dj_may

<p>Everyone has preferences. Mine are Tmax 100 and Tmax 400 developed in Rodinal 1:100. I use Tmax 100 almost all the time except if I need an exposure time faster that 1/2 or 1/4 second. You must be careful not to underexpose. If you do not underexpose, the films can be very forgiving.</p>

<p>Well at least they are only upside down. Mine are backwards too.</p>

<p>Leica could consider, if they already have not, an upgradable camera. With the durable camera body, it would be reasonable that the electronics package and sensor could be replaced. If Leica thinks that people will replace cameras rather than upgrade, then they would not do it.</p>

<p>Raid Amin, I will not get an upgrade because my sensor does not show the defect yet. I will have to wait until the defect shows up. I would prefer to upgrade before the defect shows, which it probably will, because then I will lose images and time. I am not happy with the Leica position on this. There is a known defect in the glass, and in time all sensors will show the defect.<br>

For anyone who has the defect showing, they can request a price for upgrade to M Type 240. The news release said the price will be based on the condition of the camera with the defect.</p>

<p>Raid Amin, I suppose the upgrade question is addressed to me? Yes, the upgrade option is for upgrading to M from M9, not a sensor replacement. Leica will propose a price to upgrade, if requested. It is only available to those who have the defect already showing itself.</p>

<p>I wrote the Leica service department to clarify if the upgrade option was available <strong>before</strong> the sensor defect showed. I do not want to wait for a defect, but would upgrade now. The reply is that the upgrade option is only available for cameras where the defects are showing.<br>

I am not happy knowing I have an expensive product with a known defect. I no longer purchase Ford or GM products because of that kind of experience.<br>

Despite the deficiencies that have been noted frequently, I have been happy with the performance of the M9. I adapted to the deficiencies, but I do not know how to adapt to a defect.</p>

<p>I no longer use N+- development. I use compensating development and expose for shadows/darkest areas in zone 3. That along with split contrast printing enables me to accomplish just about everything I did with N+- development. I should add that it took a lot of testing to find the right development to cover a variety of dynamic range scenes. In the end it is much simpler, and I prefer simplicity.</p>

<p>I've decided to have one cable release on every lens plus one in a pouch with filters, loupe and other accessories. I have had multiple failures, misplacements, etc. One failure was with a cloth covered release that got wet. It seemed the cloth stretched beyond the travel distance of the release.</p>

<p>One of the advantages of Rodinal is consistency. I use it 1:100, primarily with TMX and TMY large format now. But I have used it in the past with 35mm and medium format Ilford and Kodak as well. I have never had a failure due to developer, but only from my own mistakes. Grain is overrated - it is part of 35mm photography and does not make or break a good image.<br>

Whatever developer you choose, you need to do everything exactly the same every time to get consistent results. When you want to change something, change only one thing at a time, i.e., time, dilution, temperature, etc.</p>

I am not rich, and I am a cellist and a photographer. I find many connections between music and photography. I purchased a fine cello a while ago, and although it alone did not make me a better cellist, my music does sound better. It is partly because the dynamic range and subtle response of the new instrument is much greater than slightly good instrument. I mostly use large format film for photography, but I also use a Leica M9, with Leica and Zeiss lenses, because it is the next best to large format film for my purposes. I have been very satisfied with the M9.

<p>I have been using a Berlebach3-section wood tripod, with leveling ball, with monorail and and field 4x5 cameras. A tripod head is not necessary with the leveling ball, however, I have started using a ballhead with the field camera. The 3-section version also folds short enough for traveling. Price is not cheap but good value for strength and weight.</p>

<p>I have been using a Berlebach3-section wood tripod, with leveling ball, with monorail and and field 4x5 cameras. A tripod head is not necessary with the leveling ball, however, I have started using a ballhead with the field camera. The 3-section version also folds short enough for traveling. Price is not cheap but good value for strength and weight.</p>

<p>I remove the bellows, lens-on-board and back. I leave the standards on a 12" rail, bring them to the center, and rotate so they are resting together. The back goes into a lens wrap and then into a plastic food container. 150mm lens-on-board goes into a lens wrap and then another food container. 240mm lens-on-board is nested with bellows and then goes into lens wrap. 90mm lens-on-board nests with wide-angle bellows and then goes into lens wrap. I used to carry a 21" rail but never used it, so it stays at home. All goes into 60 litre internal-frame pack with space for film holders, meter, filters and digital camera. Total weight about 35-40 pounds. If hiking at altitude or in winter I also pack additional layers of clothing and food as necessary.</p>

<p>I recently did a test to compare TMX and TMY-2 shot and processed identically. I used three scenes:</p>

<p>1. Outside, building / landscape with shadows approximately 11-stop range, late afternoon<br>

2. Outside, total shade, very flat lighting, no shadows. Approximately 3-stop range.<br>

3. Outside walkway at night, lighting by streetlight, city lights in distance.</p>

<p>I exposed two sheets of film each scene on TMX and TMY-2. I processed TMX and TMY-2 together with agitation and also stand development. In both batches I used Rodinal 1:100. The TMY-2 exposure only varied by 2 stops using the shutter speed.</p>

<p>In the agitation batch, I agitated one minute initially, followed by 3 inversions each minute. This is the first time I have processed TMX and TMY-2 together. I have done complete testing on TMX and TMY in the past, however, since TMY-2 was released I have been unable to retest since my darkroom and I are different continents. I used my tested TMX development time, which is 15.25 minutes.</p>

<p>Results:<br>

1. In every case, TMY-2 had considerably more density than TMX throughout the negative, shadows and highlights. It appears there is more than a 2-stop difference between the two.<br>

2. The 11-stop scene holds detail throughout in each variation, however, with stand development the brightest area is getting very dense.<br>

3. Stand development not only increased shadow density but also highlight, resulting in greater contrast in the daylight scenes. The only scene which stand development seems to improve is the night shot.</p>

<p>Questions: <br>

How does this relate to your collective experience? <br>

Does anyone process TMX and TMY-2 together? <br>

Do you find greater than 2-stop difference between TMX and TMY-2? <br>

Regards,<br>

Jesse</p>

<p>If you look at the statement that if you are serious about photography use 4X5, in the context of learning, I agree with the statement. However, like learning to do anything skillfully, plan to advance in small and steady steps. Over the course of just one year of consistent practice with a large format camera, you will see a marked improvement in your photography regardless of the medium or format that you use. You will also make many mistakes and learn from each one of them.<br>

If you do not expect it to take practice time (and patience) to master, you will be frustrated.<br>

Large format is not about print size - it is about image quality. A good image looks good at any size. </p>

<p>Ars-imago in Zug has a lot of selection. You can order online and have it shipped to you. Since I work in Zug, I order online and pick up.<br>

Jesse</p>

<p>I take both digital and large format. The last trip (by train in Italy) I took a monorail 4X5, digital SLR, and Fotoman 45PS. I take the monorail with 2 or 3 lenses, and digital SLR in a 60 litre backpack. If I go to busy cities or on long business trips I take the Fotoman 45PS with one lens and digital SLR in a standard camera bag. The digital is for quick and easy shots, the large format is for photos that I think will be print worthy.<br>

I recommend taking both.<br>

Jesse</p><div></div>