alpshiker

It would help if you were to clarify which mount you wish to adapt what lens to. Sounds like you want to go from a Mamiya 7 lens to a Mamiya 645 body mount, but that's not clear.

 

Why not start with a lens that has a known large image-circle, and one that can easily be modified? Something like an LF 210mm f/5.6 Symmar or Sironar. Or even a shutterless 210mm f/4 Mamiya-Sekor for M645.

 

LF lenses and barrel-mounted copying lenses can be got dirt cheap these days.

 

Hi Joe,

Yes I know, there are easier ways. The reason I am considering that lens is that I can make use of a 90mm image circle. The Mamiya 645 lenses have 75mm. I also want the sharpness and contrast that ULD lenses produce on distant subjects, like mountains. The 210 f4 is probably a little too weak, although I only read other's comments. The AF 210 ULD would be fine, given a smaller image circle, but as you know, it has no manual aperture ring. The 200mm lens I use now is a Pentax 67. It is pretty sharp, but sometimes subject to flare in the centre. And talking LF lenses, I have tested my Fujinon A 240mm f9 on the device. It has reasonably good sharpness, and of course a huge image circle, but the distance of the back pupil towards the throat of the lens mount gives way to a lot of vignetting. That would be where the M7 lens could be far superior. Is is also a very compact and lightweight lens, and certainly flare resistant. Anyway, I'm just weighing the possibilities.

I have this seemingly excellent 210 N f8 that I wish to use on a shift-stitch device for landscape. This will require to alter the lens by removing the shutter blades or preventing that they can close, and to build a special adapter because the FF distance of the Mamiya 7 is some 3,5 mm shorter than the standard M645 mount. Or maybe machine the lens mount, or graft the lens elements in another lens like the plain 210mm for 645, if any of that is possible with a reasonable expense of work. But before anything is attempted that will destroy the lens as far as it's initial use is concerned, I wish I could check if the lens image circle will fit within the shift device, because this lens has a special design with small front and a large rear element.

 

Is there any way to open the shutter by an electrical means so that it will stay open? I don't want to test before I know what I am doing. I noticed on the wiring diagram that there are two contacts for magnets, one is for the open position and another one for the closed position. This is probably for the B pose. But there are also other contacts for shutter control. Well, I suspect that what I am asking won't work if the lens is not coupled to the camera, but maybe there is a repairman trick to open the lens to see through it for inspection or bench calibration? And if all of that is impossible anyway, it is always interesting to talk about it.

You have probably found the culprit by now since this post dates! But I remember having had some issues when I began using the GS1, that was a long time ago. The GS1 camera feels a little fiddly, but it is stronger than you would think and I never had to send it out for a repair in the years I used it. But one thing that can happen when mounting the back, if one is not careful, and especially when switching backs in a hurry, is that one of the two bottom (or top?) hooks can stay out, while the other is hooked. This can go unnoticed until you forward the film with the camera. Then the small dented wheels are not synchronized and you get problems such as you describe. If this is what happened when you got the bad behaviour, you would have noticed that it was difficult to detach the back. I never used the grip but only the rotating handle, and I don't have the camera any more so I cannot provide a step by step, but there should be a way to fool the camera to check if the dented wheel is turning, maybe by mounting the back and leaving it open if that is possible. I think there needs to by a film in to drive the mechanism. Also, if you don't have a manual with the camera, find one and read how to load the film properly, for there is a special manipulation with the double exposure lever while advancing the film, if I remember right. Bottom line, if it doesn't work, don't throw the baby out but take time to go through all the procedures until you master it. Be gentle with the camera and it should serve you well. PG lenses are great optics.

<p>On the GS-1, when not careful or when working in a hurry it is actually possible to clamp the back with one of the hooks misplaced. Happened to me once and all the shots were fogged. But you would have seen it when you took the back off, for it is harder to unhook. The camera is lightweight for a 6x7 format. If not exactly built like a tank, it's nevertheless a robust camera. </p>

<p>I have used a Bronica GS-1. It is a nice camera. Much lighter than RB/RZ, it can be handheld, there is even a rapid grip for it, and comes with some very sharp and contrasted lenses which are of a late computer design. They are no fast lenses however. The whole operation of loading films and back swapping is a bit tricky at first, but once the method is acquired it's not a problem. At the time, new lenses were very expensive and I had a Pentax 67 opportunity. I kept the GS-1 for the studio, and used the Pentax outside.</p>

<p>Not something I would tackle, but Steve Mallett provides some practical does and don't from his experience on <a href="http://osdir.com/ml/recreation.photography.equipment.rollei/2005-07/msg00178.html">this page</a> (unsigned).<br /> My single experience at taking a lens apart is almost 40 years old. It was a nice Nikkor 50mm 1.2 that an australian friend used for underwater photography (some might remember the price tag, a month of my wage). It had fungus, so I offered to clean it. All went well, elements clean, when the last lens to get in slipped from my hands and crashed onto the concrete floor… Reminds me that I must bring him a new one when I get to heaven.</p>

<p>The seller was I think, unaware of the problem. He politely apologized and offered a full refund. All is well.</p>

<p>Interesting outcome with the Dagor! I suspect that the balsam has crystallized and heating the lens element reversed the process? Modern lenses use different chemical compounds, some are two components, others harden with UV light. It's not certain that they would melt with heat. But certainly worth experimenting if the lens is dead anyway.</p>

<p>Thanks for this advice Charles. If it were not for some worrisome posts I have now found elsewhere, I would probably try. Others have done that to find out that the haze stood between the glued elements. It looks as though this is a programmed genetic illness of the 1.9N, or at least of some batches of it. The older C has another design. I should probably send it back. I am now a little worried for the handful top mamiya lenses I have in my bag. Is balsam fogging known to occurr on other N lenses?</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

I just purchased a mint looking N lens from Japan on the bay. To much of my surprise though, the rear element has haze, in such extent that it is unusable. I am assuming that this is due to balsam opacity, or perhaps separation in the rear element. Having it fixed would probably cost more than the $300 I spent so far, if such was available. I will certainly obtain from the seller that he takes it back, for he mentioned no problem with glass. The lens looks so good however—it is like new—, that it's heart breaking to dump it. Has anyone had success in removing haze from a 1.9 N? Are rear lens cells still available?</p>

<div></div>

Ralph, thanks for your kind explanation! It can probably be a good option, but there much chance involved in it. I would rather secure a car before leaving. The problem is there is this mention: such or such car model "or similar". The "similar" could miss the option I am looking for, and I don't think that any company would change it's contracts just for me, so I will probably call the local office and know from their experience what risks I am taking.

 

 

''Also, for a vehicle like an SUV or a minivan, your odds will probably be better if you rent early in the week''

 

 

Thanks, that is good to know!

There are things that are obvious from within, but when you fly a long way and are lost in an airport in a foreign city with too many luggage for you to carry, the last thing you would wish is go out hunting for cars... I am no exception.

 

I checked the Jeep Grand Cherokee offred at one of the companies and it seems that it should work. The rear seats fold flat neatly. There is no scale to figure what the dimensions are, but if the front seat can lean forward, a luggage filling the gap, it should be long enough to accomodate a small to medium size photographer. Any experience?

 

 

 

http://www.jeep.com/shared/2008/grand_cherokee/gallery/main/int_main_06.jpg

Why not? A small delivery vehicle should be OK, except perhaps for the big red UHAUL sign!

Right, it all comes down to renting a particular car. I think that I should contact a local company where they can offer and secure a specific model and customize it on demand instead of one of the large rental company where you are not certain about the exact model you will drive until you pick the car.

 

Thank you guys for all that useful information!

 

Paul

>Paul I see you have one of the older Toyota vans sold here in the 1980's

 

Yes, a 1990 model, 300'000KM and still running! It climbs the mountain roads like a goat even it's not a 4WD and the engine is just 1600cc. Also pretty short body even if spacious inside. It can turn around on narrow roads which is handy when looking for road views. Not imported any more, it will be a pain to replace it and so I am keeping it.

 

Honda are very nice cars, -the Honda Element mentioned above looks perfect for the needs- but tell me if I am wrong: I got the information that Honda does not let it's cars for rent. There is probably a reason for this policy, but it sure would be nice to have them. I havn't seen any Hondas at the major rental companies websites.

Ralph, thanks, good plan I will keep this in mind. Perhaps some rental company would accept to deliver the vehicle with some seats off.

Thanks for all the answers!

 

The Honda Element looks just what I need, but unfortunately there are none for rent as far as my search went.

 

There are two ways actually on three that work to make a sleeping space. Taking the seats out of the car should be forgotten on the road. Laying the back of the seats flat is another option, it makes a warm mattress but the surface is generally not flat and it takes time to fill up the holes with cloth and all things available. That's what I do in the Toyota LiteAce but it's not as comfortable as it would seem unless you can make customized foam cushions. Sleeping on the car's floor is the best. Cold nights are really cold down there, but with a good foam mattress, the back is straight. The Honda would have allowed it with the seats flipped on the sides. In some cars the back seats are turned upside down over the seat and it makes a flat hard surface. Then you have a good insulation from the cold that comes from the car's body.

 

The Westphalia type is of course the best if you want to spend months on the road or are not traveling alone.

 

For those who have used rental type of vehicles, could you please tell me more on the way they can be transformed as suggested above?

 

Thanks so far!

I don't need a 4WD actually. The problem is that the US rent a car companies offer small affordable city cars one one hand, or vehicles that are big, wide and heavy and accessorily very comfortable with some price expense on the other. Maybe I should keep just one or two criteria: back door that can make a shelter for the rainy days, and the possibility to lay the seats flat to sleep. I have no idea whether any of the Ford Escape or Windstar, Trailblazer, Uplander, offer a 6' long flat area to sleep on. Maybe some have tried them?

After more enquiries I was told that Fuji (Nikon too) offers a free upgrade for the S2 and S3 bodies to make them fully compatible with the Nikkor 18-200 VR. You have to send the camera in. Mine has just come back after two months, the long delay being due probably to the summer vacations.

Could you please suggest amongst the range of vehicles that the car rental

companies offer in the United States, what could be a good subsitute for the

Toyota Liteace I normally use here in Europe? I don't need a proper RV, but

would need a car where the back seats can be laid flat to sleep in it. An

elevated driver seat, modest look, size and fuel consumption would be other

qualities I would appreciate if available.

 

Thanks!

 

Paul

Ellis, Lex, thanks for your comments. Color aberration is certainly a draw back if it is noticeable. But while I thought I hadn't any left, I could find a non CPU lens in my drawers. I tested it on an S2 body, the S3 being out for service. They probably behave the same on this regard, and the fact is that in manual mode (required to trigger with non CPU lenses), the automatic light balance doesn't work on those bodies. The presets work however. Having to shoot mostly under fluorescent light mixed with halogen spots and daylight (never the same light for two consecutive shots), this automatic balance is a must. I think I will skip the lens and continue using Photoshop to simulate perpendicularity. Thanks again!

 

Paul

I know automatic exposure won't be available for instance. But what about

automatic light balance? Will it work in mixed lighting conditions? Or with a

light balance preset?

 

Any advice on using that lens on digital bodies? I plan on using it for table

settings and the x1.5 crop should make it just right. Even if Photoshop can now

correct perspectives quite well, I guess that it's a plus to be able to compose

the image right. But of course I'm aware that there are some trades, especially

the lack of exposure control. Any experience you would share?

I have a similar problem with the 18-200 VR on a Fuji S3 body. Although I didn't notice the problem when I first got it, it looks now as if AF focussing is impossible at the wide end of the lens whatever the light intensity. I have to zoom in and press the release mid way, zoom back and trigger. Or alternatively move the manual focussing ring back ant forth. But this is of course very annoying when a quick response is needed, and aslo modifies the light metering. On occasions the lens does not focus at all even at longer range. Should I send the lens to Nikon? Any further experience?

Dave, thanks for the interesting idea! In fact, the rear elements of more modern lenses have no digit numbers on them, or if they have, there is none at the front, yours is an exception. Except for the convertible Nikkors, I never saw two numbers on a lens that I owned. It is probably because the Symmar is a convertible. Other lenses are not meant to be taken apart.

 

The only way to check for the match on that particular lens is to measure the rear component and compare it to a working sample of the same batch. These Tele-Artons were declined in many different versions, some close to that one and some very different. Some were practically symmetrical in size, others as this one have a large front and a small rear component. They were built in focal lengths ranging from 180 to 360mm. How this one ended probably with the wrong cell is a mystery and only a careless previous owner knows the clue. In fact the guy who sold it to me had purchased it like that and passed it further... Maybe I should have sold it before posting here! ;-)