stephen_poe

On the older Nikormats like the FT2 (my first Nikon from 1976) that sad day eventually comes when the resistor disk in the exposure system fails. These have not been available since the last century and if the shutter is still accurate you simply have a non-metered Nikon. What I found that I really enjoyed was using a very nice Nikon F that had a completely failed meter. I was fortunate in finding a non-metered pentaprism and use the camera either with a hand held meter or just sunny 16. I have been quite happy stepping back to the pre-metered Nikon days - not that much different than shooting with a Leica M3. And being 80 I can still remember learning photography before cameras had meters. Still a pleasure using a Nikon F in it's original configuration. Cheers

At one time was fairly smitten with N90s Nikons - but discovered that the rubberized coating on the back turned sticky fairly quickly. Rest of the camera was fine, just the back. Turned out on the N90s the solution was simply to remove the sticky coating which left you with a nice shiny black plastic back. As I recall, I used both 91% ETOH and Coleman fuel which is actually naptha. And simple scrapers made from Popsicle sticks sharpened into a chisel-edge scraper and which did not scratch. Always a relief when I finished up and had a nice clean and not sticky back. Rest of the camera seemed fine, and so far no problems with my F100. Things like the use by Nikon of things like the short-lived rubber coatings make you wonder what they were thinking. When I loan one of my N90s cameras to one of my students they always come back pretty amazed at what a cool camera this is. I agree

My basic set of Mamiya lenses (65, 80, 135, 180) don't get left on the camera body if I am not using them for any length of time. Humidity is a villain I think, since fungus loves it. But I can't keep the house too dry or my guitars will crack and warp. Solution seems to keep the Mamiya lenses in a zip lock bags with a couple of desiccant packs. I grew up in coastal Florida and my dad was fungus phobic. He had cabinets with light bulbs inside that he kept all of his photo gear in.. Seemed to work pretty well, but these days zip lock and desiccant seems to be a simpler solution. Growing up is South Florida and working in tropical areas of Mexico teaches you a lot about preventing fungus. Like rust on tools, fungus never sleeps.

TLR's seem to have been part of my life. When I was a kid in the 1940's and 50's I always remember my mother being out and about with a Rollei. She made it clear that was the only camera for her. And BTW, I come by this photo stuff honestly - my parents met in a photography class back in the 1930's, and when looking for their first apartment after they were married the most important thing was a space for a darkroom. Back in the 1960's I was taking photography classes form John Colllier Jr. when he was teaching at SF State. Due to his influence I got my first TLR, a nice used Minolta Autocord. Cameras have come on gone over the years, but the core of my working collection has always been TLR's - Rolleis, Autocords, Yashica Mats, and various Mamiya 330 and 220 cameras. I think what influenced me to try the Mamiyas was seeing pictures Diane Arbus with her Mamiya. And I think the reason I have stuck with TLR's is that I enjoy using them - they just feel right and I like seeing what is going on. These days I mostly use a 220 F with a 135mm lens and the "L" grip- seems to be the most comfortable (and lightest) for portraits. I have my Nikon stuff for bugs and birds, but I think I get the most enjoyment working in medium format. Recently my grand daughter started doing film, and was very happy with the Yashica Mat I sent her. Nice to be passing this on to another generation. If you didn't grow up with it, TLR's take a little getting used to, but worth the effort. The nice thing about the Mamiya system is that it is not that expensive, and you can experiment to find the lens that works the best for you. That is how I got to the 135 - tried all of them, and that was just my happy place for the photography I do - and a good deal cheaper than a tele Rollei which is the only other 135. Can't really do that with any other TLR system. Cheers and stay well

The little Busch is a nice camera - about all you can compare it to is the Century Crown Graphic. In many ways the Busch is a nicer build, but the Century Crown does have a built-in Graflok back. To me a big plus which more more than offsets the fact that the Century Crown is made out of Mahoganite plastic. I had a Busch that I adapted a Mamiya Universal Press G back to which made a nice outfit. But given that the G backs are now going for about $150 it made a very expensive outfit. One thing that you can do with any of these 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 cameras with a Graflok back is use a Horseman revolving back. Makes it very easy to switch between the ground glass focusing screen and the roll film back. But bulky. Oh well, nothing is perfect. But will hang on to my two Century Crown Graphics for when I feel the need for a miniature field camera. Actually, my introduction to this format was a Horseman 980 that I got at an estate sale for very little $$ (they had no idea of it's value) - with 3 lenses and 2 horseman backs. The Horseman was really nice and got me into small field cameras. But I ended up selling it for a for fair price which allowed me to fund a variety of low budget projects. I think in the end the key to enjoying any of these small cameras is a Graflok or equivalent back (the Horseman has the functional equivalent) that makes it easy to switch between the ground glass and the roll film back. Cheers

Ok, part of the problem solved. Turns out (from the copy of the owners handbook I found) that the standard lens in the flip-up magnifier is a -1.5 diopter. So that can be solved since there are a couple of sources for flip-up magnifier lenses. Still working on the loose focusing. Thanks

For the last 20 years my favorite portrait out fit has been my Mamiya C330 with the 135mm lens. Just suits me fine in so many ways. My grand daughter has been getting seriously interested in film photography. Mostly she has been using a nice Yashica D TLR and the light meter app on her iPhone for an exposure meter. She has borrowed my C330 and agrees that the 135mm lens is great for portraits. Sooooo, after a bit of looking around I found a nice C220f with a very clean and accurate shutter 135. But it turns out there a couple of issues that I need to address before I turn it over to her. It has the type 2 WLF that lacks the sports finder. That is no problem, but it came with a +2 diopter magnifier which is very frustrating if you have "normal" vision. That is her, and at 79 I still have a great correction which lets me use the standard WLF magnifier. Am I right in thinking that the standard magnifier in this WLF was a -1.5? If so, I have found some and can replace the one in there. The standard diopter of this WLF seems to be a very obscure piece of information.

 

Second thing is the C220f seems to have been hardly used, and when you focus there is a tendency for the front to creep back. I think it is a combination of the bellows wanting to spring back to its folded state, and the focusing being quite free. I have been letting the camera sit with the bellows extended (propped open with a small block of wood) and maybe this will help, but would still like to tighten up the focusing a bit. My goal is to have the camera free of frustrations when I turn it over to her. Don't want to discourage her. Thanks in advance for any help

While appreciating some of the better 6x6 folders, I still have quite a fondness for the simpler Zeiss folding cameras. Perhaps because that is what my photographer father gave me when I went off to college in 1957. It was a Zeiss Ikonta 523/16 with an f/3.5 Tessar and of the better Prontor shutters. No range finder so I had to master zone focusing as well as sunny 16. It did have double exposure prevention, but you still had to cock the shutter after you advanced the film, and check the little red window to get the frame properly centered. It did get me through college and is currently with my son. And still taking fine pictures. And I have in my collection 3 518/16 Nettars similar to the one I started out with 62 years ago. And after this time I still now and then go back to the folders that provided me with my first real education in photography - the Nettar and a little cardboard Kodak exposure dial, and teaching myself to estimate how far away things were. I have expanded my folder range to include a couple of Voigtlander Perkeo cameras which I find to be every bit as nice as the Ikonta and Nettar. You have to look around a bit to find one with a light-tight bellows and a clear lens. The older shutters often seem to be slow on the slow speeds, but when hand-holding I find that I rarely use speeds slower than 1/50. And cheat a bit in determining exposure by using one of the exposure meter apps on my phone. Using one of the good folders from the 50's gives me a chance to slow down and think about what I am doing. And now my grand daughter has become interested in using MF folders. She started with a Yashica D, but seems to have now realized the value of a camera that you can slip into your pocket. There is everything to recommend these cameras for getting back to fundamentals and doing some very enjoyable photography. Cheers

I used to do a lot of pinhole with camera bodies made out of things like oatmeal boxes. I liked the somewhat panorama effect that I got when the film followed the curve of the round box - the the exposure was more even since the pinhole was about the same distance from the edges and the center of the film. The sheet film holder was cardboard strips glued to the inside of the oatmeal box so that I could use a changing bag to insert the film. Taped the lid on, and had reinforced the bottom with a piece of wood with a threaded fitting so I could mount the camera on a tripod. Worked great, and now that my grand daughter is getting interested in pinhole I guess I need to make a couple of new ones.

I don't use my F and F2 that much any more, but sometimes I do feel the need to do some time travel and shoot some film. Back in the late 90's I was at a camera show out on the west coast and had a chance to buy a couple of plain pentaprisms in nice shape for $35 each. At that time there did not seem to be that much interest in the non-metered prisms - I guess everyone thought that the newer metered prisms and their mercury batteries were going to go on forever. Not. Anyway, I am really glad that I bought those plain pentaprisms - they are still in great shape and it is a pleasure to be out and about with my F using either sunny 16 of one of my light meters. In the case of the metered prisms it is not just the obsolete mercury batteries, but the issue of the resistor disk wearing out. If the metered prisms need any parts they are pretty much impossible to find. And I got to thinking that this may be a generational thing. I am 78, and got serious about photography long before built in meters. When I was in high school my dad gave my an Ikonta and one one of those old Kodak exposure dials (I think they were about 25 cents). Took me about a week to memorize the exposure values from the dial and that has been in my head ever since. I eventually got a Weston meter, but most of the time found that it was less trouble to just use the exposure dial (now in my head). And that sort of still holds true. I have better and more sensitive meters now (Pentax digital spot is one of my favorites), but is amazing how much you can do without a meter. A Nikon F with a plain pentaprism is a thing of beauty and a chance to get back to basics. Cheers

<p>I have been doing a lot of high school basketball and volleyball games for the last couple of years. Using a Nikon D-7000 which gives me a pretty clean image at ISO 3200, and a 85 f/1.8 D lens, sometimes a 50 f/1.8 D. I have been very happy with this outfit. Never flash, would be to distracting to the players. In most of the gyms I shoot in I get a lot of great action shots - some gyms have such poor lighting that it is pretty much impossible to get any decent images. For basketball I usually position myself off to one side behind our teams basket - all anyone is really interested in is action under and around the basket. For volleyball I work at center court off to the side. Completely different flow and anticipation to the two sports, and with enough time you eventually get to be able to anticipate were the great shots will be. One thing that bothers me is the lack of interest on the part of the kids in doing sports photography. When I was in high school in the 50's doing pictures for the school paper and yearbook was a big deal. And very challenging - I still remember doing basketball games with a Rollei and Tri-X film. A great learning experience.</p>

<p>For many of my film years was very happy using my Tamron 90mm macro (I have both versions and the Adaptall 2 adapters) or Vivitar 90mm macro - great pictures with both, but you need to use an adapter to go beyond 1:2 so it is a bit clunky. Got one of the AF Tamron 90mm macro lenses that does 1:1 to use on my D80 and now D7000 and have been equally pleased. Has the "screwdriver" type of AF, so will not work on some Nikon DSLR's. But that is not that much of a problem since I usually use manual focus anyway. Maybe if my acute vision starts to go (72 now and still fine) I will rethink AF, but for now I am quite happy.<br>

<img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8046/8092078659_576b5a137f_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="910" /></p>

<p>I was cleaning up my 3 Nikonos III cameras over the weekend, and think most of the contributions to this thread are right on spot. These days you can get a pretty decent Nikonos III with the 35mm f/2.5 lens for less than $100. No doubt that there are limitations - scale focusing, no metering, only one lens that is well adapted to out-of-the-water use (the shallow DOF of the 80mm makes it difficult to use). But, it is a completley bombproof camera, the fine lens and bright viewfinder make it a pleasure to use, and for those who are old enough to have grown up with scale focusing cameras without metering (I am 68 so this is easy for me) the limitations do not amount to that much. What you get is a camera that works without problems in wet, cold, and dusty/dirty conditions. Sunny 16 is easy these days with the exposure latitude in most consumer reversal films. Scale socusing should not be a problem with a 35mm lens - lots of DOF at f/8 and above. In the summer my Nikonos is great on canoe and kayak trips, and this time of year it is nice not to have to worry about batteries and condensation when I take the Nikonos along on ski and woods trips. Just be careful of the fragile lugs (take out the lens and follow the advice about seperating the body by pushing up on the top through the lens hole, and keep lubricant on the O rings). Compared to other classic scale focusing cameras such as the Retina Ib the Nikonos seem to much more reliable. Oh yes, and with a little care you can get great pictures.</p>

True, the later S2A bodies were not marked as that - looked in my files and found: New style S2A bodies start with serial number 150037 (and are not marked S2A). Same sort of thing on backs - I think the backs that are later than 81501 are S2A backs. Worth checking on since you are much less likely to run into repairs on the later S2A, and the need to find parts that are pretty much unavailable.

 

Stephen

My standard developer for HP5+ is D-76 1:1. At home I usually mix the gallon

size and put it up in quart bottles - diluting to 1:1 when I get ready to

develop. I am going to be spendeng some time on the road, and wondere if

there is any problem in mixing up the dilute solution ahead of time. This way

I can carry 16 or 32 oz bottles that are ready to go, just get them to the

right temp. and use straight out of the bottle - since I would have already

made the 1:1 dilution I don't have to measure anything. But I wonder about

any problems with stability and keeping (usually not more than a couple of

weeks). Thanks in advance.

 

Stephen

This is a really tiny lens - I think the shutter on mine is a Compur 00 - and it is designed for minature press cameras so it covers 6x7 and 6x9 but never 4x5. When you are using this for what is essentially a 120 format it gives OK coverage and is a very compact with good optical qualities. The perspective is like a 35mm lens on a 35mm camera. Because of the small shutter there is no press focus and it does not have B(ulb), only T(ime) so you have hold the shutter open with a locking cable release - just makes things a little more difficult. The 65mm Super Angulon will just cover 4x5, and the prespective is like a 20mm lens on 35mm - very wide. For a while I had a 6x12 back for my 4x5 and did some nice panoramas with this lens. Too bad, ended up selling both the lens and back and now wish I had both back. It was very nice for large group pictures.

 

Stephen

On the Busch with a 6x7 back it is about the same as a 35mm with a 135mm lens. With a 6x9 back it is about the same as a 105mm on 35mm. I use a 135mm Xenar on my little Crown Graphic and it is a nice perspective - works well for portraits, but interesting for landscape as well.

 

Stephen

I think Midwest Camera in Columbus, OH sells them. When I had a Busch C I ended up making my own - the ones for the 4x5 are even more troublesome, but can be done (epoxy to glue the tab on the back). This is always a drawback with Busch vs. Crown Graphic. I still have a little Busch, but for my 6x9 field camera now use one of the nice bakelite Century Crown Graphics. They are great little cameras and have an interchangeable back that lets you use roll film holder - less common on the Busch, although I did end up converting mine with a graflock I picked up.

 

Stephen

With all the discussion that has been going on, I think this must be on a lot of folks minds. I held out from getting involved with digital for quite a while, then took a shallow plunge. It is fine for quick stuff with my 8 year old daughter, but I don't find it very relaxing, and don't know what kind of pictures she will have to show her kids. I am 65 and have been doing photography since I was about 10 (my dad owned Poe's in Evanston, Ill in the 40's, and my parents met in a photography class - what choice did I have). I am back to using my S2A Bronicas and Mamiya 330 system and am sooooo happy. I am relaxed in the darkroom in a way that I never am on the computer, and think the B&W results will stay around for a while. I expect that film and paper with silver will be around for quite a while - and MF gear is cheap enough that even if it is not a good investment you will get your $$ worth. And, if there is anything that is a better deal these days than MF gear it is darkroom equipment. But what you need now before it all gets thrown out. And have fun and relax.

 

Stephen

First, if you have trouble estimating exposure find one of those little cardboard exposure dials and carry it around for a while - it will help build your confidence in estimating exposure, and yes it is quite possible to be pretty accurate much of the time.

 

I have a FE2 which I like a lot, but as a backup I still prefer a Nikkormat FT3 - one that is in good condition should not be that expensive (unless you want collector quality), and will mount all of your lenses (plus the AI finger swings out of the way so you can mount NAI lenses or various odball lenses that would otherwise be a problem). This is really an all mechanical camera with center weighted metering and is just a pleasure to handle and use. I recently bought a couple of more on the dreaded internet auction, and think I have backup for ever now. And it gives me a connection with my first Nikon (1968) which was a Nikkormat.

 

Stephen

Or you can just make your own. That is what I did. I used a white adhesive-backed label that I cut an appropriate size strip off of. Put the information on it with a Micron permanent .02mm felt tip pen. It has been on for about 5 years now and still works just fine. I guess the ones you can buy may look a little neater, but the home made one will work just as well.

 

Stephen

Arrrrgh, you are all making me crazy with your canned air. Just throw it out and get a nice brush and a baby ear syringe. A nice 1/2" sable or other very soft brush will cost about $6 on sale at an art supply store, and you can get the syringe at any drug store. The brush will safely get off most of the dust and small particles, and the ear syringe is good for blowing particles out of places the brush won't go. Because the canned stuff is more forceful it is more likely to blow grit into corners than away. I have to admit that years ago I bought some of the canned air, and ended up having the same troubles recounted above. A friend in the microscope business gave me this same lecture. I do agree that UV filter has the primary function of keeping you from cleaning your lens too often. Filters are much cheaper than lenses if you have to be polishing something all the time.

 

Stephen

I live in a house with a lot of photo and microscope equipment and rarely have problems with fungus (maybe they know I am a mycologist and stay away for professional reasons?). Usually I keep any lens not being used in a heavy zip-lock bag with all the air sucked out (using a straw works well). If it is anyting really valuable I also use a dessicant pack in the bag. Seems to work just fine. When I was growing up in Florida (great place for growing fungus on anything) my dad kept his cameras in a wooden cabinet that had a couple of lights burning all the time - kept it dry and seemed to work well as he never had any problems. Just a thought, but in fact fungus in optics can be a real curse.

 

Stephen

Thanks, seems like it should not be too much trouble to keep track of the correction - and the fact that the DOF does not change is just fine with me. One of the lenses I would like to use the Komura 2x with is my Nikkor 105mm leaf shutter - I use it for portraits and it would be nice to retain the relatively shallow DOF that I like but to have a 210mm lens - seems to be no problem and I can retain shooting at f/5.6 DOF with correction to f/11, and have the ability to use the fill flash with the leaf shutter - hope I get time this weekend to try it out.

Just got a Komura 2x Telemore to use with my S2A - looks like a nice

piece of equipment, and will give me more use out of my 150mm

Zenzanon (= 300mm) and 200mm Nikkor (= 400mm). My understanding is

that using the 2x costs me 2 stops, so that f/5.6 is actually f/11.

And you just do the f stop "bookkeeping" in your head and remember

that you are always 2 stops less light than the lens indicates. Do I

have this right (you can tell my brain has gone to cheese using my

8008). Thanks

 

Stephen