kaliuzhkin

May 16, 2013

Thanks for your responses, A., Eric, Jose, Ray, Rick and Phil:

It looks like the responses varied from approval to refusal, right? It doesn't look like a cult, as, say, a Nikon F, F3 or F5 or a Leica M3.

I was wondering about how opinions have changed since the D1's introduction. When it was introduced, it was the only feasible DSLR. Kind of like George Washington's presidency. Not only did he have to figure out how to handle things, but he had to consider that what he did would set a precedent for future presidents. So the D1 blazed a trail. In the intervening 12 years, a lot of digital cameras were introduced and, in terms of features, the D1 doesn't compare well with these other cameras. But still, I don't need a lot of these features.

A. Valero: You recommend the Dk-17m. I wear eyeglasses so this magnifier might be a problem. Can you recommend another eyepiece for eyeglass wearers? What do you mean by "PJ?"

Eric: Can you provide a link to Rockwell's write-up? I can't find it.

Ray: Don't assume that I like complicated camera with bells and whistles. I picked up a Nikon FG-20 at a yard sale for $20. It was simpler than my F3 and I liked that, but felt that three Nikon SLR film cameras was too many. I get great pleasure out of my F3 and F. I enjoy using my folding cameras. They are about as basic as you can get. They have movement but I don't use that feature.

Also, I want to use the D1 as a backup, especially if the D300 is in the repair shop. I recently dropped the D300 on a concrete sidewalk and it was damaged. It has a few dents and the paint was scraped off at a few spots. I want pictures of this damage. The F3 with extension rings came to the rescue. If I had the D1, I could use it to take pictures of the damage. The D300 seems to work fine but I wonder if maybe I should have it checked out. Any suggestions?

Rick: What else would you suggest for $100.?

Phil: I've never been fond of menus. Back when I programmed computers, I fought against using menus for user interfaces. I still prefer command lines. Yes, part of the appeal is to own a piece of history. That's why I have a Nikon F, F3 and Century Graphic.

May 15, 2013

Through internet surfing, I discovered that the price of used Nikon D1's has dropped to around $100. This for a camera that started off at $5500! So I bought it. It should arrive tomorrow. I hope that buying it isn't a mistake.

There are lots of reviews, articles and postings about this camera, mostly from around 1999 when the camera was introduced. At that time, the D1 was the only "affordable" (ha!) professional digital camera. It is credited with ushering in an era of digital photography. Now that there are lots of DSLR's, is it still useful? Does any member of photo.net still use it?

By way of context, I am an advanced amateur photographer. My stable of cameras includes small-medium-large format (film 2" x 3", 6cm x 9cm) folding cameras, 35mm film SLRs Nikon F and F3HP, and Nikon digital D300. I have a bunch of Nikon lenses. I hope that the D1 will be stripped down and more intuitive than the D300. I like the idea that it is in the line of "professional" cameras as opposed to "pro-sumer" cameras.

The place that sold me the D1 tried to talk me out of it, saying that 2 1/2 MP isn't enough, and that it is difficult to obtain replacement batteries. It doesn't have a flash, but I hate the D300 flash setup. They tried to sell me a D200 instead.

Any comments on my buying a D1 at this time?

Dan

May 3, 2013

Pardon my ignorance, but what is a Nikon 1-system?

Dan

October 15, 2012

The lab doesn't have to be large production. I was thinking more along the lines of a lab that finds a small batch of chemicals and can now develop a few rolls.

Dan

October 13, 2012

I found an exposed roll of 35mm Kodachrome film in a fixed-exposure, fixed-focus camera and would like to have it processed. Is there any place within reach of the postal service who could process it?

Dan

August 6, 2012

Joseph Wisniewski's ad hominem attack, a/k/a flame, is not appreciated and does nothing to advance the goals of photographers. It doesn't help to generalize the attack to include "one or two people like you" Also, he is wrong in saying I am "not making even the slightest bit of effort to learn what the capabilities of the equipment you're bashing actually are." I have owned and used a Nikon D300 since it first came out, having taken close to a thousand pictures. I use Paint Shop Pro ver 12.50 to clean up the images. I know a thing or two about digital photography.

Apparently, I was wrong, especially concerning high magnification. If you resize an image in PSP, you can select the resampling algorithm as: bicubic, smart size, bilinear, pixel resize or weighted average. If you substantially enlarge the image using, for example bicubic-sampling resizing, you do not get little boxes. HOWEVER, if you magnify an area using "zoom," you do get the little boxes. I use the latter feature a lot, but only rarely use the former feature.

I also know that at the hospital where I receive health care, is a huge photograph of how the hospital will look after the construction is completed. I walk right by that photograph and from a few inches away, it looks terrible.

August 4, 2012

I'm looking for a rollfilm back for a Linhof baby Super Technika III and came across a few Mamiya backs.

E.g.,

http://www.ebay.com/itm/170769285155?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649 Mamiya Universal Press Super 23 Black 6X7 Roll Film Back ;

http://www.ebay.com/itm/320949765073?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649 Mamiya Universal Press 6x9 roll film holder;

http://www.ebay.com/itm/110922376187?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649 Mamiya 6x9cm Roll Film Back for the Universal Press Super...;

These Mamiya backs look very much like the Linhof Rapid-Rollex backs and are much less costly. Are the Mamiya Universal backs usable on a Linhof baby Super Technika III? How about on a Century Graphic with Graflok back?

August 4, 2012

I was a math major. As I remember from undergraduate days, "Diff. Eq." was pronounced "Diff E Q" = "diffy Q."

Dan

August 2, 2012

I have slogged my way through this ten page thread but haven't found a single post which clearly reads that prints from film are superior to digital prints. They are superior, for two very simple, objective reasons.

First, digital enlargements, especially those with large enlargement factors, stink. Digital enlargements display the pixels as little boxes but enlargements from film negatives might, at worst, be grainy. As you go from 1:1 to more and more enlargement from digital sources, you go from excellent resolution to little pixel boxes, with nothing in between. With enlargements from film, however, all that happens is that the print gets more and more grainy.

Remember the film "Blow-Up?" The film revolves around David Hemmings discovering what might be a murder as he blows a 35mm negative up to massive size. The plot would be nonsensical if he had used a digital camera rather than a Nikon F.

Second, digital prints have bad bokeh. Out-of-focus parts of the image aren't pleasing. They are based on pixels. Circle of confusion is meaningless in the digital world.

I'm an amateur, although I worked in a photo lab while I was in high school 45 years ago. I use a Nikon D300 for table-top photography, and Nikons F and F3HP and various 2x3 large format cameras for pleasure.

Dan

July 10, 2012

If the D700 is anything like the D300, you have to dial-in the specifications of a non-CPU lens you are using. If you haven't done that, the camera would be using settings different than what you'd expect. If so, it seems these changes are beneficial. If you can determine these changes, you might be able to deliberately use them in other configuations!

July 9, 2012

I have the AF Nikkor 50mm 1:1.4D lens. I use it on my Nikon D300 digital camera. I understand that this lens is intended for use on a camera with DX sensor. However, there are times when I'd like to use it on a film camera, such as an F3HP or an FG-20. Is this feasible?

The film size is 24mm x 36mm and the DX sensor size is 15.8mm x .23.6mm. Thus, the film area is about 1.52 the size of the sensor. Alternatively, the sensor is about 0.65 times the film size. Will use on the film camera degrade the quality of the image? Will there be vignetting or drop off in the corners? Is there anything I can do to compensate?

June 28, 2012

Other than the rangefinder, what, if any, is the difference between a Super Technika 23 and a technika 6 x 9 and a baby technika III or IV?

June 26, 2012

They're similar in that they're each 2x3 or 6x9 bellows camera and they each have a following. Unfortunately, accessories for a Linhof Super Technika are an order of magnitude more expensive than accessories for a Century Graphic. For example, you can get a Graflok film holder for a Century Graphic for $20 - $100, but a Super Rollex film holder for a Linhof Super Technika costs $200 - $1000. I prefer a Rapid Rollex and there's only one on eBay. Its listed as $350.

June 25, 2012

It must be some sort of hybrid. I'll call it a III-1/2 or III/IV.

Is there anyplace on the Internet which compares the III and the IV?

June 25, 2012

Upon reviewing my description, Bob Salomon revised the model to a Super Technika III. So it must be some sort of hybrid. I'll call it a III-1/2 or III/IV.

June 25, 2012

Left-to-right: "D.B.P. West-Germany A.P.a."

June 25, 2012

Over in LF forum, I posted the serial number and Bob Salomon responded that its a Technika IV from 1947/48.

It appears that a Calumet slide-in roll holder would work, as would a Polaroid back. I bought one of the latter and just today three more were listed on eBay.

It does not have a Graflok back. I'm familiar with them because I have a Graflex Century Graphic, which does have a Graflok back, and I played the determine-what-film-holder-backs-would-work-with-this-specific-model-camera-and-then-get-one game.

I was able to get the back to slide out on four sliders. It took a gentle nudge from a screwdriver but now I know how to pull it out.

June 25, 2012

P.S. OTOH the back is held on with a single quick lever lock, making it a IV, and there is a rangefinder on top, making it a Super Technika IV.

June 25, 2012

??? But the front standard tilts back only, not forward.

I got brave and took the cam off. The number on the bottom of the cam is 5710121. That doesn't match the body number 81848 nor the lens number 1205552. It's a Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 1:4.5 105mm. FWIW.

Thanks,

Danek

June 25, 2012

V ?!!! The seller said it was a III.

It has a knurled knob for front rise. It tilts back but not forward.

Here is the eBay listing:

<a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/120881674007?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649">http://www.ebay.com/itm/120881674007?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649</a>

Here are pictures from the eBay listing.

<a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3521.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3521.jpg</a> <a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3522-1.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3522-1.jpg</a> <a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3499-1.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3499-1.jpg</a> <a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3498-1.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3498-1.jpg</a> <a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3497-1.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3497-1.jpg</a> <a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3496-1.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3496-1.jpg</a> <a href="http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3495-1.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/Dan-the-K/IMG_3495-1.jpg</a>

Thanks for your help,

Danek

June 24, 2012

Serial Number inquiry: 81848, a Linhof Super Technika III with a f/4.5 105mm Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar No. 1205552 in Compur - Nagel shutter. Date of manufacture? Is this indeed a Linhof Super Technika III? Any other information?

Thanks.

June 24, 2012

Serial Number inquiry: 81848, a Linhof Super Technika III with a f/4.5 105mm Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar No. 1205552 in Compur - Nagel shutter. Date of manufacture? Is this indeed a Linhof Super Technika III? Any other information?

Thanks.

June 24, 2012

P.S. The serial number of this camera is 81848.

June 24, 2012

I've started going through the search results. So far, I know that this is a Linhof Super Technika III, because the front standard only tilts backwards, not forwards.

As to back movement, I think the catch locks are the problem. They don't move far enough to permit the back to move. I'm reluctant to stick a screwdriver in there and try to pry it loose. Any ideas?

What about the rollfilm holders/backs. Would any other brand's holder work?

June 23, 2012

I just bought a Linhof Super Technika and have some questions about it.

1. Which model is it? It's listed in the auction as "LINHOF TECHNIKA III" but the back is held on with a single quick lever lock, making it a IV, and there is a rangefinder on top, making it a Super Technika IV.

2. What rollfilm backs are suitable? The back engages with the body with a 12cm diameter circle. I know about the Rapid Rollex, Rollex, and Super Rollexbacks. I would prefer the first and second but they are hard to find. The third is expensive. Would any other brand's holder work? What about Mamiya?

3. Concerning the back, there are no movements. If I loosen the four lock knobs (counterclockwise) and press the two catch locks, I can't pull out the back. It seems stuck. Any tips on unsticking it?

(Voigtlander Avus to Busch Pressman to Graflex Century Graphic to Linhof Super Technike in two months!)

Note: these pictures are taken from the website of this eBay purchase.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by kaliuzhkin