s.k. grimes inc

<p>S.K.Grimes invites you to attend our open studio on August 11th, 2012 to celebrate Adam's 10 year anniversary. The open house is from 3PM – 6PM. Light appetizers and drinks will be served while you explore our larger facility, new machines, and even a collection of customer artwork from over the years. Address and contact information can be found on our website. Hope to see you there!<br>

<a href="http://www.skgrimes.com">www.skgrimes.com</a><br>

If you are one of clients and interested in showing one of your pieces at the open studio, give us a call and we can set aside some wall space.</p>

Good Day Folks,

 

In additional to needing a cable release with a long throw for an Ilex #5, you may want to check the cable release port to ensure all the pieces are present. On the inside of the cable release shaft there is a stud which pushes against the firing lever in the shutter. The cable release pushes against the stud, the stud pushes against the lever and ?click? the shutter fires.

 

In some cases, the stud is missing. To check, look down the cable release shaft. If you see a circular brass or steel piece, the stud is in place. If you see a small bar crossing the shaft, the firing lever, then the stud is missing.

 

Another common problem is the cable release threads on later Ilex #5 shutters are replaceable. If the threads were replaced and the new plug was not seated completely into the cable release housing, the distance the cable release will need to travel to fire the shutter will be extended.

 

Since we CLA Ilex #5 shutter, we stock the correct replacement pieces and have a limited number of long throw cable releases available.

Good Day Larry,

 

The following link shows how to specify a thread diamter and pitch. http://www.skgrimes.com/adapter/measure.htm

 

M39 generally refers to a thread with a 39mm OD (outside diameter) and a 1.0mm pitch. The Copal 1 shutters features a 39mm OD with a .75 pitch.

 

If a stock extenstion tube cannot be located,

 

-threaded adapters can be made to utilize your existing tube. However, since the thread diameters are nearly the same, your tube may need to be bored out and rethreaded with a larger thread. A step down ring can then be machined to accomidate the desired 39x.75.

 

-you could have a custom extension tube with the correct thread machined.

 

-you can elimate the threads on the tube all together. The jam nut /retaing ring for a Copal 1 shutter requires a hole 41.8mm in diameter. Your tube could be bored to that diameter and then the lens mounted to the tube using a retaining ring.

 

 

In regard to " If I remove the shutter (which for my application is not really necessary unless I'm using flash), what does the lens have for mounting threads? "

 

See http://www.skgrimes.com/products/index.htm for Copal shutter mounting thread specs. If you do remove the shutter from the equation, you will need the lenses' original barrel or a spacer to locate the optics the correct distance from each other. Otherwise, all you have is two loose cells.

Good Day Dietrich.

 

First off, remove the optics from the shutter, thus elimating the posible scratching of the lens.

 

If the retaining ring is flush or near flush to the back bearing surface of the shutter, you may be able to use the following trick. Lay a piece of rubber (rubber can opener, old inner tube) on the table. Set the shutter and lensboard down of the rubber with the retaining ring on the bottom. A rubber ring gasket can also be used to make contact between the rubber sheet and the retaining ring.

 

Place another piece of rubber over the top of the shutter. Push down and twist. The ring should pop free. If not... you may need a spanner wrench.

Good Day Andrew,

 

The two 610 Apo's I measured in shop had a 95mm filter thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if they made one with a 105mm. If it is a 105, the thread pitch would be 1.0.

 

The way in which the 610 is designed could lend itself to having multiple threaded fronts. The optics are contained in a housing which is seperate from the front "deco name ring." With most Apo Nikkors, if you were to remove the front retaining ring, the glass could be taken out. With a 610, once you remove the front ring, you discover the elements are still contained in a seperate housing.

 

My point... it would be easily for Nikon to make 610's with different filter threads without completely redesigning the front cell.

 

Adam @ SKG

Check out the following thread for adapters from VII to ... .

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004spf

The 610 Apo-Nikkor takes 95mm filters. The thread spec is M95x.1.0.

 

Adam @ SKG

Pressing oversized filter adapters certainly works. It may in the long rub scratches and damage of lens cells. The rubber band system is probably a safer bet if you don't mind using the Lee filter sytem.

 

Another option is a slip-on adapter. See the following thread for slip-on options. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004spf

Forcing a threaded ring into or onto the current lens is one option. However, keep in mind this can result in damaging the threads. Consequently, the lens is no longer is mint condition for resale and if the lens ever needs to be have the glass internaly cleaned or recemented, you may be looking at additional costs to repair the threads in order to remove the glass.

 

Another option is to have a filter adapter custom machined.

 

Two similar threads are as follows:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003xTv

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0034SL

Good Day Todd,

 

I second the 3.365 measurement. All the Kodak WF Ektars I have seen used a standard Ilex #5 flange. The Ilex #4 and #3 shutters, however, have various lens board boring requirements depending on the model Ilex (Kodak, Rim set, Dial set, factory 12" Artar remount, etc).

 

For more info on Ilexs shutters, see the following link. http://www.skgrimes.com/ilex/index.htm

 

 

Adam @ SKG

Good Day Tor,

 

When remounting a barrel lens into a shutter, there are two main considerations.

 

1. Does the shutter have an iris that can accommodate the lens.

 

2. Physically, can the cells be located relative to each other and the iris while maintaining the critical distances.

 

If the threads on the 360 F9 have the same mounting threads as a Copal #3 shutter, M56x.75, then chances are the iris of a Copal #3 can accommodate the lens.

 

Physically, it sounds as though the lens will fit in the shutter. However, just because the lens threads into the shutter, it does not necessarily mean the critical distances between the lenses and their relationship to the iris is maintained. There are situations where lenses requires spacers and/or material to be removed from the cells/shutter.

 

In cases where a lens is not a direct fit into a shutter, adapters need to be fabricated and/or the cells need to be re-machined. See http://www.skgrimes.com/lensmount/24art/index.htm for information regarding this type of lens remounting.

 

Adam

It sounds as though the piece with the three notches is actually flange. http://www.skgrimes.com/adapter/index.htm

 

These threaded rings are intended to be directly fastened to the lens board with screws. Often flanges are used as retaining rings, since drilling and tapping metal lens boards is not a common skill taught in photo 101.

 

When searching for a spanner wrench, also note theer are two type of wrenches, flat tipped and round tipped and it important to use the correct tip with the corresponding retaining ring to avoid damaging the ring and/or the lens.

 

http://www.skgrimes.com/span/index.htm

 

 

Also, some shutters utilize locating pins which are attached to the back of the shutter. A notch in the lens board is created to "locate" the pin. If you attempt to remove a shutter with a locating pin by turning/twisting the shutter, you may jar the pin, strip its threads, damage the shutter, and/or board.

No luck at Borders either. However, a local (RI) photographer mentioned to me that he had already received his copy.

S.K. Grimes continues to operate as Steve intended. We all had the opportunity to work side by side with him on various projects. Paul Choppin's statement on photo.net, "the last work you had done may very well have been done by one of Steve's protégés" is very true. We trained with the best! As a teacher, Steve nurtured our enthusiasm while guiding us to meet your expectation � a custom crafted solution.

 

In SK Grimes is evidence of Steve�s 40 years of experience. You just don�t just put that experience on like a suit. But we have a suitcase of problem solving skills, the right tools, a motivated team and a passion for meeting your expectations. Thank you for your continued support we look forward to hearing from you!

 

Adam @ SKG

Good Morning All,

 

Thank you for your concern. Steve Grimes is currently in the hospital. At this time we have no further information about his status.

 

 

Adam Dau @ SKG

The groups themselves are symmetrical, that is, the entire front group can be switched for the entire back group. The individual elements are not symmetrical. That is to say the curves are substantially different on each side of each glass; the curves are different enough to tell by looking at them. (Hint, the steep curve of the positive lens faces away from the iris).

I am similarly plagued by the distressing abundance of incompetence in what seems to be every encounter. <p>

The stories I can tell: Sometimes its amazing that anything gets done'

at all. I approach each such search with a cynical certainty that the

odds are against me. Last year I spent over $3000.00 on what turned out

to be an incompetent con-man web design expert. I hired and payed a

substantial sign on bonus to a former employee of the famous Marty Forscher who

turned out to be a complete nincompoop non-performer. ("Well, I thought

you were hiring me to conceive of and design the work, not actually do it")<p>

 

At least I have a good car mechanic, to quote an old joke. "He's so good he repaired my car 14

times last year alone." :-) <p>

 

And I am by no means immune to showing up as an idiot myself. Recently, in a team

effort including myself all four employees reviewed and participated in a job for a

new customer making a number of very large sized lenscaps (9" diameter which, with

material costs turned out costing about $225.00 each, most of which was material

cost. There were two versions of the lenscap. We managed to make eight of the one he wanted

two of and two of the one he wanted six of. At such a time all you can do is stop crying,

start laughing, and take a posture of abject apology to the customer and get on with

ordering more stock. <p>

 

Recently I needed to purchase a second computer lathe. I began the process of shopping around and,

although satisfied with the performance and company support of the

<a href="http://www.southwesternindustries.com/swi/">

PROTOTRAK </a> lathe I have had for a couple of years I found it a little primitive and wondered

what else there was out there. I found and visited <a href="http://www.fryermachine.com/">

Fryer machine company

</a> who are within easy driving distance of my shop and got a really gee whiz demonstration

of a totally cool and very attractive product, the "touch 2000" Many sophisticated and

well thought out features and ergonomics. But I couldn't find anyone to say anything

good about this company. My suspicions (already 99 out of 100 cynical as is the topic of this

rant) were aggravated in finding out that the "Proudly Made in the USA" statement on the

web-site should have read: "Proudly uncrated and painted in the USA from machinery made at

state factories in China" <p>

 

When I told the SWI (proudly uncrated and painted in the USA from machinery made in Taiwan and

Spain) rep that the delay in my purchase desicion was due to the fact that I was

considering this new lathe I perceived the pained look of patience that comes from the

dilemma of it not being good protocol to bad-mouth a competitor but nonetheless wanting to

communicate "Danger Danger"<p>

 

Since this is a $30,000.00 purchase its not something I wanted to take a chance on and have

duplicated the Prototrak lathe. I appreciate its primitiveness as the versatile simplicity that

it seems to be. <p>

 

The point being that I successfully used my cautious and cynical attitude to avoid a $30K disaster<p>

 

SKG

Thanks for the confidence but Dave Schlick reads like the "customer from hell" (Note that I wrote "reads like" not "is")

 

In this age of consumerism where the customer is king its become totally OK to rate, evaluate, and casually comment on any dealer or professional of any kind as if half baked and unauthoritative amateur opinions actually mean something.

 

The notion of a dealer or professional evaluating a customer is taboo, and I am taking a risk here.

 

In this specific case the customer may just have incredibly bad luck and judgement in selecting professionals. After all, the fingerprint inside the lens did not get there by skilled handling and I surely don't want to be the last in a line of incompetents.

 

Sometimes goods like this arrive at my shop for evaluation and the item is absolutely breathtakingly perfect with no defect whatsoever.

Such an item is returned immediatly with that report and a sincere hope that even further "damage" has not been inflicted in my custody.

 

Sometimes they arrive in poor or tampered condition from do-it yourself repairs or repairs by the local part time clock/radio/snowplow fix it guy. In that case I would most likely recommend replacement of the shutter with a new Copal shutter and avoid the repair since it is almost certainly a lose lose situation.

 

This is the process that I apply to strangers and minimizes the risk of being the next incompetent in line. Now in this case Dave, late in his message notes that he has found an excellent gunsmith and this is evidence that he is a demanding customer and not necessarily a total nut case.

 

I have many demanding customers and value their patronage. They have all gone thru a careful (though not necesarily conscious) process of mutual evaluation. Its important, if you are a demanding customer (most demanding customers deny that they are that and that they only want truth and justice that's naturally due, its too bad the world is in such a state etc etc etc.) that you establish a relationship with the professional in a way that he can demonstrate his competence and you, as customer can establish your requirements without scaring the daylights out of the him. If you show up as both a nut case and a cheapskate the professional is going to make short work of the evaluation. The pro won't tell you this but will see to it that you are steered somewhere else. And you will be plagued with having to patronize expensive and incompetent practitioners. Most really good professionals are reasonably priced because they can do their good work quickly and right the first time.

 

Incompetents need to charge more because they are slow and have to do it over and over as well as spend time arguing with the customer.

 

If you show up at a Doctor's office as a new patient with "I've had to sue my last three doctors for malpractice, what do you think of this lump?" Well you don't have to do too much figuring out to tell what the competent pro is going to do: "I'm not taking any new patients right now, why don't you go down the street and see what the new guy thinks"

 

SKG

The above answers are correct: see: <a href="http://www.skgrimes.com/ilex/index.htm"> more pictures and explanation </a>

Back in the old days of film this was done by taking pictures of shoes for a shoe catalogue at a much too cheap price.

 

The eager youngster who had "just landed a contract from a shoe company" was sort of a stereotype of the beginner pro.

 

The shoe catalogue company was merely interested in the very cheapest price only and the neophyte's artistic lighting and rendering of the shoes was of no consequence whatsoever.

As a practical matter the two different 210mm lenses could share the same iris scale. Its unlikely that there will be any significant difference. You should be able to extrapolate and correct for the difference at the maximum of f-5.6/6.8. Most 210mm lenses in #1 shutters have the 5.6 at the full open aperture. So, if the 6.8 is a little smaller than the full aperture that will tend to confirm this opinion.

 

Most likely the diameters will be the same for f/8, f/ll, etc. You can check by looking and/or measuring.

 

SKG

<a href="http://www.skgrimes.com/compur/index.htm">Compur</a> made a #00 size shutter which is no longer available. (Scroll down that page to see a table of dimensions which includes the obsolete #00 size)

<a href="http://www.skgrimes.com/products/index.htm">Click here (then scroll down the page)</a> to see a table of the different available sizes of Copal brand shutters. The numbers correspond to the available sizes: #0, Small, #1 Medium, #3 and 3S largest Copal available. There is no #2 size.

<a href="http://www.skgrimes.com/flanges/index.htm"> USA Stocked mounting flanges </a>

The miracle of all this is that the condition is completely correctable with the use of spectacles. Plus spectacles, like in the drugstore, Binocular magnifiers, loupes, etc are all variants of the same thing. (you can convince yourself that you don't need glasses by using a loupe)

 

I nevertheless like to applaud the miracle of technology that are spectacle lenses . To me they are amongst the greatest single technical acheivement of civilization, bringing more benefit and releif to more people than practically anything I can think of -- right up there with clothing,plumbing and electricity. Just a simple curved piece of clear plastic costing only a few cents to make....

 

SKG