g_k7

<p>That didn't work for me in Eastern Europe. Specifically in Russia I've found they are going to scan your film no matter what you say, do, ask, emote or even think.</p>

<p>Frankly, for me it's easier to scan negative film, as compared to reversal ('slide') film. The contrast and tonality of reversal film is fantastic, but once something glides towards the D-max or D-min range (blocky shadows/ nearly-blown highlights) it can disappear more readily, than with negative film.</p>

<p>Tim, as with any camera, if you can place a "deposit" on it but take one roll and develop it, that would be my recommendation.<br>

Be it a Mamiya, Contax, Rollei, Hasselblad, Bronica...you name it.<br>

That being said, the C645 system is modular, well-built and performs.</p>

Leigh, it's not an excuse I'm offering up.

 

It is, in fact, a fact - pun wholly intended.

<p>Leigh, there is a VERY good excuse for that. B&H, as well as Adorama adhere to a set of beliefs that proscribe them from engaging in commerce on Saturdays. It's not like UPS or FedEx is going to pick up the package that day any way! I for one have no problem with them following that principle, it's their business and I simply plan ahead.<br>

<br />I've bought used from KEH and Adorama, I have not delved into B&H in that category yet. KEH I patronize mostly because they have all the little trifles I'm looking for, at some point during the sales year.</p>

<p>Yes, it's not an enormous amount of travel, but the RB/RZ does have a lot of "close focus" ability that doesn't necessarily have to translate to another body format.<br>

<br />I can't get anything to appear in my browser, using the link from above? :/</p>

<p>Artistic aspects aside, one of the bodies he's using for sure is a GSW 69III, it's obvious from the angle of view in the Amy Chua photos. There is a second GS (W?) body hanging from the softbox post, in the Cairo shot. I don't see a Polaroid back on it, though that's hard to absolutely ascertain. My supposition is that it's merely a different focal length.<br>

The RZ he's using has the prism finder (not AE) which weighs about 10% less than the meter prism.<br>

120/220 is medium format, I wouldn't call it large format. Though perhaps I am mis-reading an earlier thread comment.</p>

<p>Doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants, veterinarians, dentists, pilots...I consider those "professions".</p>

<p>A photographer? The tent is vast and varied, but by no means would I call it a profession.<br>

Professional? What does that really mean?<br>

I picked "C" right away because it's not A nor B, and D isn't quite correct either. The actual image is the same no matter what, the film format just serves as a cropping factor of whatever image circle is projected onto the film plane.</p>

<p>It's not the film.<br /> I have used a GS690 and a GSW690. I'd say it's a "feature", and especially so if using 220 film.<br /> As the others above said, you should add drag to the unfurling spool and ensure that the takeup spool and incoming film/paper are in perfect alignment.<br /> <br />What's also very important, is to make sure that no "nugget" (for lack of a better word) of paper leader causes any bulking at the takeup spool insertion slot. Imagine a cut section through the spool - you'd see the disk in the background and the thin-cut spindle in the middle. The paper sometimes won't fully curl around the spindle, thus forming a "nugget" or pearl or barnacle, whatever you're feeling today, and that forms the basis around which the remainder of the roll accumulates.<br /> By the time you finish the roll later, you are slightly off-spool because the inside diameter of the film wasn't minimized. :-(<br /> To sum it up:<br /> 1. Keep tension on the film spool<br /> 2. Align, advance once and then push/squeeze the takeup spool paper to ensure tight fit<br /> 3. If need be, carry a small changing bag and "portable darkoom" in the form of aluminum foil to wrap the film in...just in case.</p>

<p>I almost do #3 when shooting 220.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Dave,<br>

http://www.flickr.com/groups/contax645/discuss/72157626043687010/ looks like nobody has answered there yet...<br>

It is indeed the GB-71 that mates to the 45 Distagon.<br>

Take a look at the plastic mounting ring inside your lenshood. Check for cracks or other imperfections. I think the pretty but fussy metal lens hoods are one of the larger annoyances of the C645 system, besides the lack of customizeable functions like focus behavior which one can set on other AF 645 cameras. The hoods look pretty as they are the same finish as the lenses, but cost a small fortune. It's crazy.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>You should also consider buying the Mamiya-branded tripod adapter "N". <br />Once placed atop a tripod or attached to a quick-release plate, the controls on the bottom of the camera, depending on tripod/plate size, can be blocked.<br>

<br />What can sometimes happen is that one cannot get the spool release pegs to pop out of the body, which means you can't change film.<br>

<br />Or sometimes, you cannot manipulate the light curtain switch, meaning you cannot change lenses.</p>

<p>The adapter is just a simple stand-off, but it makes it easier to use the camera with virtually any tripod head there is.</p>

<p>I always bring a hotshot bubble level with me as well, as I suffer from "CES" - crooked-eye syndrome.</p>

<p>Hi Thakurdalip,<br>

Happy 2011! I like the Zoerk, though it is a bit unwieldy to use because of the fine-tune screw that is very very long. But it allows for very precise movements. Note my Zoerk is only a shift adapter, and if you buy/order one, I would get the version that has a tripod foot added to the adapter - that way your lens stays in one place, and you're really only moving the camera sensor, which is very effective for photo stitching.</p>

<p>The Mirex is a shift AND tilt adapter, and is very handy if you like to use tilt to change your focus plane. Some of the functionality of the Mirex is a bit stiff, but you get used to it. It is a very well-made piece of machinery.</p>

<p>Regarding your D700, since you have a built-in flash, the housing will likely obstruct the vertical shift when shooting landscape format. Vertical shift is usually the most useful movement for shooting architecture. But, if you shoot portrait format, than the flash housing will be on the left or right side of the shift mechanism and you should be OK.</p>

<p>Live view, or the Nikon equivalent, is of paramount importance with either of these adapters.<br>

Good luck!</p>

<p>My opinion (like others) is that the lens elements were specified, probably made, ground, polished, coated, etc. then assembled by Pentax.<br>

Any alteration to that optical path, like the stated "re-grind" would remove material from an element designed by Pentax.</p>

<p>I would not keep the lens, if you have right of return. It may take awhile, but there are other 800s out there.<br>

Best of luck.</p>

<p>The M645 150mm f/2.8 is stellar on film, as well as a full-frame digital SLR. It's relatively compact for an f/2.8 aperture, and costs a song on the used market.<br>

<br />Frankly, I find 150mm more practical on 645, than 200 and up. Not that they aren't valid, but as others said, you really have to pay heed to movement, shake, vibration, etc.</p>

 

<p>James,<br>

<br />As an aside, that's about as Basque as family names get :-) excepting perhaps Goicoechea.</p>

<p>Call Mamiya of America and talk to their technical support people. That should give you the straight poop.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well, there is also the byzantine-looking close-up attachment for the 75mm G, if you really want to "get funky".</p>

<p>I have used rechargeable NiMH batteries by Ansmann. They last quite some time if you get the low-discharge ones, however I find when the cells peeter out, the falloff is very abrupt.</p>

<p>As Mr. Barnes says: pop-up flash housing and live view (or equivalent) are the two key things to watch for.<br>

<br />I use a Mirex and a Zoerk on a 5Dii, it's perfectly functional. On a 40D, the Zoerk couldn't be used at all, and the Mirex wasn't fully adjustable.</p>

<p>Did you check the Sony website? :-|</p>

<p>www.docs.sony.com/reflib/docget.asp?manualid=10041&template_id=1&region_id=1&DL=',600,560,10,10,'Manuals'</p>

<blockquote>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1770111">Graham Mitchell</a> , Sep 21, 2010; 03:16 a.m. I can't believe no-one has mentioned the Rollei 6008.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Greg Jones did, on page 1!</p>

<p>I've used a Mamiya 645 AFdii, a Contax 645 and Pentax 645Nii. They're all pretty good, to tell you the truth.</p>

<p>Jon,<br>

<br />This is completely normal. As they others state above, the rangefinder mechanism of the Mamiya 6 & 7 (and all modern rangefinders?) use a polarized patch.<br>

<br />Your TV is an LCD model, correct? Current LCDs use polarizing shutters to restrict what color of light comes through each pixel. This is why the black is never truly black - it's a closed "shutter" so to speak with a bright white backlight against it.<br>

You can test/verify this by either looking at your TV with polarized sunglasses on, or for even more fun, look through the back of a circular polarizer filter, towards your TV. Twist the filer and you will see it go from simply "dark" to black and back again.</p>

<p>Nice photojournalistic touch. How do you avoid netwon rings? My glass holder forms them all the time; I'm starting to wonder if it has to do with the low-humidity of where I live, causing film to adhere to the glass.<br>

Even a pass with the anti-stat cloth doesn't seem to help much.</p>

<p>Try the Nikon 8000/9000 Yahoo! User Group.</p>

<p>They are very different, the Mamiya is a system camera and the Fuji is pretty much stand-alone.<br>

<br /> The Fuji 645s all have fixed lenses and the film travels in a typical right-left path, much like a 35mm film SLR.<br>

The Mamiya 645 Pro is highly modular, encompassing prisms, viewfinders, winders, lenses and film backs.<br>

The film travel on a 645 SLR is rather tortured and thus the depth of the Mamiya is quite a bit more than the Fuji.<br>

<br /> If you want small and discreet, get one of the Fujis, personally I'd try to snag an autofocus version for "blind" shooting.<br>

<br /> Start simple, is my advice.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Marco, what Randall suggests in terms of conversion - it is certainly do-able, but you should realize that from an economic standpoint, it makes little sense.<br>

First you buy the NAM-1 = perhaps $450<br>

Then you pay to convert it = likely $850<br>

Then you buy a C645 lens = price/type varies, usually above $500 and up to $5,000<br>

Then, you shoot it on Canon EOS, and not Nikon = whatever you pay for an EOS body</p>

<p>Unless you are already in the Contax system, or have real, irrefutable reasons or belief that a 645 lens on a 35mm dSLR, with no tilt nor shift capability (but with 'Zeiss' rendering) will be worth spending $2,200 on at a minimum...I'd say skip it.<br>

What is it about the C645 lenses that you believe will be worth this pricey and roundabout solution? Not that it isn't worth it. Personally it's really cool that Conurus is offering this conversion, in my opinion.<br>

There are obviously some N-series users out there, who likely love their cameras to pieces, but altering a NAM does allow C645 glass to "live on" mounted to newer bodies. <br /><br />There is no modern, credible digital Contax SLR.</p>

<p> </p>