jereme_rauckman1

<p>@Rodeo Joe: Makes sense (which is gratifying, since just a week ago that would have all sounded like Greek to me). Thanks for the information.</p>

<p>I appreciate all of the responses.<br>

@Rob Bernhard: I dug into the manual and did find (and now understand) the info regarding the in-camera control. Thanks for mentioning it. It looks like I've got more control than I thought, though I think I'm still missing the ability to see recommended flash distances for specific power levels. I realize E-TTL makes this somewhat unnecessary, but it'd be nice to have.<br>

I went ahead and purchased a 430EX II off of eBay, so now I'll have the opportunity to do some multiple light stuff as I explore this new area of photography.<br>

@Pete S: You mention a radio trigger to control the speedlights off-camera. What additional functionality would a radio trigger offer versus the in-camera control of my 60d?</p>

<p>I'm looking for recommendations on a hotshoe flash. I've been a serious amateur photographer for many years, but never put in the time and effort to really learn about using off-camera flash. Reading the manual for my flash was confusing enough to overwhelm me and put me off again and again.<br>

Anyhow, I've recently made it my goal to learn more about artificial lighting and have found some resources that did a good job of helping me understand the technical stuff. Unfortunately, I quickly found out that the flash I own is less than ideal for learning, as it doesn't have manual capabilities (it's a Canon Speedlite 420EX).<br>

Since I obviously don't know much yet about flash, I therefore don't know much about what to get, so I'm looking for advice or recommendations.<br>

Here's what I think I'm looking for:</p>

<ul>

<li>manual features</li>

<li>compatible with Canon 60d</li>

<li>good recycle time (I shoot bike races and trail runs for my club, and a faster recycle rate would help me miss fewer racers)</li>

<li>less than $200 (or should I spend a little extra and just get a used 580EX II?)</li>

</ul>

<p>Basically, I know there are good third-party flashes out there that are a better value than Canon brand, but I have no idea what's what. Thank you.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. I went back to the lab, and they agreed it was likely a scanning issue and are redoing the scan for me.<br>

I've gotten bad scans from them in the past on medium format stuff and have resorted to sending my 120 film to The Darkroom, despite the higher price, or scanning it myself. I was hoping they'd be more competent with 35mm, but now I'm not so sure. Too bad, since they only charged $6 per roll for processing and high-res scans.</p>

<p>I had a couple rolls of 35mm film processed and scanned locally, and on one roll a thin, light, horizontal line appears on every picture. The line appears in the same position on every frame. I took a close look at the negatives and don't see anything unusual on them, so I'm guessing this occurred during scanning.<br>

What might cause this? Is it reasonable to expect the lab to re-scan the images at no charge?<br>

Here's one of the photos showing the line:<br>

<img src="http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-DnLvPXF/0/M/i-DnLvPXF-M.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> </p>

I appreciate the responses. The dial

indicator is fairly easy to turn,

unfortunately, so it tends to get moved

when handling the camera or

transferring it in and out of the bag.

Writing the film type on a piece of tape

should've been a no-brainer. I'm

embarrassed I didn't think of it.

Thanks.

<p>I'm somewhat new to film photography (aside from point-and-shoot stuff prior to digital) and have fouled up a couple rolls of film with my Mamiya C33 because I forgot what type of film was loaded. I'll occasionally meter for the wrong ISO, and half the photos from one roll had a nice yellow tint because of shooting color film with a yellow filter installed (I thought the camera had b&w in).<br>

I've got a Pentax KX that has a memo holder on the back to put the top of the film box in as a reminder, but my Mamiya doesn't have a holder. I'm looking for ideas on how to keep from making this mistake. Thank you.</p>

<p>I think I've worked through the issues and came up with some shots from my most recent roll that I'm pretty happy with. Thoughts on these? http://flic.kr/s/aHsjMvHV4w</p>

<p>I also picked up some Ektar 100, based on Fred Mueggelhopper's advice. Thanks for that.</p>

<p>Also, I didn't pay for high-res scans of this second roll, as I wasn't very happy with the scan quality of the first one. Is there an online shop you'd recommend for processing and scanning? I'm in Wisconsin, with the closest metro area being Minneapolis/St Paul. Thanks again.</p>

<p>@Charles, Bill and Martin: Thanks for the suggestions and details. What sounded like Greek at first finally made sense once everything was spelled out and a photo was provided.</p>

<p>I used the jewel case suggestion and tested the focus of the viewing lens vs the taking lens, using a wall map in my office for a target (the camera was set up on my desk, about 50" from the target). I'm happy to say that the focus of the two lenses matched spot-on.</p>

<p>Not only did I determine that the lenses were in alignment, but learning how to do the test also taught me a lot about how my camera (and film cameras, in general) works. A big thank you for that.</p>

<p>Also, I got my second roll of film processed, and found that the focus and evenness of exposure are much better than the first. I added two photos from the new roll to <a href="http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-kZ8qX">this gallery</a>. On the photo of the ruler, I focused on the 15" mark, and that is where the focus falls in the picture. On the photo of the tools, I had focused on the blue-handled tool in the center of the frame. In both photos, the exposure appears as I would have expected it to, with no light leaks or odd light elements. Hurrah.</p>

<p>Now that I have a better understanding of how the camera works, I have a theory about what might have caused the light leaks and focus issues on the first roll of film. Tell me if this makes sense. The backlid of my camera is a bit tricky, in that you really need to press it in when locking it closed, or it won't close fully. If the backlid hadn't been closed fully for the first roll, it obviously could cause light leaks, but could it cause focus issues? My thinking is that, if not closed all the way, it wouldn't have pushed the film completely against the focal plane. Conceivable?</p>

<p><strong>@Charles Monday and Martin Jones:</strong> As someone new to film, medium format and TLRs, I have to admit a lot of what you're recommending is sailing over my head. Any chance you could point to a video or illustrated description of what you're describing online? I'm sure I can figure it out, but a visual or two might help it click in my brain.</p>

<p>Also, I checked the bellows, using the flashlight in a dark room technique, and everything looked fine. I'm extremely confident now that there are no light leaks occurring through the bellows.</p>

<p>Thanks for all of the responses so far. I really do appreciate the help. I'll try to answer some of your questions...</p>

<p>@Norman Valentine: The focusing screen's matte side is down, toward the lens. The manual mentions an exposure index scale that's not there, though, so I'm wondering if a third-party screen was installed at some point. This could be an issue, according to some reading I've done, since the C33 wasn't meant to have a user-swappable screen and has spacers that could get messed up if the screen was changed by someone without the right knowledge. I'm unsure about this.</p>

<p>@Alan Klein: The lens looks clean, and was advertised as such in the eBay listing. I'll take a closer look once I've shot through the roll of film in the camera right now. The film was not expired. It was Kodak Portra 400 I picked up at the local photo shop. I'll consider trying a roll of chrome if I can't figure anything else out.</p>

<p>@Dieter Schaefer: How would I go about finding out if the viewing and taking lenses don't match up?</p>

<p>@Charles Monday: I don't have the waist level finder. I have the pentaprism, instead, and I'm pretty confident it's not user error. Not 100%, though, so I put the camera on a tripod and took some shots at an angled yardstick at various apertures tonight. That might tell me something once the prints are developed. If you know of other good focusing tests I should try, please let me know. As for the possible light leaks, the bellows are in good shape, and the eBay listing stated they were light-tight. I'll perform your test, though, once I finish the roll of film in there right now.</p>

<p>@Anthony Oresteen: The lab is a local photo lab called Sharp Photo. They're the only game in town, and since my town isn't in a metro area, they probably don't do a great deal of medium format processing and scanning. The person I dropped my film off with had no idea what resolution their scans would be at. The film was not expired and was Kodak Portra 400.</p>

<p>I've been wanting to get into medium format and film photography for a while now, so I read some books, did a lot of internet research and ended up with a Mamiya C33 Pro. I really like the slow, manual-everything shooting experience as I worked through my first roll of 120, but I picked up the film today and am really underwhelmed with the results.<br>

I'm wondering if it's due to mistakes I made, if the camera has some issues or something else.<br>

A few sample photos from the roll are here: http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-kZ8qX</p>

<ul>

<li>In the photo of the guy with the bike, I was focusing on him, but the sharp part of the photo is the bike behind him. I noticed in several other photos from the roll that the focus is significantly behind where it should have been</li>

<li>On the photo of the boy on the stairs, disregard the blur. It was the result of a flimsy tripod and a clumsy shutter press (I've since picked up a sturdier tripod and cable release). My main concern about this photo is the whole bottom half looking like it got exposed to light. You'll also notice the focus is again behind the subject, if you look closely.</li>

<li>The photo of the farm field has a few funky light irregularities going on. The bottom left is green-blue and foggy, the upper left has a repeating diagonal pattern in the sky, and there is a narrow line of vertical light in the upper right (that narrow line only shows up on the scan, by the way, but the other stuff on the left side shows up on the scan and the print).</li>

</ul>

<p>So, am I doing something wrong, does the camera have problems, or am I just expecting too much from a 40-some-year-old piece of equipment?<br>

Any advice would be great. I really am interested in learning and improving. Thanks.</p>