martin_jones1

The Speedlite 199A will also automatically control the shutter speed and aperture on the A series Canons. The big advantage with the 199A over the 155A, apart from increased power, is the bounce flash facility to give you more even lighting indoors when bounced off the ceiling.

Hi John, I was gifted the same 058 / 168 combo a few years ago. It's in similar condition to yours and could do with a strip down to clean and lubricate to get it working smoothly again. The plate on the 168 head on my sample is covered with cork rather that what appears to be rubber pads on your example the cork has hardened to the point where it feels more like plywood. I'll probably try to source some thin rubber padding and replace it. Any preferences for lubricants for the working surfaces. I have a range of greases includinga rather exotic 'Electrolube' grease which I bought to service a scanner few yearsago.

Galvanising involves zinc, not tin. This cable was sold as stainless steel but must have been a very poor grade. Troubling thing was it looked like any other multi core stainless cable. (I have been around sailing dinghys and boats for 40+ years and it would be very scary is someone used this for stays etc.)

<p>This is where filters can come to the rescue. Yellow through red for BW films and ND for colour.<br> Sometimes you have to be a bit creative in attaching the filters if you are not going to hold the filter in front of the lens,<br> For box cameras I have used a blob of blu-tac on the filter rim and pressed the filter to the camera body. Use old filters as cleanup can be tricky.</p>

<p>Once the film has been in the developer long enough for the emulsion to swell and allow the developer in, the gelatin is very sticky. Think flypaper. Any particles in your processing solutions / wash water will adhere and embed themselves into the emulsion surface.<br /> <br /> Using distilled water only as a last step is like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. You may, at best, rinse off any particles on the back of the film.<br /> <br /> I use filtered water to make up solutions and for washing. See Ilford dump wash method - I give an extra rinse and dump at the end.<br /> <br /> 2 - 3 drops of Photoflo in 500ml filtered water in a Paterson tank is plenty. I drop and lift the film in the tank a few times and I expect to see a few bubbles on the surface. If your tank is frothing at this stage you have used way too much Photoflo.<br /> <br /> Used or old fixer is a source of particle contamination. I also filter my fix after use when returning to the storage bottle.<br /> <br /> Lastly I also do the flick / whip with film before hanging. This removes most of the water on the non emulsion side. You can't do much about the emulsion side as this will be uniformly saturated. The squeegee with fingers trick just tends to push the water around on the back of the film leaving you with large drops randomly distributed on the film. Any particles in these drops will produce the 'water marks' on your dried film. These particles are very small and you won't see them until the film is dried.<br /> <br /> I am scanning my films at the moment and with cleaner negs I don't have to spend much time in post processing to clean up the images in Photoshop.</p>

<p>Try again. Note that there are still some larger defects on the image which will need manual cleanup in PP.</p><div></div>

<p>And now let's try the first image. This one is trickier as there is a lot of fine detail in the texture on the block wall behind the cars which I want to preserve. If you apply the cleanup too agressively then PSDR will ' eat' the fine details in the image and sometimes leave behind ugly looking doughnut shaped artifacts - little white rings.</p>

<p>I've just run your image quickly though PSDR and this is the result</p><div></div>

<p>I've recently had the same problem with a roll of Ilford FP4+ developed in HC-110 and OLD Ilford Rapid fix.<br> I have been filtering my fixer after use but this batch was about 4 months old and had fixed 7 films from a litre of working solution.<br> My snowstorm was just like yours. There is , however, help to correct this after scanning if you have a copy of Polaroid Dust and Scratch removal software for Windows. A few years ago this was freely available as pdsr1_0.exe, 1608KB. I don't use it often as it can be a bit savage and needs very fine tuning when you setup the parameters to create the mask for the cleanup. I don't know of any equivalent software for the Mac.</p>

<p>S/N: 202723 X720 July 1983?</p>

<p>I find that 2 to 3 drops of Kodak Photoflow in a Patterson tank with one 35mm reel is plenty, about 450 ml water.<br> <br /> Just let the drops fall into the tank. Raise and lower or rotate the film reel to disperse the photoflo. At this stage you will have a few bubbles on the surface. After a minute or two when you are ready to hang the film the bubbles will have reduced and possibly disappeared altogether.<br> <br /> I find that any touching of the wet film just moves the water around. If you are really brave and your film is well attached at it's top clip, you can give the film a couple of gentle whips to flick off the larger water drops. Did it last night for first time and I'll be sticking with this technique rather than physically touching wet emulsion.</p>

<p>Hi Mark, <br> In most forums this problem with the Maxxum / Dynax 7 rubber is described as being sticky and quite unpleasant to handle. For some reason the rubber coating starts to degrade and turns into a sticky mess.</p> <p>I have two of these cameras - the Japanese version, called alpha 7 and they both had this problem. I don't believe that you can stabilise the rubber coating on the camera back. Best to remove it when it's this far gone.</p> <p>After trying several solvents I found that isopropyl alcohol removes the sticky rubber coating quite easily. I bought lab grade IPA from a pharmacy a few years ago which I use for all sorts of cleaning. Just hold a piece of clean cloth over your index finger, dip into the IPA and start rubbing. You will need to change the cloth regularly as it becomes contaminated with the old rubber coating. Be careful around the switches on the camera back and also when you clean the edges of the camera back when the door is open. Q tips are useful for tight spots.</p> <p>You will be left with the plastic of the bare moulding which will be smooth and non sticky.</p> <p>I think your Dremel approach will be a bit harsh. The right solvent is needed rather that a lot of mechanical scrubbing.</p> <p>Others have used denatured alcohol and naptha when attempting to remove the sticky rubber but I find them not as effective as IPA. Please don't use acetone as you may damage the camera body moulding itself.</p> <p>Good luck with cleaning up your 7. They are an amazing camera. (Even more so if you can score one of the HS flash units - I have the 5600HSD.)</p>

<p>Hi Wouter, like Colin above, my father bought one of these in the mid '60s. It's identical to yours. Your sample definitely has some hazing in the lens as none of our shots show this problem. </p> <p>Having said that I have just been reviewing some of dad's slides and negs which I scanned with a Nikon Coolscan 5000 and the overall sharpness is not that impressive. Still, at least he captured the memories. I last saw the camera about 30 years ago and from memory the shutter had seized and it was consigned to the back of a cupboard.</p>

<p>You've got a point there. When I bought the camera I sent it straight off for a check over / CLA. I didn't know what batteries were installed. I guess my service guy is just a bit fussy. The 357 batteries are held perfectly central in the chamber so I'm happy.</p> <p>The camera got a clean bill of health. The main part of the work needed was to apply an anti corrosive to all electrical contacts to ensure future reliability. Exposure and shutter speeds were spot on except for 1/1000 which was a bit inconsistent but within tolerances. (Not worth the cost of a major tear down to rectify this). Not bad for a 40 year old unit. It's now one of my favourite shooters along with an F1-N. Gotta love the old iron.</p>

<p>My serviceman fitted a coiled spring into each battery chamber and used size 357 batteries. I don't know if they are alkaline or silver oxide but they are definitely 1.5 volts.</p> <p><img src="/canon-fd-camera-forum/h;\canonef.jpg" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>The first question to ask is are the scratches on the emulsion side or 'back' side of the film?</p>

<p>Hi Craig, I have the Better Scanning 120 holders for the V700 and the ANR glass plates I have measure 230mm x 62mm x 3mm.<br> They are a bit too long for the Epson holders and about 2mm too wide to fit between the guides on the Epson holder. I only have the 35mm film holders from Epson.<br> I think that when measuring the glass for the Epson holders the important thing is that the glass will sit flat against the film in the holders.</p>

<p>It's standard C-41 process. Unless it's a pro lab they may not want to stray from the norm. I last used it in 1983 and I don't feel that it was as good as the competing Ilford product which was XP1 in those days.<br> When processed, my negs had a purplish tint and although they printed well on normal B & W paper I have tried to scan them recently on a Nikon CS5000 and they seem to confuse the Digital-ICE which is designed for C-41 negs, colour or chromogenic.</p>

<p>This eBay ad was analysed extensively over at APUG and the machines in question were for the preparation of the acetate base. They were not for coating emulsion onto the base which is a different machine altogether.</p>

<p>If you are confident that you are using the camera correctly, do you have another camera you can compare meter readings with. In any event a sunny day with the meter set to ISO 100 should yield exposures of 1/500 sec at between f5.6 and f8. In your shot of the cherry blossom I would even expect the meter to indicate f11 at 1/500 as the large mass of white flowers would fool the meter into underexposing. Similar to shooting snow in bright light. In these conditions take your meter reading from the grass in the foreground as this represents a good mid-tone for metering purposes.</p> <p>I have an AE-1 along with other FD bodies and just recently it is indicating overexposure of around two stops under most conditions. I will have to do a clip test with this camera against one of the FD bodies I am confident are exposing correctly and check the results. (2 stops over exposure on B and W film is fairly obvious).</p> <p>At the end of the day, if your camera is faulty the repair cost may not be worthwhile. If I find that my AE-1 is consistently overexposing I'll just compensate with the film speed on the meter. I.e. If I am 2 stops over then set the meter to ISO 400 for Provia 100F.</p>

<p>Antonio, for the first question the key thing to remember is that the C41 process removes all silver from the negative and the image is formed by dye clouds. This compares with conventional black and white negatives where the image is formed by metallic silver left in the emulsion after developing and fixing. C41 has a bleach step to remove the silver affected by the developer. The undeveloped silver ions are removed by the C41 fix as per conventional black and white.<br> This why if you process a conventional black and white film in C41 you should get totally clear negatives as there is no dye layer to form an image in the development step and all silver is removed in the subsequent bleach and fix steps - nothing left in the film emulsion on the negatives.<br> I have only tried printing colour C41 negatives on single grade black and white papers without much success. Remember that the dye clouds formed in a colour negative must handle all lof the colours in the final print. Single grade black and white paper is not sensitive to this full range of colours. C41 monochrome dye clouds are a single colour which is why they will print correctly on conventional black and white papers.<br> In the distant past, early 1980's I used to use a Kodak conventional black and white paper called Panalure which was designed for printing C41 colour negatives as black and white and this was very good. It was sensitive to all of the dye colours in a C41 colour negative.</p>