out a solution? Thanks!</p>

<p>I've done a cold boot.<br>

I hooked the monitor up to a machine running Windows 7 and I could choose the highest resolution. </p>

<p>No, the mirror displays box is unchecked. Other ideas?</p>

<p>Hi, I'm running a Samsung 22" T220HD monitor on my MacBook Pro. A few days ago, the screen resolution changed - I don't know how, as I didn't change it - and now I cannot select a resolution higher than 1360 x 768.<br>

What could have happened? How do I restore the higher resolution choices?<br>

Thanks.</p>

<p>I'm using a Leica M6, and sometimes after I've unloaded the film and pulled the tail out for loading onto a reel for developing, the film curls backward. Why does this happen? (Am I winding it onto the take-up reel in the camera incorrectly when I load the film, or doing something else boneheaded, or is it a problem with the roll itself?)<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Hi -<br>

I'm using a 15" MacBook Pro with a 22" Samsung T220HD external monitor. When I calibrate both screens using Spyder3, there is a discernible difference in the brightness - the Mac screen shows the images as brighter than the Samsung screen.<br>

Moreover, if I print from Lightroom and let the program manage the color, the print is the same brightness as the Mac monitor image, but if I let the printer (an Epson Photo Stylus R2880) manage the color, the print comes out darker, like the image on the Samsung screen.<br>

How do I bring everything into sync?</p>

<p>I'm mostly using Ilford HP5 developed in D76 (either full strength for 7 1/2 min or 1:1 for 11 min, or whatever the spec sheet says), and then scanning with an Epson V700. Does anyone use a different processing combination?<br>

It's entirely possible I'm expecting too much, or I'm just not consistently shooting in good light; but it just seems like I have to do a lot of shadow/highlight manipulation or burning and dodging of the scanned negatives in PP in order to get the degree of contrast I want.<br>

Anyway, thanks everyone for their input. I'll keep playing with my shots and see what happens.</p>

<p>I've been looking through a lot of these posts to get information on the Nokton or the Biogen and similar lenses, and most of the references are to their performance on an M8 or M9. I'm using an M6 and have Voigtlander Color Skopar f2.5 lenses (35mm and 50mm) and I'm not quite happy - would like something faster and with more contrast. I don't know if the lenses perform the same on film as they do on digital, so I'll ask: Does anyone have recommendations for a good non-Leica 35 and 50 mm lens for a film Leica body? Thank you! </p>

<p>Hello all,<br>

I hope this is the right forum for this question ... are there travel or human interest magazines that consider unsolicited material? I have some unusual photos from India that I'd like to turn into a photo essay, but I have no experience in selling my material. (I'm not looking for websites where I could upload the images for free.)<br>

If anyone has advice/experience in this area that they could share, that'd be great. Thank you.</p>

<p>I'm thinking of shooting only with primes for my standard lenses - a 35mm, a 50mm, and (to be purchased) an 85mm - on a full-frame Nikon D700. The reason is that for day-to-day shooting, the 24-70mm zoom is too heavy, although on assignment I'd still use a 70-200mm telephoto zoom as needed. Is this set-up practical? I'd have a Nikon D300 with a DX-format sensor as a back-up ...<br>

Also, for the 50mm and the 85mm lenses, is it really such an advantage to have the f/1.4 versions vs. the f/1.8 versions?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Sorry, I meant 2.7.</p>

<p>Hi -<br>

When I use my adjustment brush in Lightroom 2.6 (running on Windows 7 64-bit), the brush goes haywire. Instead of giving me two concentric circles, it gives me two intersecting quarter arcs - like the top left quarter superimposed over the right top quarter, almost like a McDonald's "M". I can still paint with it, but I have no idea what I'm painting!<br>

Has anyone else had this problem, or can anyone suggest a solution? Thanks!</p>

<p>Thank you, Mike. I'm moving to India too.</p>

<p>I hope this isn't a stupid question: I'm about to move to a place where it is unsafe to drink the water. (I don't even know if the locals drink it or not ...) Could the water quality affect B&W film processing, chemical preparation, or print washing?</p>

<p>If anyone can share their real-life experience with this, I'd appreciate it:<br>

I have a D300 and like to do a lot of low-light shooting without flash. It may be zoomed or wide-angle, it all depends on what I come across ... I'm not a professional, but I'd eventually like to do freelance work so I want a professional quality image when all's said and done.<br>

To my eye, anything shot above ISO 800 on the D300 is too noisy so I don't go above it unless I'm desperate. I use noise reduction s/w in post-production (but I don't want to go into the relative merits of various s/w solutions here), but if the light is low, and I'm trying to shoot anything slower than 1/15 or 1/20 second at f2.8, I invariably get camera shake since I never remember to carry a tripod, and it's just easier to work handheld in crowded situations anyway.<br>

I'm drooling over the idea of a D3s with its ISO 102,500 capability, but it's pricey; if the D700 (or a used D3) can give me good noise control up to ISO 6400 or 12,800, that's probably good enough for me. The question is "if". How high an ISO can you use on the D700/D3 to and have a (reasonably) noise-free image? Is the D3s worth the premium over a D3 in that regard?<br>

Thanks!</p>

 

<p>I shoot with a Nikon D300, with both a 17-55mm f/2.8 lens and a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. When I'm trying to go "light", I carry just the body on the strap around my neck with one lens attached to the body and one in the 70-200mm lens case. This makes the equipment more accessible, but it's <em>killing</em> my upper back and shoulders. I don't want to use a backpack, since it's too much fumbling; does anyone have suggestions for a harness system or a bag that distributes the weight in such a way that I'm not going to need to have my spine realigned after every shoot? Thank you!</p>

<p>Thanks, everyone. I'm trying to distill all this, and I like the concept of "subversive", 'tho to me "subversive" can be either large or small, either disturbing or humorous - anything that makes you look twice; and I also suppose it can be a snapshot, as long as the snapshot has a focus, an answer to the question "so what". That seconds2real website is great.</p>

<p>This question may open a big can of worms ... I like street photography, I (sometimes) enjoy trying to do it, and some of my shots work and some don't. A lot of Garry Winogrand's photos captivate me, a few leave me scratching my head.<br>

So what makes a good street photograph?</p>

<p>Hi, can anyone recommend a good resource that explains how to best use the Nikon SB-900 under different circumstances - e.g., when to use TTL vs. AA vs. manual vs. guide numbers; how to light cramped areas vs. open areas; and so on? Thanks!</p>

<p>I just shot a roll of Superia X-tra ISO 400 under cloudy skies (using a Leica M6 with a Voigtlander Color Skopar 35mm lens), and I compared the scanned negatives to some test shots I did with a Nikon D300 with white balance set to automatic. The colors aren't the same, which I expected given that the digital white balance has its own characteristics; but in reading some of the posts about Superia, I start to wonder whether it is a good outdoor/daylight film, or whether it is best used for artificial light conditions. (I usually shoot in B&W, so I haven't thought about the best color negative film to use for outdoors.)<br>

Any thoughts?</p>