steve_ember

Hi Dave, My belated thanks for your suggestions, which I somehow missed until this evening! Meantime, I find my left eye will accommodate to the Chinon's VF without a diopter correction lens, but I still prefer using the right eye, so will investigate the avenues you suggested. Thanks again!

Hi Donnie, Wondering if you - or any other Chinon CE-3 owners on the forum have had occasion to add a diopter correction lens to the viewfinder window. I typically require +1.0 or +2.0 (depending on the camera). Typically, I've been able to fit a Pentax diopter attachment or, in some cases, a rectangular Nikon, to Pentax or Contax SLRs and they fit just fine. Turns out the plastic molding around the Chinon's viewfinder window is just enough too wide to fit one of these great little rescues!. I do have a search on ebay for the Chinon-made unit, but so far no results. So, anyone know of a dioptric lens adapter that will fit the CE-3? Many thnaks!

Hello Graham, Hope I'm not missing something, perhaps a fllow-up to this post, but can you advise if these greater capabilities include printing exposure data between frames, as the D-8 does for my Contax AX? If so, would it be possible to purchase a pdf copy from you of the complete manual? Many thanks! Steve

<p>Thank you, Glen, Craig, Jochen, and Erwin, for the guidance. Looks like I'm off in search of replacement caps for these little "orphans." I'll hope the circuits will be intact once the caps are replaced. It's so much fun using a light source that was still popular when cameras like my Auto S3 were new ;-) Before my one working Cube Flash went poof, the couple I shot were all smiles at the very different light source, which I'm not sure they even remembered!</p>

<p>Hello, all - Especially anyone familiar with (dare I say it and reveal my age?) FLASH CUBES!<br> I'm almost embarrassed to ask this question but here goes. In reacquainting myself with a variety of late-60s and '70s compact rangefinder cameras, I've been enjoying some nostalgic shooting (with the blessed absence of menus!).<br> One of the cameras I purchased was the elegant little Konica Auto S3. Its manual mentioned the Konica Cube Flash attachment, and that reminded me that I had one stashed away, along with a bunch of flash cubes. Fortunately, I'd removed the 15 volt battery long ago, so the battery compartment was clean. So, I ordered a new battery and planned to start doing some flash cube photography, if for no other reason than to see people's faces as this "ancient and arcane" technology was used in gatherings.<br> Meantime, the compact r/f odyssey continued with the purchase of the even more compact (and also all metal!) Konica C35. This one came in the original hardshell presentation box...including another Konica Cube Flash attachment.<br> And, somehow, along the way, I managed to come into a third such unit!<br> As I try to re-construct my limited use of these, I know <strong>at least one</strong> of them worked, if only once. That is to say, pressing the flashcube would cause the OK light on the back of the unit to glow and pressing the shutter on the C35 did produce a burst of light. Also a puff of smoke! The latter, I attributed to possibly the age of my flash cubes.<br> I'm hoping that brief plume of smoke was not indicating the death of the unit, perhaps as a result of the capacitor being ancient and demented (as I must sound in posing this question!).<br> Bottom line: I now have THREE Konica Cube Flash attachments, none of which will fire, either using the hot shoe or plugging the PC cord into cameras so equipped. Beyond that, the ready light will not come on in response to pressing in on an un-fired flashcube in any of these.<br> At first, I suspected the 15 volt battery had been an early casualty, but it measured fine. It just can not get ANY of my three Konica Cube Flash attachments to operate.<br> I should also indicate, I've tried this with multiple new cubes.<br> One last item - unrelated to the Konicas: I also purchased a Canon Cube Flash attachment, which is a bit more convenient in that it has a lever for both rotating the cube and ejecting when done. Only downside, no hot shoe, but fine for cameras with PC terminal. Instead of the 15-volt battery, the Canon uses two 1.5 volt N batteries. So, I bought a pack of N cells, loaded the Canon, and (you've probably guessed it!), no joy.<br> If anyone is familiar with this type of equipment, I'd appreciate your guidance. If it's simply a matter of an ancient capacitor self-destructing, do you know if they can be replaced.<br> Many thanks!</p>

<p>Thanks, Lex, Jim, Stephen, and Fred. Jim, I think you've reinforced my inclination to just hold a large enough filter in front of the camera to cover both the lens and the meter sensor. Or, if I can find an arm (other than my own!) that would allow such positioning.<br> Might be awkward, but, considering what fine condition T2s and 35Tis sell for, and the likely cost of repairing broken gears, lens covers, associated mechanisms (assuming there are even parts for such repairs), sounds like a more prudent course than attaching stuff to a moving lens - especially when these cameras can decide at the wrong moment to make like a turtle ;-)</p>

<p>Many thanks for the idea, Lex. There just might be such a contraption gathering dust in some treasure trove old camera shop. Will check the "usual suspects."<br> I continue to be amazed at the "immediacy" of forums such as these. I pose an off-the-wall question and - literally seconds later - someone has an idea!<br> Anyone else?</p>

<p>Hello, all...<br /> I've recently added these elegant little machines to my film camera collection. Ergonomically and fun factor wise, they are both lovely to use, but there are many times I feel naked without a red or yellow filter while shooting B/W, or a polarizer or at least an 812 when shooting chromes.<br /> Has anyone had success in "attaching" a filter without ill effects in exposure or at least holding a filter in front of one of these cameras - neither lens has threads, of course. I'm less concerned about confusing the camera as to focus, as I envision using such filters in landscape shooting, so would be selecting the infinity setting rather than auto-focus, and just using a wide enough filter to cover both lens and viewing windows, unless someone has a more elegant solution ;-)<br /> Naturally, I can - easily - use filters with my rangefinders or SLRs...It's just a matter of these little gems having such fine glass, a pity not to give whatever film its best chance to shine when using them. Thanks for any suggestions!</p>

<p>Bingo!<br> Nice work, Randy. That's how <em>I'd</em> have wanted it to look, were it my pic and my doggie ;-)<br> And, of course, it still looks like an Ektar! (and why couldn't a pro lab have gotten it like that?)</p>

<p>Hi Brittany,<br> You're most welcome. Here is a further suggestion - As you had these done by a local professional lab, why not take both the negs and scans (and, I'm assuming, prints) back to them and discuss the issues. Over the years, I have found that - especially when you've established a relationship with a real photo lab, there is no unpleasantness if you show them what you like - and don't like - about their work. Do NOT accept answers like, "Well, they're just machine prints." There is ALWAYS latitude in printing to taste and a caring lab will do that. <br> Again, this advise is offered in the absence of actually seeing your negs, so please take that into consideration in terms of how hard-nosed you need to be. Ektar is a lovely film and unless you overexposed the #$%^ out of it, you should see better results than these.<br> I applaud your desire to deal with local companies, but the other side of the coin is they need to earn your loyalty. As to having to wait four weeks for mail-order processing...for what it might be worth, I live on the East Coast and routinely send film (including Ektar!) to three labs on the West Coast. I typically receive my (very clean!) negs, lovely 4x6 prints, and large scans back well within two weeks.<br> That, to me, is a fair trade-off for consistently fine work, as well as prompt customer service if I have a question. After all, when we buy into shooting film, we put instant gratification on the back burner, don't we ;-) I get all the instant gratification I need from my D-SLR (which almost never goes out without a film camera or three).<br> Another note - I strongly agree with Les as to the sometimes unwelcome artifacts of Noritsu-Koki lab scans, with the issue sometimes being an over-sharpening that can make continuous tone areas like sky a bit too "granular," even with fine grained films like Ektar. This is mainly noticeable when viewing on your computer monitor (as opposed to the typical 4x6 print). I'm still working my way through that, either by re-scanning with my Nikon CoolScan V ED or doing some post processing (or both).<br> Even so, ain't film grand...<br> Best regards,<br> Steve</p>

<p>Hello, Brittany...<br> I see some washed out areas, as well as the over-sharpening to which you refer. As someone who has shot a great deal of Ektar-100 in Nikon and Canon SLRs, I've come to love the film for its vivid colors - almost like shooting slide film, but far less critical as to exposure latitude - especially "over."<br> Without seeing your negs, I'd hazard a guess these were processed at a drugstore or mini lab - by an experienced (or careless) printer. There is always the risk that the dreaded automatic factor is there, by which the machine "averages out" the tonalities, without human intervention, often leading to washed out prints. For example, I'd imagine in the last one, you'd rather the green railing etc were darker, so that your dog and his shadow were not so "blown out" and lacking in detail.<br> If my guess is correct, the automated printing (and scanning) was given full rein by a "casual" operator. Scanning can be a whole 'nother Pandora's Box. That said, contrasty scenes - as some of yours are - are by and large more difficult to print satisfactorily - unless the person operating the machine brings a level of judgment to the process.<br> Before giving up on using Ektar - or doubting either your Nikon's metering or your own skills - I'd have a serious lab take a look at your negs and perhaps run a few prints and scans.<br> Good luck,<br> Steve</p>