mike_barger

<p>The Pentax V was not designed to use mercury batteries. I own one and still have the owners manual. I agree with Robert it may be time for service. Mine doesn't move when the light button is pushed.</p>

<p>Google Richard Ritter for repairs.</p>

<p>Did he have to replace a broken focus knob on yours?</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>Did you get the note I sent you? They are very interested in having you test.<br>

My email is<br>

bargerm@gmail.com<br>

I don't want post their name, but I will email you the information. I was involved just trying to find another vendor to make kits. The last couple times Artcraft didn't seem to interested in making individual kits, but they did.<br>

When I told this vendor what I wanted (baggies like Artcraft makes) on Friday they said sure thing. Then they called me back Saturday morning and said they were interested in making it to sell ready made. I told them I would contact you and give you their contact info.<br>

I used the send a message to a member here, maybe it didn't work. Would have been this past Saturday.<br>

Based on your first post, I decided to shoot two scenes (two negatives ea) and develop one for the 8 minutes and one 17. As you can guess a big difference. I'm going to print them tonight on the Adox paper and see what I can do. I couldn't get away from the fact I was doing exactly what Picker instructed, vs. your knowledge base of this developer. So I decided to reshoot, and develop (yesterday afternoon) and print tonight. I must say the 8 minute negatives look better to the eye, other is pretty dense.<br>

Your 510 buddy<br>

Mike</p>

<p>I also should add, it looks like one of the photography chemical vendors is looking at selling 510 Pyro mixed.</p>

<p>I should be receiving some of the first trial batch to test in two weeks. I hope it works out.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>This a print from the testing. There is more detail in the white (center) than scan shows.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=22102" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>Jay<br>

The film speed part of Picker's test doesn't involve paper. The base plus fog of a unexposed and developed negative is determined. Then I made zone I negatives at 100%, 75%, 50% and 25% of the box speed (400 in the case of HP5). The negative showing between .08 and .10 is the negative Fred indicates is correct. I've run this test twice and HP5 has came in at 200 both times.<br>

When I've tried the same test on Tri-X 400 (120mm) in comes in right on the button at 400. Both films I used a calibrated X-rite 810 to measure the base plus fog negative and the zone I negatives.<br>

This seems to be a pretty common test method to determine an individual EI. Does it not work with 510 pyro?<br>

Fred's development time test involves finding minimum exposure through the base plus fog negative on the same paper you plan to print on. For me that is MCP 310 RC VC Adox (and some MCC110 that will require an additional test). The time I came up with on this part of the test was (7) 3 sec bursts @ F22. <br>

Then shooting zone VIII negatives ( I shot a medium gray card 16X20 taped to my garage door in the shade), I tried 7.5 minutes (with the method in the OP) and the print was much to dark for zone VIII. I extended development times until the zone VIII printed with a slight change to gray from the white paper base. That time ended up being 17 minutes. The mix of the 510 was 10 ML of 510 and water added to make 1100ML @ 70 degrees.<br>

As I understand your response I should have used graded paper to determine my proper development time (and film speed?). Are you saying run the same test as described, but use a grade 2 paper?<br>

The part I really didn't understand (I have very limited darkroom experience) is how the VC paper will be a moving target from grade 2 to grade 0 if I don't add filtration during the test?<br>

The other question I have, if I test to a graded paper but only use Adox MCC110 VC fiber or Adox MCP310, how is the test relevant to the paper I will be using?<br>

Looking for suggestions.<br>

Thanks for reviewing.<br>

Mike</p>

<p>As a side note, I do get full speed from Tri-X 400 in 120.<br>

Mike</p>

<p>I've just gone through Fred Picker's film speed test, development test, and the proper proof test.<br /> I use HP5 in 4x5, Dektol 1:2 (two minutes), and 510 Pyro 1:100 (70 degrees). I develop in an old Jobo 4323 drum with the (I think) 2120 reels. This rolls on a unicolor base with the auto forward reverse. Paper is MCP 310. The new Adox RC paper.<br>

The tests led to a rating of 200 for the HP5 (same I get for HC110) and a development time of 17 minutes. Fred's test for time of development is based on printing a zone VIII negative for the minimum time to produce max back on the paper.<br>

I know the is a lot longer than Jay's time for continuous agitation. As a further test, I followed up with a different batch of 510 pyro from Artcraft, but the test results are the same.<br>

Not complaining, I love the results. I was just wondering if anyone else was using a longer development time?<br>

Mike</p>

<p>Jay<br>

<br /> I've just gone through Fred Picker's film speed test, development test, and the proper proof test.<br>

I use HP5 in 4x5, Dektol 1:2 (two minutes), and 510 Pyro 1:100 (70 degrees). I develop in an old Jobo 4323 drum with the (I think) 2120 reels. This rolls on a unicolor base with the auto forward reverse. Paper is MCP 310. The new Adox RC paper.<br>

The tests led to a rating of 200 for the HP5 (same for HC110) and a development time of 17 minutes. Fred's test for time of development is based on printing a zone VIII negative for the minimum time to produce max back on the paper. <br>

I know the is a lot longer than you are using for continuous agitation. As a further test, I followed up with a different batch of 510 pyro from Artcraft, but the test results are the same.<br>

Not complaining, I love the results. I was just wondering if anyone else was using a longer development time?</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>Get a copy of Fred Pickers book off ebay for about 3 bucks and finish your film testing in an afternoon.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>They actually made a little rubber plug for when you use 220 film.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

I've had good luck with my fujinon 90. No experience with other brands

Mike

I have a little rubber plug to accomplish the same goal.

Mike

If we're talking 120mm film, I'm for Tri-x in 510 pyro.

Mike

My vote, 120mm 400 Tri-X in 510 Pyro

Mike

Late to the dance, but I to still use 510 Pyro. By the number of hits at APUG I'd say there is a fair amount of interest in the developer.

Glad to see you posting Jay.

Mike

Gotta love MF negs. What developer did you use?

Mike

I have used a motor base with 120 Tri-X in 510 pyro 70 degrees 1:200 for 13 minutes and had good negatives to print.

Mike

Jeff, I've had good luck with Tri-X 120 and 510 Pyro. It's the only pyro I've used, but have had good luck with it. There is some info over on APUG.

Mike

Kowa has nice lens, who else made a 19mm for 6x6?

Mike

Is the camera store guy ever right? :)

Mike

I don't know about beefy, but Kowa did make nice glass. I used to have a setup like the above, plus the 250mm.

Always wanted to see in person the 19mm Kowa made in this series, I've only see one in their literature and a photo of one from a fellow in Europe.

I moved on to hasselblad, it's beefy. I don't think the glass is any better with 8X10 prints than the Kowa glass.

Mike

I wish them well, but seldom does a small business reopen after being closed for so many months.

Praying the health issues clear up.

Mike

Sorry Dan, I did write it backwards. Thanks Jay for correcting it.

Mike