Fiodor

Previously, I tried this Sigma lens twice with the adapter and the XT3, and I wasn’t able to stop down. But now I can. And I realized that the lens must be inserted only when the adapter ring is on one side (and not on the other side). Both times I tried previously, I imagine I must have inserted it with the ring on the wrong position. I really don’t know if that is possible. But if it is, I did in a way that pushed the lever in a way that block or cause trouble to the lever. I am just guessing… But the important thing is that the problem was solved. Thank you!

Thank you! I tried the lens with a Nikon D80 and first, I didn’t get different exposures when I changed the aperture (I have to set the aperture ring at 22 and then dial the aperture on the D80). The EXIF was recorded with different F number, but the exposure was the same. But then, after some photos and fiddling around with the manual/auto focus switch, the problem was solved (now the aperture changes the exposure). So, after that, I removed the lens and I could see the diaphragm at the aperture set on the aperture ring. I discovered the lever, which I didn’t know before, and if I push the lever, the diaphragm opens. So… Should I try the lens again with the adapter and the Fuji camera? Is the adapter doing something wrong to the lens?

I just saw that when I turn the aperture ring, I don’t see any diaphragm closing in the lens. The adapter I have can work with Nikon G lenses (without aperture ring) by changing the position of a ring. But this Sigma lens can’t stop down even if I change the position of that ring (it is not a G lens, it is something different). So, I guess it is impossible to stop it down…

I have this adapter FotodioX Lens Mount Adapter for Nikon G-Type F-Mount Lens to Fujifilm X-Mount Camera and I can use Nikon AF lenses on my Fuji XT3 and change the aperture with the ring. But I can’t stop down this AF Sigma lens for Nikon Sigma Zoom Telephoto 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF-D It is always at the wider aperture. What is the Sigma lens lacking? Can I do something to make the aperture ring work?

I forgot to mention that I record 4K video, which is more demanding for the camera. And the original batteries are NP-W126s, with an S at the end, which apparently are more efficient to record 4K video. But the Watson which swelled is just NP-W126, the older model. But in this case, I don’t know if it is about the S, or about the general quality. In the comments of this article TESTED: Third Party Fuji Batteries? "Inflated capacity values. Some batteries almost Fraud!"... and the Winner is...? - Fuji Rumors, someone wrote: “The swelling could be due to charging the Wasabi batteries in the Fuji charger. ONLY charge batteries in the charger from the same manufacturer. We have used a mix of factory and Wasabi batteries for years with no problems. We never cross charge between devices. The internal charge rates and peak cutoff are different. That swelling was caused by overcharging which can cause a fire and/or explosion.” What do you think? If I buy new a third party battery, should I buy also a charger from the same brand? Maybe I could buy a set, 2 batteries and charger.

Not as far as spinning, but when I compare the battery to others I have, all on a flat surface, it is a tiny bit swollen at the center on one side. Terrific idea, how bright some people are :D Thank you, everyone.

It sounds “tempting”, for the sake of recovering the battery. But isn’t it dangerous? Also, I don’t know if it is good to turn on the camera if the battery is a bit swollen. I think the battery got swollen after charging it (could I have “overcharged” it?)

Hi Sandy. Yeah, I think I will have to replace it. And I could contact Watson, good idea.

It looks the same as other batteries I have, I don’t see the slightest difference. However, it should be a tiny more enlarged somewhere. I can insert the battery, it touches a bit the wall of the compartment. But to take it out is difficult, I have to use tweezers and I don’t like the idea of doing this. It is a Watson battery for my Fuji X-T3. I am not sure if the battery changed its size, or I had never used it and it is a manufacturing defect. Can I do something to reduce the size of this battery (if it is enlarged, it is just a fraction of millimeter)?

Hey, how are you? Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I cleaned a bit more the contacts with isopropyl alcohol but I haven’t been able to turn on my Sunpak flash. So, maybe I will ask a repair service if it is possible to fix it. Why do you think a dead capacitor means the end of the flash? Because repairing it is as expensive as buying a new flash?

I have isopropyl alcohol and a contact cleaner (and lubricant). Could I clean the contacts with one of these products? Here are some photos. Look that there is a bit of green in some borders. It is subtle, and I don’t know if that is just the glue or something which is not wrong. It is a relatively new flash, bought like 10 years ago. And yes, last years it hasn’t been used (I don’t remember when was the last time I fired it).

Thank you for the messages. I found out that my Nikon SB-23 didn’t turn on either, but I cleaned a bit the contacts with a cotton bud moistened with apple vinegar. And apparently this is what made the flash work again. But I still haven’t had luck with my Sunpak. I cleaned the contacts with vinegar and also with a pencil rubber (and by the way, the inner contacts are tiny springs, difficult to clean, and it is impossible to rub them with a pencil rubber without damaging them). I also tried with a new set of non-rechargeable batteries. And I turned the flash on and off for some minutes. I don’t know how much time I should do this routine, which implies that I spend time doing this and have my hands occupied with this task.

It’s a Sunpak PZ42X. It was in a cabinet for months without being used. Now it doesn’t turn on. I changed the batteries, to no avail. What could be the problem?

I want to buy two or three ND filters, especially for video. Right now my largest thread of lens is 58mm. But it is not impossible that one day I buy another lens with a bigger thread. Do you buy filters for your largest thread, o for a bigger one? The reasons for buying bigger ones would be: 1- In case you buy other lenses with a bigger thread in the future; 2- To avoid vignetting (really?). I am not sure about the second reason, because if the filter is just a bit bigger, let’s say a 62mm for a 58mm lens, used with the appropriate adapter, I have the impression that there will be more vignetting than using just a 58mm filter (because of the increased distance to the lens produced by the adapter). And what about if the difference is bigger, let’s say a 77mm for a 58mm? Yes, I could try the filter personally before buying. But if I buy online from a foreign shop, that is not possible. A reason for buying filters of the same thread is that usually filters are more expensive when they are larger. And sometimes the difference is BIG. For instance, this filter B+W 58mm XS-Pro MRC-Nano 806 ND 1.8 Filter (6-Stop) costs $80 for 58mm and $180 (!!) for 82mm.

I don’t know how the NDs of your cameras work like. You could record some video with and without ND and compare them. The only thing I know about Sony and NDs is that a couple of times I shot with cameras like the Z1, a semi-pro HDV camera, and I used the ND. I never did a quality test, I just used the ND to shoot with a wider aperture, and it worked fine. But I guess a Z1 has nothing to do with your camera, which I think is a pocket one. Just try it. I wish my Fuji X-T3 had built-in NDs.

@Ed_Ingold Thanks for the reply. Yeah, you are right. The rule for normal shutter speed is to set it to twice the frames per second. The lower the SS, the more the amount of motion blur. And the higher it is, the more the stroboscopic effect, as you noted. So, what VND do you use for your Sony? A B+W?

Basically, variable NDs are more fast and practical, with a bit lower quality, and more uneven tint. And the problem with the fixed ones is that, for example, you have one filter which reduces 6 stops, but you need to reduce 7 stops. So you have to put a 1 stop ND filter on top (which could affect definition or color), or sacrifice one variable that you wouldn’t like to change (aperture, shutter speed or ISO). 1- I would like to read experiences from people who use fixed NDs. How do you adjust the entrance of light if one filter alone doesn’t give the proper exposure? If there aren’t fast movements, would you increase the shutter speed? Because you won’t notice the difference and you don’t want to increase the depth of field closing the aperture. 2- I learnt that variables, because of the polarization effect, could flat skin tones, as if they had too much make-up, because of the reduction of reflections. Have you noticed this effect? This video shows a technique to optimize the VND to have better colors and to reduce skin flatness: What do you think? Have you practiced this technique? 3- Let’s say you need continuity between shots in a scene. But at the same time you could be using the sunlight, which might change a bit and so as a consequence you may rotate the VND ring to adjust the exposure. I guess this adjustment could modulate color a bit, which is not desirable in contiguous shots in a scene, like in a shot reverse shot sequence. So, in this scenario, would it be advisable to leave the VND untouched? (if that is possible, because I guess you could move the ring accidentally).

I processed another roll, I saw the scans and I didn’t see a single dark circle. The image I posted was the one from which I realized of these circles, but then I saw some previous rolls and in some of them there were one or two circles. So, regularly, I was doing something wrong. What I did different is: 1- I rapped just after pouring, like 6 times (probably I exaggerated, and a couple of times is enough). And only then I agitated for the rest of the first 30 seconds. The initial rapping (before the agitation) is recommended by Kodak. Not the initial agitation for the rest of the first 30 seconds, as I wrote previously. I also focused more on the subsequent rapping, but anyway I read that once the film is wet, bubbles can’t stick to the film. And Kodak doesn’t mention rapping after every agitation, it only indicates after pouring. 2- I removed the exposed film from the refrigerator some hours (like 5 hours) before loading it on the tank reel. It was in the plastic canister and this in a Ziploc bag with other films (exposed and unexposed), so I had to remove the other films too. But probably, if it is just about warming up the film, I don’t have to remove all films. I don’t know what the culprit of the circles was. I think it is the lack of rapping. But because I don’t know for sure, I will do both things in my next roll. Thank you everyone. I learned one more thing.

[uSER=4774668]@alan_marcus|2[/uSER] And what is the solution? Just to remove the film from the refrigerator some hours before loading it on the reel?

[uSER=4774668]@alan_marcus|2[/uSER] I see… But I still don’t understand what you mean. I can see and touch the water on a window or on a mirror. But the leader of the film was not wet. I touched a bit the film in the dark, and it was dry, at least on the corners and also I touched a bit in the middle of it. It didn’t feel like it was wet, or that there were droplets on it. And anyway, it is just water, how could this cause low density circles? Are you saying that these droplets stayed there for some hours until they were in contact with the developer?

Okay… But… There wasn’t any water during the loading on the reel. I mean, it was a dry film, just a bit cold. How can droplets be formed?

[uSER=4774668]@alan_marcus|2[/uSER] Are you suggesting that the marks could have been produced not in the development process, but before? Do you mean when the film is shot and it is still cold? Or when you develop the film still cold (if it was in the refrigerator before)? This roll wasn’t in the refrigerator before shooting. It was in the refrigerator (not freezer) the day before developing. The day before, I took it out and then I manipulated it when it was still cold (I mean, I loaded it into the spiral). Do you think that loading a cold film could cause these marks?

Yes, it could be this. Or maybe it is about the fixer, as someone in another forum told me (the film doesn’t get transparent in those edges in contact with the reel). Or both. Thank you, Glen_h. Yes, but these are not light leaks. I think light leaks happen to me when I load the film under full sun, when I don’t have other choice.

I found that there are different approaches to the first minute. Some (including Kodak or Ilford) don’t do anything special in the first minute. While others agitate the first 30 seconds and then let the tank sit for the remainder 30 seconds. And others agitate the whole minute. In this regard, I read a book by Gonzalez Casanueva, an Argentinean photographer who used the Zone System method (I don’t know if there is an English translation of the book). He treats the first minute differently than the rest of the time. He says that if you do a 3 minute water pre-soak at the same temperature as the developer, you don’t need to agitate during the first minute, because the pre-soak already ensures a uniform developing. And if you do agitate the developer after the water pre-soak, you get more contrast (and grain) than needed. So he proposes pre-soaking for 3 minutes and then the first minute of developer just let the tank sit. But, if for some reason you decide not to pre-soak, then you have to agitate the first 30 seconds to get a uniform developing. This is what I am currently doing. If I continue with this method, I think I will rap the tank after the pouring (again, do you think the omission of this action could be the cause of my marks?) And if I am still getting the marks, I will pre-soak.

Well, every book or article I read, or class I attended, indicated 5 seconds every 30 (or 10 every minute if you prefer so). Kodak itself recommends 5 seconds every 30 in its D76 paper. I am sure there are other methods, I am just telling you the information I got, including the one coming from the manufacturer of the developer I use. I know that the exact quantity of time is not crucial; the important thing is to move the liquid a bit once in a while. How much time do you take in doing these "one or two inversions"? How do you decide if you do one or two?