Niels - NHSN

Or upload the images to flickr.com (if you use that) and simply paste the share links into a post. The photo.net forum software will parse it automatically and show your images.

That would be a strong indicator that your lens is a 7 element. The protrusion is cause by the 8th element - hard to imagine it could be an 8 element without it. But how about some pictures of your lens and perhaps a link to the video you mention? Here’s a site that seemingly has assembled quite a bit of data on how to ID those 8 element lenses. https://takumarguide.weebly.com/1--14--50-358-8-element.html

Rolleiflex 3.5E (Planar 75mm f/3.5) for the weekend. Loaded with a roll of Fujicolor Pro 400H from my last box. I will miss this film.

I am assuming those numbers are of the factory rolled films prior to use? I am thinking they may be rolled on different assembly lines that may not deliver the same exact tension, and I probably wouldn't give 0.5mm on the feeding spool too much importance. It I am guessing that differences in the backing paper tension you apply when you load the film onto the take-up spool will affect the final diameter and thus the final wind-on tension to some extend. Or/and as @kmac suggests; possible variations in thickness of backing paper and film and possible tension introduced by the friction/resistance of various film/backing-paper materials that occurs during film winding. Combined this may result in variations on the take-up spool diameter and potentially affect the total resistance you feel at the end of the film wind-up. Just speculations.

This weekend I will be trying out another camera that just returned from an overhaul: A Leica IIF Red Dial (1955) - "Red Dial" or RD is just a reference to the color of the flash sync dial numbers under the shutter dial and indicates it is the last IIF/IIIF model with minor improvements on the shutter and in flash capability. I have mounted a modern Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f/1.5 Aspherical LTM on the camera. A lens produced from 1999 and a few years forward. I bought in Japan around 2010. The accessory finder is a Leitz SBOOI 5cm brightline finder that improves the framing vastly over the build-in finder. I didn't quite finish the film in my Leica IA last weekend so I brought that along as well. I did a few side by side photos to see the differences between the two 50mm lenses manufactured almost a century apart.

My Leica I (A) from 1930 came back from a general overhaul yesterday. The shutter wasn't completely reliable and the camera scratched the film. I expect that to be fixed now and will take it out into the sun loaded with a roll of Fujifilm C200. The repair person could see that the 93 years old shutter curtains had never been replaced, and he claimed that they did not need replacement! Impressive. This is in contrast to my three Leica IIF and IIIF's from the 1950's which all have needed replacement of their deteriorating curtains. Another interesting piece of semi-related trivia: Also yesterday, I stumbled upon this quote in my copy of "Walker Evans at Work" (p.44). "That photo I sent you was made with Grotz' [Paul Grotz] little Leica camera, using a special close-grain film imported from Germany at a stiff price, but allowing enlargements to huge proportions if desired. We have thrown that one up to almost life size" The quote comes from a letter to his friend Hanns Skolle from May 1929. Given Leica only sold the Leica I (A) model with the 5cm/3.5 Elmar in the 1920's (with a few very rare exceptions) it is almost certain that Evans is referring to a camera just like the one below. The film he is talking about appears to be of the brand "Perutz", judging from the contact prints reproduced in the book.

@stephen_mcateer Repeatedly testing the operation of a camera with fresh film can be costly over time. I'd recommend you keep a test roll at hand for the times when you inevitably will need to verify camera functions unrelated to actual exposures on film. It is especially relevant in situations where you receive a camera back from service, to be able to quickly communicate if there are any anomalities in order to avoid delayed discussions about who is responsible for a possible re-repair. I am saying this because during the past years I have had many cameras serviced, and perhaps 35-40% have needed additional adjustments. I have used both the usual recommended suspects as well as lesser known, and both groups are equally good/bad when it comes to the need for returns. Re. your current issue, running a test roll through it a couple of times may give you an indication if this specific issue is perhaps periodic and therefore camera related or if it is more likely film brand related or whatever. It is also easier to get a feel of the consistency of operation if you don't have to compare incidents that happened weeks apart. Not saying you have to sacrifice an expensive color film. Maybe one you know you may have mis-exposed, or if you find one in an old camera, or an expired roll you accidentally left in the glove compartment, or maybe just get a roll of cheap Fomapan (or Arista - depending on where you live). Good luck. BTW: It is practical to have an extra spool to roll the test film back onto - you should be able to get one free from your lab if you don't have them lying around.

Playing around with one of my Barnacks in anticipation of a 1(A) that is on the way back from an overhaul. This is a IIIf ST RD and a Summicron 50mm f/2 v.1 loaded with Fujicolor C200 for the weekend.

😆 Yeah. I don't think NASA used many F65's.

I was aware of the Nikon/NASA relationship from the film era, but not that it continued into the digital era. Does anyone know if this is an exclusive relationship with NASA or if other manufactures also have cameras on board on recent NASA missions (I'm thinking about cameras operated in human hands)? BTW. It reminds me of the ad below. I find it interesting because it is from around 1980. That was the era of Nikon F2 and F3, yet it shows a modified Nikon F. Apparently NASA used the Nikon F throughout the 1970's and skipped the F2, and at the time of the ad, the F3 wasn't space ready yet. I also notice the following wording "Nikon has never failed on a NASA space mission.... Or Jammed." (my emphasis). I imagine this is a friendly poke at Hasselblad and their infamous tendency to jam.

The iPhone 5 had defective batteries. Apple extended the warranty for those. My wife had the battery in her iPhone 5 replaced at no charge 3 years after purchase - it is still working fine for her today as a secondary phone. Other than that, I have only experienced swelling rechargeable batteries with 3rd party brands. I have seen several leaking rechargeable batteries in long unused Hasselblad 500 EL/M’s, but they were probably NiCd, although I am not certain.

Thanks @AJG that Wratten reference helped a lot. Simply called a Kodak Viewing Filter it seems. It still appears to be a relevant product among some photographers (although not made by Kodak): https://shop.stearmanpress.com/products/zoneview-viewing-filter

A large format photographer friend of 40 years ago explained he used a filter like this to visualise black and white scenes. First and only time I saw this item in use. Today I got one in a box of accessories and wanted to Google the principles behind it's use, but fail to get results as I don't know what it is called. It is black plastic where the filter can fold in and out. It is approximately 5 by 5cm when collapsed. The filter is very dark amber'ish. What is the correct name for this thing?

Nordic winter shortens shooting hours significantly even with a roll of Fujicolor Superia 400 loaded. This weekend I added a SB-28 to extend the time available to shoot. Among the cameras in Nikon's FM/FE series, I normally prefer the Nikon FE, but for flash, the FE2 is the better choice of the two as it adds TTL and a top sync speed of 1/250.

Manfrotto Easy Link for accessories, like a light etc.

Leica IIf (RD) with TRINOL/"Stewartry" 105mm f/3.5 and Leitz VIDOM universal finder. I have not found much on this lens. The lens head aperture ring is signed MADE BY NATIONAL OPT. CO. LTD. LEICESTER ENGLAND. The inner chome part of the barrel is signed "STEWARTRY" MADE IN SCOTLAND. Some speculates that TRINOL is derived from TRIplet National Optics Lens. Others that these were intended for WWII military use but were sold to the public because the war ended before the planned production batches were ready. Some were coated, some not. This one is coated. The glass is clear and it has a beautiful 12 bladed aperture. It is a strange mix of aluminium, painted aluminium, painted brass and chromed brass. I will try it out with some HP5 and see how it performs.

Although not a fancy dog purse like on the photo; here's a camera with a self timer on that side:

I agree, especially when shooting color. I now think of my Fujica 6X9 as a more practical alternative to my 4X5 kit and put similar attention to composition and exposure i.e. use it with a tripod for subjects I have planned and visualised beforehand. Looking at a medium format slide on the light box is really something special.

I know 😄 ! For half frame, I usually print or scan the roll of 72 as 36 frames: Two half-frames side by side, like diptychs. This unintended juxtaposition can sometimes add something additional to mundane frames when presented "as-if" there is a co-relation, even if there wasn't originally. Below is an unintended bird themed juxtaposition taken days or weeks apart. Obviously; had I intended these to appear next to each other, I would have shown the rooster before the parakeet so the birds would "look" a each other, but I find the broken compositional rule more refreshing than bothering. Most of my photography is fairly mundane thus this somewhat random approach can be inspirational for myself. Film was Ilford XP2 Super, camera Olympus Pen S - my favourite half-frame camera:

So you’re getting into the groove with twice as many frames, it appears. 😆

I have been running a second film through my Leica IA this weekend, to make sure I know what flaws it may have before I send it in for an overhaul. The first film was a home rolled HP5 in a FILCA cassette and showed some horizontal scratches. It may have been my bad in the film loading process or the 90 years old cassette, so this weekend I used a roll of Fujicolor Superia X-tra 400 to possibly rule out my loading errors. Repair techs don’t usually look for potential cause of scratches unless they are notified to do so. Minus 7 degrees Celsius and snow in the park today so no-one playing table tennis 😉 Leica IA (1930) w. accessory Leica nickel/black rangefinder HFOOK (1933)

@orsetto do you happen to know if it would it be correct to assume the Nikkormat Copal Square shutter is more easily repaired than the FM etc. Copal CCS shutters? I was told by a Nikon rep. back in the day, that a FM/FE shutter “repair” at Nikon was always replacement because it these shutters were not designed to be easily repaired. Much later, an independent repair tech told me that when FM/FM replacement shutters were available from Nikon, he would always just replace and now (~15years ago), with no new parts available, he would still prefer a swap from a dead donor body over actual repair, I assumed because it would be more economical for the customer. I didn’t inquire if the shutter was difficult to work on, or just time consuming, and never got to ask if earlier Copal Square shutters were made with repair rather than replacement in mind. It is my impression that the larger horizontally traveling shutters in the F, F2 and F3 are more straightforward to work on, a bit like the oversized Leica stutters, but I don’t have personal experiences with that, so don’t know for certain if that is an accurate assumption.

Jacob Holt's monumental "American Pictures" project were shot largely, if not exclusively, with a Canon Dial 35 and slide film. I remember he had daily screenings of the slide show in central Copenhagen for decades. Never got to see it, though. I don't know why 72 frames takes so long to finish. I have no problem finishing 36 frames in what feels like no time, but 72 frames never ends.

Although I think I understand what you mean to say, "fully electronic" is not completely accurate, as the shutter is electronically controlled or governed - It is otherwise a largely mechanical construction, but you certainly need batteries for normal use. Nikon believed the 1/60 speed would be sufficient option in case of power failure - after all, LR/SR44 are not hard to come by and they are so small that there really is no excuse for not having a handful in the bag when going out for those critical tasks. I doubt the "most have failed / ..." part is correct. I have had many through my hands in a work related context, and cannot recall having seen one with problems that were not obviously use/abuse related. That is not to say that there are none, but my impression is that they hold up fairly well. Nikon's own communication about the LC display needing routine replacement every 7 years was either overly conservative or Nikon must have improved that part during the 20 years of production. I have seen variations in intensity of the display but never anything that would effect ordinary usage - but again; that is not to say that it does not happen, but LCD problems is something I associate with the F4 of which I have seen a few. I don't know if OP even have considered the F3, but it is definitely a camera that is primarily made for aperture priority usage, to me it feels as if it's support for manual usage was an after-thought. If regularly using the camera manually, the FE2/FM3a will serve you much better. Nikon made a mistake by not using the proven display of the EL/ELW/EL2/FE in the F3 IMO.

There is a difference between adapting for cine usage on mirrorless and actually converting (as in rehousing) for dedicated cine usage. A less invasive conversion is just de-clicking the aperture ring which doesn't seriously affect usage on the original cameras (although annoying if you don't plan to use the lens for video). I don't think Canon lenses are more easily converted. Since Canon produces cine cameras, it is possible that Canon cine users want to stay with Canon glass - not that I think the signature of film era FD lenses are especially comparable with modern EF lenses - so that is just a guess. I imagine that rarity of some lenses also increases the perception of desirability among the type of photographers/cinematographers that appreciate their equipment has a conversation potential. From experience I can say from experience that a Hexanon AR 57mm f/1.2 is not any better or more characterful than the wonderful Nikkor 55mm f/1.2, yet the former commands twice as much or more, allegedly due to the cine crowd.