jim_peterson2

<p>Thanks for all the comments. I shot and developed another roll of film today but unfortunately all of my Acros 100 film was gone so I went with HP5+. But I did change my agitation significantly. Reading the Kodak literature it describes an agitation that is quite a bit more vigorous than what is recommended for SPD. In the case of SPD it calls for relatively slow agitation, with complete inversion and back taking 2-3 seconds; for one continuous minute and then 10 seconds every following minute. Kodak calls for agitation at a rate of one complete inversion (over and back) per second. The literature says to start with 5-7 of these and then 2-5 again every 30 seconds. I did a full 5 inversions every 30 seconds and didn't see much evidence of the lighter edges except perhaps in the one shot that was vertical orientation. So my initial conclusion is that D-76 simply requires a bit more vigorous agitation than SPD.<br>

I was pleased with the results but the big disappointment was that my GF670 seems to have a shutter problem. In the past I have sometimes gotten one frame in a roll (usually somewhere in the middle) that was completely blank. It seems the shutter simply failed to open. In today's roll I got four out of ten frames that were blank! grrr... I'll be contacting my camera shop soon. <br>

Anyway, the results from today are <a href="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/cyncty">in this gallery</a>.</p>

<p>Zack,<br>

In the past I've always developed Acros in Fuji SPD and it comes out really nice. I've never had any problems like this and SPD is clearly optimized for Fuji films because even though dev. times for SPD and D-76 are similar for most films, for Acros and Presto 400 they only require 4.25min but with D-76 its over 7 minutes. <br>

So with SPD the contrast is not too hard and Acros comes out looking just great. I'm wondering if D-76 is doesn't work as well with this film.</p>

<p>OK. I guess my next step will be to measure out exactly how much fluid is needed in this tank to just cover the reel and then use only that much next time...</p>

<p>It still seems odd though since there is room in the tank for the reel to move up and down at least a half inch or more so one would think the circulation would be fine. But I guess the best thing to do is experiment.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses.<br>

I was using a stainless steel tank and reel, and I filled it with developer until it was overflowing...<br>

Agitation was the same as always and I don't think I've seen this problem before so I'm rather puzzled.</p>

<p>I shot a roll of Acros 100 with the GF670 at the Garden of the Gods today and in many of the shots the edges of the film are noticeably brighter. At first I wondered if forgetting to take my lens hood was the cause but the pattern is the same for portrait oriented shots so I ruled that out. I'm suspecting something happened in the development process. I used stock D-76 with a fairly standard agitation of 1 minute continuous and then 10 seconds every minute after that.<br>

You can see the <a href="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/shk">full gallery here</a>: </p>

<p><img src="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/image/147958041/original.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/image/147958045/original.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>If blowing sand is a big issue, skip the old folders, skip the TLR, and go with something simple and easy to use like the <a href="http://www.dantestella.com/technical/ga645.html">Fuji GA series</a>. No lens changing to fuss with, AF, built in meter, light and portable, one model even has a zoom lens. extremely sharp lenses... and relatively affordable!</p>

<p>I would recommend against planning to buy a new camera of a format you haven't used before just for this trip. If you really want to get into medium format do it well ahead of time. And in all likelihood, plan on spending more money than that. Medium format film cameras are cheap, but still you should plan on spending at least $200-$400 for a decent camera and lens. <br>

If you don't need to change lenses an old Fuji 645 rangefinder might be one of the easiest to use, like the GA645 or one of the variations. I would opt for the wide lens version. </p>

<p>Gianluca, yes I know which camera you have. I owned one until about 6 months ago. <a href="http://news.mapcamera.com/mapsele.php?itemid=7118">Here is an article</a> (sorry it's in Japanese) talking about the similarities of the GS645 and the GF670. If you look at the photos you'll see that they really are not all that different in size.</p>

<p>I loved my GS645 too, but when I had the opportunity to trade it and some others in for the GF670 I did so without hesitation and have never looked back. The size really isn't that much different between the 645 and the 670. My guess is that if you like the GS you'll absolutely love the GF, but that's just me.</p>

<p>Sounds like your P67 was broken. I'd take a Hasselblad in place of that too!!! <br>

As for the Leica, definitely portable, but this OP wants portability without stepping down to small format.</p>

<p>The guidelines do crop some but being a rangefinder, you can see well beyond the lines so while you don't know exactly where the image will be cut, you can see everything that will be captured and more.<br>

I love this camera and was happy to sell my RB 67 Pro SD, Voigtlander Bessa-R and Fuji Klasse in order to finance it, even though all three were very nice cameras!</p>

 

 

<p>Well, this topic has gone around quite a bit, making for some interesting discussions. But if we take it back to the OP, there are three factors cited. <br>

1. Wants something more portable than the 501 system.<br>

2. Wants something less awkward to hold off the tripod<br>

3. Likes the idea of a built in meter<br>

One concern is making the switch from square to rectangle viewing frame<br>

And he adds the comment that he does almost all his shooting with one lens; an 80mm<br>

Finally he is concerned about rangefinders because of lack of experience with them.<br>

So... it seems that most everyone agrees that a Pentax 67 and probably any Bronica SLR won't be significantly more portable than the 501. And others have pointed out that the addition of a grip to the Blad will make it more holdable off the tripod.<br>

So many folks will just suggest staying with what he has. That may be a good option. But the whole reason for this thread is because he wants a change.<br>

And I just don't know how you can answer without going down the rangefinder road. Personally I think the Fuji GF670 is the almost perfect answer. Extremely portable and easy to hold (although it does take some getting used to), has a very accurate and usable built in meter, offers both 6x6 and 6x7 without the hassle of carrying and changing film backs, it has an 80mm lens (or you can get the WA version) and the optics are second to none! If the OP would at least try it out and address his concerns about unfamiliarity with rangefinders, I think he would find the GF670 to be an ideal solution!</p>

 

 

<p>Yes, yes, I know. But I'm definitely a "blue collar" photography sort of guy who only got into medium format because used equipment is so cheap now days. I have lots of respect for Hasselblad, Roleiflex and Leica but doubt I'll ever be able to afford any of them. In the mean time I love the results I get with Pentax, Bronica, Mamiya, Fuji, and Yashica.</p>

<p>It's easy enough to find the actual dimensions of each format with a quick google search, and from there you just figure out the ratio and do the math. But as others say, this assumes there was no cropping, or that you have the actual negatives.</p>

<p>There's nothing heretical about suggesting the SQ-A over the Pentax 67. I own both and would take the Bronica for portability any day. If you want to go 6x7 the GS-1 is even better and about the same weight. I use my Pentax 67 on a tripod 90% of the time but love hand holding the Bronicas.<br>

You mentioned the Mamiya 6 and I would encourage you to look into it. Much more portable! I love mine and use it a lot. You could probably get by with just the standard lens and the WA lens. Both are excellent.<br>

But if you are happy with one lens, really want portability, and are undecided between 6x6 and 6x7, the Fuji GF670 sounds like the perfect match. It is a beauty to behold.<br>

Yes, rangefinders are different from SLRs and TLRs but I've found the adjustment to be rather manageable. </p>

<p>I bought a full RB kit NOS in Tokyo not too long ago. I got the KL127 and 90 lenses with it. The whole thing cost me about $450. I ended up selling it last summer along with several other lenses and accessories for it that I had accumulated. But i wouldn't be surprised if that store still had some of the NOS stock left. It is Sanpoh Camera in Meguro, Tokyo.</p>

<p>I have the 645 Pro TL and enjoy it a lot. I got it used, in pieces, out of the junk bin and yet everything works perfectly. The lenses are probably the cheapest medium format lenses on the used market so my collection just keeps growing. I had one metered prism VF that wasn't accurate but quickly found another one that works just fine. I almost always use the larger power drive grip and the AE prism. The whole system seems pretty indestructible. </p>

<p>As a few others have suggested, the Bronica GS-1 sounds like a good solution to your quandary. It is fully modular, has superb optics, is quite portable and great for handheld work with the leaf shutter lenses. And best of all, you don't have to decide between a 6x7, 6x6 or 645 camera because the GS-1 is all of the above! You can go retro with WLF, hand lever film advance, and all manual. Or you can attach the AE prism metered VF, the speed grip and shoot in aperture priority mode. </p>

<p>If using the AE finder don't forget to set the lens to A-mode. I did that a couple of times when I first started using the camera. As for scanning, if you can make some custom profiles for specific films you will get the best results. There are various calibration applications that can help you do this. Then just go back and forth between the light table and your screen in post until you get the scanned image to look just like the film.</p>

<p>I've only had the GF670 for a little over a month but I am thoroughly enjoying it! At the same time, I also recently acquired the Mamiya 6 and have become very fond of that one as well. The Mamiya 7 will give you 6x7 but it really isn't all that small. Of course, compared to a MF SLR it is quite small, but still, especially with the non-retracting lens of the 7 it is considerably more bulky than the GF670. Of course the flip side is that you get lens choices!<br>

If you want to spend less money the older Fuji rangefinders are very good and very affordable with a wide range of formats (645, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9) and focal lengths.</p>

<p>I have 220 backs for several cameras and could get a pretty good variety of color films in 220 if I wanted but I tend to be happier with 120 for the same reasons stated by Q.G.<br>

As for B&W film, I've seen those stainless steel reels for 220 and they looked much harder to use in a dark bag than the standard 120 reel. Since I develop all my B&W film at home I'm perfectly content with 120.<br>

On a sub-note, Steve's comments about the Pentax 67 being a difficult camera to load are puzzling to me. I read similar comments about that camera frequently, but to this day have no idea what makes it any harder than any other camera. I've never had any trouble loading film in either the 6x7 or the 67...</p>

<p>If you don't already have the AEIII metered prism I would highly recommend it. It's significantly better than the AEII and battery life is much longer.<br>

Enjoy your new gear and share some of the results with us!</p>

<p>I just downloaded beeCam Lightmeter and it seems to work well and is within one half a stop of my handheld. Clever device. But in truth I use reflective metering more often than incident metering since it's usually for landscape stuff, so it won't get used all that much.<br>

By the way, Tom, the film you'll be using with a medium format system is 120 or 220, definitely not 110! It's ironic but 110 is for miniature cameras. I just shot a roll today!</p>

<p>I just recently bought the Mamiya 6 as well so I'm not an authority at all. But looking through my viewfinder I notice that if I have my eye perfectly centered so the rangefinder superimposed spot is the sharpest, the shutter speed on the left side is almost invisible. To see it clearly I do need to move my eye to the right a bit, and thus off center. And if I look even further to the left than the shutter speed indicator, I also see a reflection of the double image area. I don't notice the uneven brightness that you mention unless I move my eye way off center.<br>

Comparing the viewfinder and superimposed area of the Mamiya 6 with my other rangefinders I would say that it is much better than my Mamiya Press, a little bit better than my Fuji GS645 and not as good as the Fuji GF670. I guess that all makes sense considering the relative age of each camera. Rangefinder technology has continually gotten better over the years.</p>

<p>Oh well. He actually makes money writing that stuff so he obviously must be smarter than me! Personally, I enjoyed Dante Stella's article a lot more; but then I tend to enjoy almost everything he writes.</p>