jo_dad

If I'm not wrong, this a series 4 tripod. So this is a fairly strong tripod.

Do you really need it? If I'm not wrong, yours are medium format ("compact") cameras. For lightweight use, I`d take a series 3 at much (most times I use a series 2).

The benefit of having a good lightweight (&expensive) carbon fiber tripod is lost by carrying an "oversized" one.

I don`t find the reason for this tripod... maybe for nature photography with extremely long lenses...

Yes, it folds small (5 section!), which means it`s a pain to fold/unfold. A four section tripod this size is still perfectly compact.

Can't say about the price, Gitzo tripods are insanely expensive nowadays. Yes they are good, but also highly overpriced, I think.

For sure this is a great tripod, but I wonder if it is the one that suit your needs. I'd think it twice.

Are the 2s and 3s that much lighter?

I figured a stronger tripod would also be more stable etc etc but a stronger tripod is usually a bog tripod that you're not going to want to carry around all the time. Im not sure.

Hi Guys,

I’ve got a question for you. I know this isn’t a tripod forum or sub forum but I suppose because of the type of cameras that this sub forum represents this is probably the best place to ask.

I’m meeting someone on Wednesday to look at a secondhand Gitzo GT4552ts and maybe buy it. What do you suggest I check when I inspect it? Any problems associated with this tripod? Anything I should look out for etc.?

Also, do you guys have any experience with this model? Any words against it? I would be using it with my SWA and also my Bronica SQAI. The reason I thought this tripod would work is because although its strong, it folds small and it’s not too heavy all things considered. I’m 5’10” so I think with a head, it’ll be a decent height for me. It also comes with a center column.

Also, the gent is asking for USD 510. If it’s in good shape, do we think this is a good deal? I know I often ask this last question but in this case there aren’t any sold items to check on eBay so I have no idea.

Taking a chance on repeating myself. I have both. My most used

lens is the 35 mm asph. Therefore, I prefer [drum roll please],

the M3. Cover the frameline illuminator and you have a

non-crapped-up finder which is as accurate for 35 mm as the

frame lines in any other M.

 

 

Has anyone else tried the covering up the frame line illumination window trick??

 

 

I prefer the DS M3, which is what I kept. That is just personal

preference and not the result of some higher knowledge. ;<)

 

Art

Hi everyone,

Anyone have experience of the Schneider 58/5.6 XL on a technical camera in 6x8 for example?

Since developing times don't actually change the baked-in speed of a film, it's the subject contrast that's important here.

 

If the subject has a higher than normal contrast (brightness range), then pull the developing. If not, expose and develop it normally and deal with any overexposure in printing or scanning.

 

Plus, surely it doesn't take much figuring to come up with a time slightly shorter than that given for 200 EI and not as short as for 100 EI? It's B&W film for goodness sake, with a latitude as wide as a barn door!

thanks Joe

I'm not sure I can see the difference one third of a stop makes; I think I'd just expose and develop for 200.

However, if I had to use 160, I think I'd interpolate like this. Plot a graph with film speed on the x-axis, and the recommended development time on the y-axis. I'd use Excel because that's what I have. You could do it on a calculator with a graphical display, or even by hand on squared paper. I think the graph will be easier if you either plot the x on a logarithmic scale, or convert the ISO number to DIN (so one stop is an increase of three, not a doubling of the number). You have at least three points (times recommended at ISO 100, 200 and 400). Draw a smooth curve through them, and read off the time for any intermediate speed you like.

Cheers Dustin

Hey all,

I want to shoot some HP5 at 160 but on the massive dev chart i can only find HC110 times for ISO 100 (pulled 2 stops) and 200 (Pulled 1 stop). at 160 its pulled 1 and 1/3 stops. Anyone know how i calculate the dev times?

I will be visiting Munich for work from this evening (07/05) until Sunday evening (12/05). I was hoping you could tell me if there are any good secondhand and classic camera shops in the city. I know that there is the Leica shop in Munich - i will definitely be visiting that shop, but are there any other cool camera shops? I like 35mm and MF - actually, everything in Analog, I am not interested in digital. I would really appreciate any suggestions.

Actually, anywhere to get film at a good price would be nice

I read somewhere a few years that the way to tell how worn and more specifically, how used a Hassy is, is by looking at the back of the body where the film back attaches. Specifically at the ridges on the body that couple with the grooves on the film back. The more times the film back has been removed and put back onto the body the more of the black paint on the ridge on the camera body wears off to show the silver underneath. This seems obvious if you assume that a film back is being removed and replaced every time film is used up and replaced with new film. Also, obviously there are variations with how gentle people are with their equipment and an aggressive/non-gentle user would cause more paint wear with less removals and replacements than a gentle user would with more removals/replacements of the back. I guess the average owner doesn't just remove the film backs and put them back on for no reason. I don't know, maybe they do but i guess the average owner of a relatively expensive Hassy doesn't just play around wit the camera like this. I also assume the average owner/user is relatively gentle when performing this operation that they don't slam the backs on.

So the question is this:

How easy does this paint wear off? And, in the case of the bottom three examples ( two with worn off paint and one that looks like none of the paint has worn off) how much more have the two with the worn ridges been used relative to the one without wear.

If you fit a 120 insert into a 220 back, it's not a 220 back anymore, it suddenly becomes a 120 back

 

Only the inserts are 120 or 220, and they are interchangeable with the same clamshell

This makes me happy :)

Thanks for the comments guys!

Just looked at my SQ-B. The clamshell around the insert doesn't know what it surrounds. All the spacing, etc specific to 120/220 film is contained in the insert itself.

Thanks C Watson. Hoping someone has actually tried it.

Do we have a definitive answer to the question:

Will everything work fine if I use a 120 insert with 120 film in a 220 back on my Bronica SQ-AI?

I found a lot of posts with people talking about the possibilities and the technicalities but no answer for sure.

Has anyone done this and does it work? That is the question,

(well built)

Lol

I wouldnt use the camera with a DB, just film

Not interested in it for P&S shooting either. Many have said that the rollei 35 should be used as a P&S, just setting to f8/11, setting focus to 3m or something and just shooting away. I didn't use the Rollei35 like that . I actually played around with the focus and aperture a lot. Would probably be the same way with an SWC...

one can pull off some amazing street and spontaneous shots, at useful slower speeds like 1/60th or even 1/30 (which you wouldn't dream of with the huge 40mm on a clanking jarring 500 body). This was a big deal for Hasselblad 500cm owners, but perhaps less so vs your Bronica: if the SQ/40 combo is hand-holdable at 1/60th, the SWC would be less compelling in that aspect..

Yes this is something that is very appealing about the SWC and actually a reason i didn't consider a Hasselblad 500/1000/2000 etc type camera (with the big mirror slap - like a Hassy/Bronica/Mamiya's 67/Pentax67) and instead went with the rolleiflex. It seems so far that on the Bronica that 1/60 is ok on the negs. Where it is a little difficult is having to flip up the mirror prior to triggering the shutter and risking changing the composition slightly. Also, the weight makes it a little bit difficult being super still, maybe as i train at the gym a little more, things will improve ;) but still...

This was also one thing that was a con for the 40 Distagon and a pro for the SWC.

Given you've almost instantly bonded with your SQ/40 combo, you're probably a very good candidate to exploit the SWC someday. The two most difficult adjustments most feel when moving to the SWC are coming to grips with 38mm wide angle 6x6 format, and the non-reflex imprecise focus/compose handling. Since you already love the perspective/format combo, you're two steps ahead of most other SWC aspirants: the only thing that could blow it for you is the non-reflex handling. As I've mentioned in previous discussions, this is something you'll figure out within a few weeks or months: quickly enough to resell an SWC without losing much (if any) money on the audition. Renting is an option, but the fee to rent one for a week is probably more than you'd lose from buying it outright and evaluating at your leisure for a couple months before reselling (if you don't love it).

Apparently the Voigtlander angle finder (as difficult as it is to source) allows slightly more accurate framing. To be honest, im not sure why since, i imagined paralax issues would be the same on any external VF. Do you know if the angle finder is indeed a bit better for framing?

The lack of accurate focusing i think wont bother me as much as the inaccurate framing, compliments of my time with the Rollei 35...

Still, all in all, i must say, i am very glad that i made my original post here about the SWC alternatives because, like I've said, this wide 6x6 format is super cool and very enjoyable to shoot. So, thank you Orsetto and thank you to those others that wrote to me on my other post :)

not necessarily be indicative of what you'd get from a Bronica SQ 40mm or other alternatives.

I ended up getting a Bronica 6x6 with the 40 as you guys suggested. That thing is so much fun! I never thought id enjoy wide angle and even be able to use it but, for me, the wide is amazing to use and framing seems so much easier in square than in the rectangle format that i got used to with my 35mm cams.

I have a Rollei 2.8f and although that's square (this is the first time i realised i preferred 6x6) as well, its the normal 80mm so...

I was just curious about the hassys i guess because it is the eventual option because I figure either a 500 series or swc (well, certainly an swc) will be a bit smaller and lighter than my Bronica so, knowing myself, eventually in a year or two ill try to get either of those two options. Just trying to figure out which.

I really like the ability to focus. I didn't realise how much i missed that until after i sarted using the bronica. For a year or so before i was shooting a tiny rollei 35SE and actually i enjoyed the freedom of not focusing (or actually zone focussing). I never really took real closeups or shallow photos because i was always at f8 and higher. with the bronica i have been playing with closeups at 40 (real fun). I reckon i might miss focusing accurately with the SWC and also the ability to frame accurately. The thing is, the fact that the 38 is rectilinear is super appealing and it would suck to pay all that for the 40 and not have that rectilinear distortion free image...

Can someone show me the difference in results between the 38 biogon and the 40 Distagon please?

Has anyone taken pictures of the same subjects with the two lenses to show the differences in rendering and distortion~?

I’m just hoping for a visual demo of the difference rather than just a written description.

Well i managed to get the back off with a pin ;)

Still no triggering of the shutter.

I assumed the batteries were ok because the light works when i press the shutter. I'm going to switch to new batteries later today. If its not that then I'm not sure what else

Bought a camera but its missing the dark slide. How the hell did i not notice this?! Anyway, the camera is a Bronica SQ AI with a Bronica SQ-i 6x6 back (the new (?) ones with the iso on the back).

Now I'm trying to test the camera.

All below happens at any shutter speed setting.

-The battery test button doesn't seem to work because the battery indicator light doesn't light up.

-BTW, should the battery test button be somewhat recessed into a circular "guard" and stick out less than the film back release button?

-There is no film in the camera.

-There is no dark slide in the back.

-mirror isn't locked up

-Lens can be removed

-the film winder on the camera body can be wound constantly when on non multiple exposure mode and still no firing.

-when on multiple exposure mode the winder winds then locks and cant be would any more. Still no stutter fire.

-When returned to single exposure, film winder releases and can be would again.

Apparently you can test the shutter in multi exposure mode but often it wont fire if you have no film in and if the film back is attached. So, you can test this by removing the film back. I cant do this without the dark slide. Is there a way to remove the back without the slide?

I've attached an image of the back.

Can you confirm that the battery check button is shorter than the film back release button> If this is not the case I may have encountered a mechanically damaged button.

Sorry to revive an old thread guys but my battery indicator doesn't work either. Also, my battery indicator button is lower in (as if depressed somewhat) compared to the film release button.

Guys, you really have surprised me. I honestly didn’t think I’d get this much feedback and so detailed too!

I’ve found a Bronica SQAI. It comes with a 40, 80 and a 150 (I think it was a 150, didn’t it too much attention to that one). Just left the guys house. Everything looks clean but couldn’t test the cam with film. He wants USD 600 for the lot with I don’t know 4rolls of portra 800 and 4velvia from 2018.

Apparently it’s his uncles camera. He was a wedding photog... this worries me. I always read that buying cameras from pro photos who made money shooting was a bad idea because everything was probably HEAVILY used.

The guy was a nice enough family man. I met him at his house. He said he hadn’t used it for a year but only ever shot 1 roll through it. He said if anything didn’t work I could come back to him for a refund. I have no reason from Him to mistrust what he is saying but I am just a natural sceptic.

What do you guys think? A decent deal? Is there a lot that can go wrong with this model? Anything I could look for/test over a QUICK exchange next time I meet him if I’m going to buy it?

Thanks so much for the suggestions guys. Super helpful.

Looking for an SQ (i dont know much at all about the Bronicas) i came across the Bronica ETR C. Found a few with 40mm F4 lenses and they are a fair bit cheaper than the SQ. What do we think of these cameras relative to the SQ to SQ ai range?

Hey all,

thinking about the Hassy SWC. In fact, I've been thinking about it for years but never had the chance to try it. I have had a play around with one that belonged to someone trying to sell but he couldn't be convinced to let me use it for a test roll - fair enough.

What i wanted to know is if there is a cheap alternative to it that i can buy that would give me a flavor of 6x6 with such a wide angle, just so i can see what it would be like to shoot photos like that and if i could actually get my eye in to find good pictures in square and super wide like that. I'm thinking better try out something similar that's cheap and see if you like the setup first before rearranging finances and selling some stuff so that i can afford it.

So my question is this:

Is there a cheap 6x6 camera that i can get a cheapish lens for (that will be as close as possible to the wideness of the biogon)?

I don't care about how small it is or any other such details. I just want to see if i can get along with the superwide 6x6 format and don't mind lugging something big around for a few months to decide.