mishka

<p>APO-Symmar 150mm f5.6 in great condition is probably worth close to $470, so you get the camera for free.</p>

<p>I have this lens, which had developed coating defects over time. I have asked guys at Focal Point, and got an estimate for repairs north of $600. I am wondering if anyone knows anything about these lenses and whether it's worth repairing it. I suspect this may be a lens, it's a "1Q" after all, but it may just as well be a very ordinary DDR tessar -- and they are quite cheap on ebay these days. Any advice is appreciated.</p><div></div>

<p>Weird no one mentioned: scanning itself degrades images quite a bit! The images on film, from my experience, are always significantly better that whatever the (Nikon) scanner spits out. Obviously, digital technology always improves. And so will the quality of scans of the films shot today. But not the quality of digital files saved today.</p>

<p>> 3. A sturdy, wide-legged tripod. The camera, lens, finder & back & me went into to drink once while fiddling with a <br />> weaker model. This is no area to skimp.</p>

<p>I just hope the model was over 18...</p>

<p>Hasselblad F 110/2<br>

Pentax 645 35-55 AF<br>

Mamiya 7 43/4.5<br>

...</p>

<p>I ordered one from Adorama yesterday and received it today. It was marked as "backorder" though.</p>

expect $300-400 if it's in excellent condition

No need for one.

Which bank did you rob?

> BTW, how do you get a Porsche when it means the kids go without food? <br>

<br>

 

kids can beg.

Do you really need instructions for it? <br>

It's quite straightforward.<br>

> Is the 3.5 planar/xenotar any better than the 2.8...<br>

> I`ve found it difficult to find info on the net.<br>

<br>

are you kidding?

Pentax USA, Colorado

used mamiya or pentax. or contax, if you gave the dough. <br>

at this point kievs are grossly overpriced (unless you can get <br>

one for free).

every freaking wedding photog? who would you rather pay, a guy with a wimpy 35mm knockoff or someone with "some serious gear"? given a similar price to canon offering i suspect d645 would sell like hotcakes.

Ron,

Does that include the full frame digital bodies as well?

Thanks

nevermind the scanning. just look at the ligh table -- you'll have no further questions.

I had a P67 shortly and found it quite handholdable.

I have P645 now (but not only), and the reasons are

 

1. as it has been mentioned here, although 645 looks small

compared to 6x7, it's large enough for most practical purposes

(mine)

2. factoring in the lenses, it's much lighter

3. LOTS of 3rd party lenses are available w/ adapters,

at any price point, from Arsat/CZJ/P6 to Zeiss/Hasselblad to

pentax own 6x7.

4. if there ever a digital solution from pentax, 645 is a

much more likely target than 67

The adapter on ebay would cost under $100 (I have one).

You will be use AP and manual exposure. Stop down

metering of course.

as far as i remember MLU on 500CM opens the rear "shutter" as well.

three words: mirror lock up.

I use Viv 550 with P645 (plain, not N or NII), and it

 

(1) doesn not have adjustments in TTL mode

 

(2) has 2 auto modes as well as a manual mode (constant power)

 

With 35mm pentax cameras there's a trick to do flash exposure compensation though: you set exposure compensation on camera and

set the camera in manual mode.

 

I am not sure if this would work on P645 -- never tried it.

Butt ugly. All three of them. You've heard it here first.

I have just measured the camera: the lensboard to GG clearing

is ~58mm and the opening in the front standard is ~70mm wide,

so that should be ok. I guess I'll try to rent one this weekend.

 

Thanks!

I am thinking about 4x5. If that is doable, this would be one heck<br>

of a wide camera! drop bed is not a problem at all.<p>

The problems I was thinking about were<br>

-- The lensboard opening seems to be pretty small, and I am not sure

if it's wide enough the aforementioned lens. <br>

-- also, i am not sure if the bed will stay out of the view, even when dropped? <br>

<br>

As far as the 2 3/8", I took this number from <br>

http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/features.html:<p>

<i>

The Speed Graphic is slightly heavier and thicker than the similar Crown Graphic. The 2 3/8" minimum film-to-flange distance required by the focal plane shutter on a Speed Graphic precludes the use of 65mm and wider-angle lenses, whereas a Crown Graphic is able to use a 47mm WA lens. Many modern wide-angle lenses in the 47mm-65mm range can cover 4x5", but classic lenses this wide were designed to cover 2-1/4 x 3-1/4, so they should be used with the 2x3" Graphics or with appropriate roll-film backs on 4x5" Graphics.</i>