bruce_appel

That is the correct answer. If you have any more questions, ask Dan Fromm, he is our resident expert.

Whether or not Bowers was out of line to post the question isn't what I take issue with. A good argument could be made that she was, it matters not to me. What I take issue with is someone just poppimg off calling names and being rude. There is no call for that.

I have been on the receiving end of this sort of stuff on this site before, and to be honest, I really don't understand it. It reflects badly on everyone who is a member, and the adminstrators for tolerating it. Disagree with me, disagree passionatley, fine, but name calling? Come on, its out of line.

No one threatend you with violence. Not only are you mean, you evidently have trouble reading also.

Here is the deal- first, from the question asked by LeeAnn Bowers, you had no way of knowing if she had done any research prior to posting here, a site frequented by people such as yourself, with lots of knowledge of old cameras. Seems a logical place to ask that sort of question to me.

Then, making the assumption that she had not done a search, you proceeded to be insulting and and call her names.

That, at least to me, is over the top.

I think you owe her an apology.

If you spoke to me like that in person, I would have a real moral dilema. One the one hand I am a peacable person by nature, who thinks that viloence is not a good way to solve conflicts. On the other hand, I would feel compelled to dot your eye. It would be a challenge to see which won out.

Bull butter Dan. There are lots of reasons someone may not have done a search- limited access to a computer, limited computer skills, limited language skills, heck they may think that posting a question to a bunch of old camera geeks may just be a way to get good information.

Whatever the reason, name calling adds nothing for anyone, annoys lots of folks, and reflects badly on you.

Here is a question for you, would you speak to someone like that if they were sitting there with you in person? My guess is that you would not, as you know what the result would be.

I have nothing to add to the original post. Your response was all I wanted to address.

No reason to call someone an inbecile just for asking a question. If you don't like the question don't respond.

Skies the limit. I bought a cheap old Burke and James that I have been having a ball with. Full movements, folds up to fit in a back pack pretty easily, a little lighter than the Speed Graphic. Didn't cost more than a couple boxes of film.

I figure that once I learn from using it, I will know more about what I really want/need in a field camera if and when I decide to upgrade, and can recycle this one to someone else to use and learn with.

I don't know what camera you are putting this on, but I have one of these lenses on my Speed Graphic and it works fine. Very sharp, contrasty lens, just limited coverage.

If your standards don't get close enough to focus, maybe you could rig up some sort of recessed lens board?

I have three folders, a non-rangefinder Bessa I, a Super Ikonta 532/16, and an Iskra. The Iskra is currently getting a cla. I bought the Ikonta and the Iskra at the same time, with the plan of selling the one I like/use the least. Thus far I really like the Ikonta. Built like a tank, classic tessar lens, great ergonomics.

The Iskra, may be a better user. It has a great (coated) lens, the viewfinder is bigger and brighter than the Ikonta. The build quality is not as good. I find the ergonomics not as good as the Ikonta. I find it harder to find the focus gizmo, and to cock the shutter when it is up to my eye. The Ikonta falls to my hand easier. I will reserve final judgement till it comes back from the spa treatment, but I am leaning towards keeping the Ikonta.

I do both digital and wet darkroom work and I really think of them as being different mediums. Both have their places, vitues, limitations. For b&w printing, I have never gotten the quality with digital printing that I can easily get with the wet darkroom. I am sure that is a learnig curve probably.

The other thing for me, is that I spend so much time in front of a computer at work, that I find it hard to make myself sit in front of one to scan, photoshop, and then print. The darkroom is a nice little sanctuary from all that.

I have just recently been doing some serious film testing, as I have not changed in years after nailing my last combo. What I find is that I am testing my process as much as anything. If my results are way different than what the manufacturers say, I have usually screwed something up. My last combo I tested was apx 100 in rodinol 1:50. I ended up with an ei of 80, and a development time somewhat shorter than that recomended by agfa, but not much, and clearly within the error range of my meter, camera, thermometer, etc. I just finished testing fortepan 200 in PC-TEA, and came up with an ei of 150, so again, not very different. If I had come up with anything more than about a stop either way, I would have started over.

I was told they are waiting for a new shipment.

Sun Photo from Midwest Camera Exchange.

If I were looking at a used rollei- any model, there are a few specific things I would look for.First, rack the lens in and out, and watch to be sure the lens panel is moving in and out straight. Worn rolleis can have problems with the lens panel getting out of alignment.Put a roll of film in it to be sure the counter works. The roller that senses the film thickness can get out of whack and need repair. Otherwise look at all the stuff you would with any camera-shutter, lens, etc.

I have been using an hp combiplan tank with good results.

I recently bought a Mountainsmith- the biggest they have, don't know the model number. It will carry my 4X5 outfit, mf would be no problem. Well made, carries well, really good tripod mount, cost less than Lowepro products. Might be worth a look.

I have one made from some thin doubled black cloth. It was left over from a temporary darkroom from years ago. I carry some clothes pins with me, and use them to clip it to the camera.

I have also used a black tee shirt, and it really works better in lots of ways. Put it over your neck upside down, put the bottom of the shirt over camera. Works better in the wind.

I would be afraid of a cloth with weights. I seem cursed that whenever I get the big boy out the wind picks up. Weights flinging around on the end of some flapping cloth sounds like broken equipment, injury, or with my luck, both.

Yes it will work on the sl66. You will need extension tubes long enough to adjust the back focus.

Its pretty straight forward to mount them on a rollei sl66. A mounting plate, some extension tubes, and you are good to go. I have a 360mm schneider mounted this way.

I think part of the reason that digital is being pushed by the makers so hot and heavy, is because 35mm cameras had already been developed about as far as they could go.They needed something new to make sales, and minor tweaks to already advanced systems would not generate sales like a whole new product.

I have recently been in your shoes. I am using a combiplan, and even have done some e6 with it. It works, but is not ideal. It drains very slow. I am probably going to go the route of getting a couple more containers, so I can just lift the film into the next container.

While mine is older and non auto, I must chime in and say that my helios 58mm lens is truley the best 50mm I have. The only normal 35mm lens I own that is better is on my contax g2. My pentax 50 is good, but I was appalled at how good the helios is considering I paid $8 for it and the zenit it came on. I also have one of the 35mm lenses that is outstanding (again, non auto). If the newer auto versions are as good, you will not be disapointed I think, unless the build quality went down over time- a distinct possibility.

For a somewhat contrarian view, let me chime in. I had a C330 with an 80, a 65, and 180mm lens if my memory serves correctly. While it was a perfectly servicable outfit, I was never really happy with it. I have an old rollei with a Tessar that takes noticably sharper images when stopped down a bit. I then got a rollei with a 2.8 planar, and the mamiya lenses I had, could not compete. It may have been my samples, but my rolleis win hands down, and are in small very ergonomic packages. Of coarse no interchangable lenses.

I found the c330 to be a big, heavy, clumsy beast best used off a tripod. For the same weight and space I can carry a 4X5, so why bother?

I want to work where you do.