thomas_hansen1

<p>Some very interesting responses and ideas here - thankyou all. I greatly appreciated the thought you have given my frustrating problem.<br>

I am half way through a film at the moment and am going to go to the end of it on a trip this wednesday. Once this is done i shall see if a. this happens yet again (its agfa film) b. look inside at the mechanism / tension plate etc. investigate a bit more and post some further responses.<br>

Many of these ideas seem very likely so i will let you know if i have any further info.</p>

<p>Thankyou all again for giving your thoughts and time.</p>

 

<p>Well - interestingly. When i first got the camera and went into my local (and awesome photography shop), i asked them if they thought the camera and lens would match nicely with any particular film. Now at the time they told me - its a russian camera so go with Kodak. They gave me a reason for this at the time although i didn't pay all that much attention to it as it was sometime ago. (i do think it was to do with strength, although i can't remember sadly) Anyway, i also had over 30 roles of kodak to go through, so it wasn't much of a thought. However since then i've switched to other films and this is when i've had problems.<br>

In terms of my 'scientific' look at this problem, i'm afraid there is little, however i can categorically say it's no coincidence. I had no problem whatsoever with a single kodak film yet of the 6-8 fuji and agfa films i've run through it - every one has had a problem, with most snapping. At first i didn't even think about the make of the film until i remembered my distant memory of the man in the camera shop, and then on getting most of these back and realising so many pictures had double exposed (always partly) i realised it was a real problem. The fact is i've run 2 fuji with problems, then one kodak with no problems, then an agfa with problems, then 2 kodak no problems - you get the picture, it's beyond a coincidence to me.<br>

Its slightly frustrating to as i don't only want to use kodak really, and i don't want to keep losing frames.</p>

<p>So pretty straightforward question some of you may know the answer to -<br>

I am having problems with all film in my fed3 that isn't kodak. For some reason the kodak films i use all rewind perfectly, but whenever i switch to a different brand - in this case fuji and agfa, the film usually breaks whilst rewinding (normally once i've got back near the start) and it appears it doesn't wind on properly as invariably between one and sometimes 20 pictures have come back double exposed due to it seeming to not wind on properly.<br>

Is there anything i can do to stop this, as, much as i like kodak film, i do not primarily use it and i have many other films already that i would like to use.<br>

Any thoughts?<br>

Thankyou kindly for your thoughts in advance.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I would highly recomend anyone going to megatron in London. I went there recently thanks to this thread and the guy did a great job and for barely anything. Getting your old one fixed for under forty pounds is well worth the money. They put a new solar cell in, recalibrate and it's like new and good for another 30 years. Lots of the second hand ones i looked at were going for up to £50 and even the cheapest a good thirty, and for all you know it could pack up after 6 months or be badly calibrated.</p>

<p>I would also like to add, that in my opinion, having people around you that are supportive is the most valuable thing a young artist could have.<br>

Peter, i think it's fantastic you're here getting peoples thoughts and trying to help and support your daughter, trust me, this matters the world. You can have all the talent in the world, but if you don't have someone who supports and believes in you, it can mean nothing if you don't have the confidence to continue.<br>

Once again, kind regards to you both and good luck!</p>

<p>If there's one thing i've learned from my job in the arts, it's that the single most important thing of all is to stay true to your own vision. Tailoring things to what you <em>think</em> other people may or may not like, <em>never, ever</em> , works. You are weakening your own statement, and at the same time very likely to misjudge what you 'think' someone else is into, when in reality, you probably don't know.<br /> In art, or music, what everyone is looking for is a singular, strong vision - or, a person capable of that. That means, if you like photos with lots of foreground (for example), and know why they're there, then great, be true to that, and keep your foregrounds in, whatever anyone says. If you like photos to be personal, keep them personal. People respect focus and vision, and comittment to your own ideas, never forget that. If it matters to you, then do it. What your vision is, that's your business, but stay true to it and yourself - <em>your own mind is the only thing we can ever know for sure - try and second guess someone elses and you'll always be surprised and mostly wrong.<br /> </em> <br /> At the end of the day, the only thing you can really be confident about is your own judgement - your inner likes and dislikes. If you stay to that, trust me, you'll be fine. And hey, this is why we do it in the first place, to make something that we feel inside ourselves is worth creating.<br /> My ten cents, and best of luck to your daughter peter.</p>

<p>Hello Tõnu, and thanks for the reply. It is much appreciated.<br>

I am 97% sure the camera and lens are well adjusted, especially given many successful pictures that i have also achieved - although obviously the unsuccessful ones are bringing slight elements of doubt. I have just taken a couple of test roles and noted down appertures / distances etc. for each picture to put it through it's paces. Maybe this may put my mind at rest on this.(i did perhaps note that more of the pictures with appertures F8 and above and at longer distances, are the ones that seem the least sharp interestingly)<br>

My feeling is that the DOF scale is perhaps incorrect. As you note, perhaps this more liberal criterion is responsible here and i should perhaps be a bit more cautious with my appertures and distances.<br>

Perhaps though a kind person could briefly put my mind at rest on these points? -<br>

a. the DOF scale on the fed 3 / industrar61 is maybe not quite accurate. (are they usually totally correct across cameras? I've never encountered this problem before)<br>

b. Which is more likely to be accurate when calculating total depth of field - the internet calculators, based on entering stock figures, or the one actually on my lens? As the two figures, when comparing, are, while similarish, still different enough to be puzzling.<br>

c. ..and super finally.. i'm not getting the method wrong by any chance am i? As i said, its many years since i last used a fully manual camera.I am convinced i am right, and google is telling me i am right, but, i guess you never know.</p>

<p>Thanks again Tõnu and anyone else who may be able to offer advice.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hello all, so i recently acquired a fed3 camera, with an industra61 lens.<br>

I'm really happy with it and the photos have been fantastic so far. However, one issue troubling me, is calculating my depth of field using the DOF scale on the lens in relation to the distance.<br>

The reason for this is twofold <br>

- Some (although not all) of my pictures so far have come back strangely out of focus. This is odd to me as all were considered pictures, rather than snapshots, and in all circumstances the rangefinder should have been correctly applied. Why they are not all perfectly in focus is a mystery to me.<br>

- Similarly, my usual technique of working out DOF (Set apperture, set distance, look at DOF scale and line up both appropriate appertures number on the DOF scale to the distances below said numbers, on the distance wheel, to calculate my DOF.) is producing to me slightly unexpected numbers that i am pretty sure are not correct. Sadly i have no other cameras anymore to compare this to to see how it compares to other models, but using online DOF caluclators is producing quite different DOFs than the ones i am working out.<br>

Also<br>

- It's been some time since i calculated DOF on a manual camera, and i was never a pro anyway, so I would not be surprised if my memory of the process or on DOF in general is incorrect, although, every other investigation online with google suggests this is not the problem at all. I am, in short, baffled as to why when i have focussed on people, they have not come out in focus but the background has, for example.<br>

So what i'm asking, variously, is -<br>

- is there a specific way to calculate DOF on the fed3 that is perhaps different to another camera?<br>

- Are there any quirks on the camera lens i should be aware of?<br>

- Are there any further tips people more experienced with this camera or similar, could give me to help more of my pictures be in focus?</p>

<p>Thankyou all for any help and advice you may be able to offer, it would be greatly appreciated, and hope everyone had great holidays.</p>

<p> </p>