|
FasterThanLight posted:...for the most part, I think Leicas are extremely well built... The mechanics are very solid. I got to briefly handle an old Leicaflex SLR awhile ago when helping out at a closing camera store... damned thing felt like a steel brick, probably the heaviest 35mm camera I've ever held. Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Oct 17, 2011 |
#
?
Oct 17, 2011 19:34
|
|
is go
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:29 |
|
|
Hah, I've actually lusted after an M6 since I was a teenager. It's just now I'm in a position to buy one. I bought the Kiev to see if I got on with rangefinders, quite enjoy using it, except it is huge and on average eats every third film. What sort of issues should I be checking for with a used M6 ttl? Also I decided against an M7 on the basis of my luck with electronics. And what is a CLA?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2011 21:07
|
|
|
Laser Cow posted:CLA? Clean Lube Adjust A tune-up for your camera/lens
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
Laser Cow posted:My Minolta FX-570 electronics died on me. My Nikon FG electronics died on me after I replaced all the seals and fixed the jamming mirror. I've had enough of my Kiev 4 jamming and snapping or tearing film.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2011 22:06
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You can have my F3 and an ais 50 for 1/10th of what that leica costs. Whoa I was just looking at an F3 + AIS 50 on KEH earlier, how much do you want? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2011 22:41
|
|
|
Laser Cow posted:Hah, I've actually lusted after an M6 since I was a teenager. It's just now I'm in a position to buy one. I bought the Kiev to see if I got on with rangefinders, quite enjoy using it, except it is huge and on average eats every third film. I don't know a whole lot about the electronics/meter on the M6, but you should be able to tell if it seems accurate. For everything else, expect the shutter and frame advance to be the smoothest thing ever. Rangefinder patch should be bright with no fungus, framelines should pop up when you move the lever next to the lens mount. Check the shutter curtain for pinholes, and make sure light seals are intact. Not a whole lot you can do to test the rangefinder accuracy without film, but I'd at least try focusing on something very far away to make sure infinity focus is correct. If you can't seem to reach infinity (or can focus past), it may be a sign that it needs a professional calibration. Could also be that only infinity is off slightly, which is an easy DIY fix. The camera you linked is a good price (considering what they're selling for these days, at least) and it looks like it's been well taken care of. If you have the money, go for it!
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 01:36
|
|
|
I took my M6 with me to Tokyo last month and picked up a 5-pack of the new Portra 400 to try out. I headed out from my hotel on a sunny morning, getting some skyscraper shots on the way to a nearby park. When I got to the park and prepared to frame a shot... nothing but blur! The glass eyepiece on the viewfinder had somehow come unscrewed as I was walking and fell off!. I retraced my steps to my last shot in the desperate hope that I would somehow see it on the sidewalk but I had walked many blocks and was out of luck. I headed straight to Map Camera in Shinjuku to ask about a replacement part but they had none and didn't know who might carry it. Apparently nobody loses this part other than me. An internet search turned up nothing. I guess I will have to email a picture of the place the part was located to some repair shops and see if they have one laying around. In short, I carried my Leica 3000 miles to only get 3 shots off. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 10:23
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Whoa I was just looking at an F3 + AIS 50 on KEH earlier, how much do you want?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 10:35
|
|
|
Does anyone who processes C-41 have any suggestions for a water bath? I was thinking a cooler with an immersion heater of some sorts and a PID controller, but I'm not comfortable building a circuit running of mains power, combining it with water and then putting my hands in it. Fish tank heaters only seem to go to 34C max (and still aren't that safe). How do other people do it? And before anyone asks, I'm looking to do it myself because processing costs $10/roll.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 11:35
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I was offering it to him because he lives close. Sending it to the US would cost half of the price by itself. Oh hey, I appreciate the gesture. And at some point in the future I probably will want a
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 11:55
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Does anyone who processes C-41 have any suggestions for a water bath? I was thinking a cooler with an immersion heater of some sorts and a PID controller, but I'm not comfortable building a circuit running of mains power, combining it with water and then putting my hands in it. Fish tank heaters only seem to go to 34C max (and still aren't that safe). How do other people do it? Maybe you can replace, wire around, or gimmick the fish tank heater's thermostat?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 13:33
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Does anyone who processes C-41 have any suggestions for a water bath? I was thinking a cooler with an immersion heater of some sorts and a PID controller, but I'm not comfortable building a circuit running of mains power, combining it with water and then putting my hands in it. Fish tank heaters only seem to go to 34C max (and still aren't that safe). How do other people do it? If you're uncomfortable with the whole water electricity and my hands in it, you could go the crock pot route(you will have to figure how to set the thermostat lower. I have this thing called the chill chaser for developing(it's old who knows if they make the oil filled heater?) They also make fish heaters that are not closed in a glass tube but a piece of titanium, or stainless steel. Also you could throw in a GFI circuit which you should be using anyways in a darkroom, and that would take care of the whole water+electricity=electrocution(This assumes you are on a grid similar to the US AC one.) Food for thought.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 15:15
|
|
|
Laser Cow posted:Oh hey, I appreciate the gesture. And at some point in the future I probably will want a
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 17:28
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:I took my M6 with me to Tokyo last month and picked up a 5-pack of the new Portra 400 to try out. I headed out from my hotel on a sunny morning, getting some skyscraper shots on the way to a nearby park. When I got to the park and prepared to frame a shot... nothing but blur! The glass eyepiece on the viewfinder had somehow come unscrewed as I was walking and fell off!. Wait, are you near/far-sighted? Then that glass eyepiece is a diopter. http://www.mapcamera.com/shopping/s...&class=&x=0&y=0
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 17:53
|
|
|
Hey, I'm looking for a good film camera for my girlfriend. Right now, she has a canon XS, which is digital. A few months ago I met a guy with a really cool soviet vintage camera and he talked about the benefits of using film over digital, which inspired this gift. I'm looking for something similar and I don't know where to start. I'd be willing to spend up to $300, but would be totally willing to spend more if it was worth it. What would you recommend?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
Francesca posted:Hey, I'm looking for a good film camera for my girlfriend. Right now, she has a canon XS, which is digital. A few months ago I met a guy with a really cool soviet vintage camera and he talked about the benefits of using film over digital, which inspired this gift. I'm looking for something similar and I don't know where to start. I'd be willing to spend up to $300, but would be totally willing to spend more if it was worth it. What would you recommend? Even if she doesn't have any extra lenses for her XS, get an EOS film camera. Familiar controls and the lens will work on the XS. I got an EOS 1n from keh in bgn condition for $130, the EOS 3's are also very good. Just add a lens for a pro level camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 22:50
|
|
|
I was reorganizing my apartment a bit today and... yeah.  Shameful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 02:12
|
|
|
Self-promotion, I'm selling my Bessa R and Nokton 50. Cameraquest now charges $699 for this lens new, get it and the body for $99 less!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 02:16
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Does anyone who processes C-41 have any suggestions for a water bath? I was thinking a cooler with an immersion heater of some sorts and a PID controller, but I'm not comfortable building a circuit running of mains power, combining it with water and then putting my hands in it. Fish tank heaters only seem to go to 34C max (and still aren't that safe). How do other people do it? If you want to go the super easy route, just get a decent sized tub, get the water to 40-43C put the chemical bottles in and then wait until they hit 37C and go for it. The temperatures don't change enough during the time of a process run for you to worry about. I've done this for E-6 processing too, which is even more sensitive and its worked out fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 04:05
|
|
|
VoodooXT posted:Wait, are you near/far-sighted? Then that glass eyepiece is a diopter. I wish it was just a diopter. It is the part that the diopter would screw onto. Right now there is just a hole and a mirror on the back of my camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 05:05
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:I wish it was just a diopter. It is the part that the diopter would screw onto. Right now there is just a hole and a mirror on the back of my camera. Since I'm assuming you're no longer in Japan, I guess it's no consolation to you to mention that Leica has a store that does repairs in Ginza. EDIT: Found this thread online: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=101657
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 10:04
|
|
|
Spedman posted:If you want to go the super easy route, just get a decent sized tub, get the water to 40-43C put the chemical bottles in and then wait until they hit 37C and go for it. The temperatures don't change enough during the time of a process run for you to worry about. I've done this for E-6 processing too, which is even more sensitive and its worked out fine. This is probably what I'll end up doing. I was thinking an insulated tub, digital internal (maybe) thermometer and just the immersion heater. Then my friend said he had a few 100W peltier devices laying around he used to use for PC cooling that I could try. Still too hard? I had it in my mind that the temperature had to be stable for 30min or so since that's how long it takes me to do B&W from first pour to squeegee, but I guess C-41 developing is actually only 3-4 min so a PID controller is way overkill for hobby use. Safety first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 10:40
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:This is probably what I'll end up doing. I was thinking an insulated tub, digital internal (maybe) thermometer and just the immersion heater. Then my friend said he had a few 100W peltier devices laying around he used to use for PC cooling that I could try. Still too hard? I wouldn't bother with the peltiers, way too much stuffing around, an immersion heater would be perfect. All I had was a hot water tap and a plastic washing up tub and I never had a bad roll, here's some Ektar done in a Tetenal kit:  Lades Brades #2 by mr_student, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 11:35
|
|
|
Thanks. Also, how long do you find the mixed chemicals last? I'd be using some R134a to displace the oxygen, but would I get a few weeks out of mixed chemicals? can it be done single shot in a patterson tank? or do I have to do 15 rolls all at once?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 12:12
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:I was reorganizing my apartment a bit today and... yeah. I've only just started. I have to make sure I never show my wife this photo or she'll never let me buy another film camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 14:06
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Thanks. I mixed the full liter kit straight up, and had each of the chems in their own concertina bottle so I could squeeze as much air out as possible when they were stored. When I did the process I'd put the whole liter bottle for each chem in the bath and then decant what I needed as I went, pouring the just used chem out of the tank back into the main bottle at the end of each step. The C41 chems lasted about 2-3 months before I ran through the 15 or so rolls, where I was doing one or two rolls each weekend, just using a Patterson tank. I've heard of people getting over 6 months out of a kit, but i wouldnt want to go to that extream. Also if you're shooting lots of high ISO film, you'll exhaust your chems a bit quicker, and get less rolls out of a kit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 14:15
|
|
|
I have a Canon A-1 with 3 lenses, but I'm really coveting a Nikon F3. They're similar in price, I could probably sell one and buy the other at a 1:1 trade basically. Do I just have "grass is greener" syndrome?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
echobucket posted:I've only just started. I have to make sure I never show my wife this photo or she'll never let me buy another film camera. It's dangerous. Pretty soon you'll pick up an old folder at a garage sale and then you'll be into medium format. Then you'll start buying all the good 35mm deals you see (they're cheap in photo dollars!). Then you'll see some nice big medium format slides and feel the urge to get into large format oh god someone help  I should write a book about this. I'll call it "If You Give A Photographer An SLR"
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 19:13
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I have a Canon A-1 with 3 lenses, but I'm really coveting a Nikon F3. They're similar in price, I could probably sell one and buy the other at a 1:1 trade basically. Nikon glass is definitely more of a cult favorite (particularly since you can use it on modern Nikon bodies) but I wouldn't say it's better overall. Canon was always Nikon's biggest rival and I'd say it's more down to the individual lens designs than "Nikon > Canon". If it makes you feel better, I'm into Pentax stuff pretty heavily too and I don't really feel that I would get anything by moving to Nikon over it. I'd say Canon was in the same neighborhood quality-wise as Pentax in the 60s and 70s. Honestly the thing that seems logical to me is cherrypicking the best lenses out of each lineup. Lenses of the same length/speed cost pretty much the same thing across brands now. Manual focus camera bodies are $100-150 at most (for a F3 or similar, I covet one too), and sometimes as little as $20 (Pentax ME, Minolta gear). Then you can decide which manufacturer had the best design and skip the others. Personally I really like the Nikkor 105/2.5 and the Pentax 35/3.5. If you feel a need for taking multiple lenses for a single camera, get a normal for each system too (usually super cheap). I rarely take/use more than 2 lenses anyway. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Oct 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 19:21
|
|
|
Somewhat related to doing C-41 at home, has anyone tried printing colour negatives on regular graded (non-multigrade) b/w paper? I'm considering getting some graded paper to try that but I'm wondering how it'd turn out considering the paper is orthochromatic and not pan. If anyone has tried that, is it worth it? (Maybe I should just try doing a digital simulation.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 19:34
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I have a Canon A-1 with 3 lenses, but I'm really coveting a Nikon F3. They're similar in price, I could probably sell one and buy the other at a 1:1 trade basically. Every major manufacturer had pretty good glass back in the day because photography was more about pros and enthusiasts as opposed to mass market. You'll always get people who swear one brand is better than the other. I find the major variances are in the camera bodies as opposed to the glass because that's where the big feature and style differences come into play. About the only really sure things in lenses are Zeiss and Leica glass, but it's not like you're going to go horribly wrong with anything else. Some people say Olympus glass is the poo poo, but even I as a big fan of old Olympus gear wouldn't say that it's head and shoulders above anything else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 19:41
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Nikon glass is definitely more of a cult favorite (particularly since you can use it on modern Nikon bodies) but I wouldn't say it's better overall. Canon was always Nikon's biggest rival and I'd say it's more down to the individual lens designs than "Nikon > Canon". evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Oct 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Somewhat related to doing C-41 at home, has anyone tried printing colour negatives on regular graded (non-multigrade) b/w paper? I'm considering getting some graded paper to try that but I'm wondering how it'd turn out considering the paper is orthochromatic and not pan. If anyone has tried that, is it worth it? I was looking into doing it last year, from what I found online it will turn out crappy. Kodak used to make a paper that was intended for just what you're talking about, but it's been discontinued for a while and I don't think anyone makes anything similar
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 00:24
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I was looking into doing it last year, from what I found online it will turn out crappy. Kodak used to make a paper that was intended for just what you're talking about, but it's been discontinued for a while and I don't think anyone makes anything similar Hmm, my digital simulation (probably piss poor) turned out like something I could keep though. Actually I didn't see much difference between it and a straight grayscale conversion. Maybe I'll order some graded paper along next time, then post about my results.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 01:10
|
|
|
Has anyone ever tried to expose developed bw film onto undeveloped bw film like a contact print? So when I put a roll of film through my camera, the developed film contains a negative image. Can I then take that strip of film, lay it across an identical, unexposed roll, and contact print the negatives into positives on the second roll? - I think this should work...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
It sounds like it would work, but you'll have to be pretty careful with light and exposure times - my understanding is photo paper has effective ISO much, much lower than film. Please try it and post your results - it sounds really interesting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 02:11
|
|
|
wanderlost posted:Has anyone ever tried to expose developed bw film onto undeveloped bw film like a contact print? It should, though I think it'll be hard to do without special machinery, or onto ortho film so you can do it in darkroom lighting. It is basically how cinema film prints were traditionally produced. You shoot onto negative film, develop, cut and splice the negatives, then print onto another negative film to get a positive print for projection. E: ^^^ ExecuDork posted:It sounds like it would work, but you'll have to be pretty careful with light and exposure times - my understanding is photo paper has effective ISO much, much lower than film. According to Ilford's instructions, their MG papers are something around ISO 500 when exposed in white light. Of course the sensitivity curves are crazy different for different wavelengths due to the multigrade-ness. But exposing ISO 100 film should require pretty much the same darkroom timings as exposing grade 0-3 prints. Further edit: In fact I have a bunch of spare rolls of Pan F+, maybe I'll experiment with one of those some time. nielsm fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Oct 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 02:12
|
|
|
nielsm posted:
I don't think that's right at all. I've shot paper negatives inside my huge old folding cameras and box cameras before, even in daylight I needed stupidly long exposures. Paper's usually between 1-5 ISO. This was a strip of Ilford MGIV exposed for about seventy seconds at F8ish in fairly bright indoor light:  Kodak Duaflex IV: Paper Negative by epomorski, on Flickr Using the same paper outside was more like 15-30 seconds to get a decent exposure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 02:39
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:I don't think that's right at all. I've shot paper negatives inside my huge old folding cameras and box cameras before, even in daylight I needed stupidly long exposures. Paper's usually between 1-5 ISO.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:29 |
|
|
nielsm posted:According to Ilford's instructions, their MG papers are something around ISO 500 when exposed in white light. Of course the sensitivity curves are crazy different for different wavelengths due to the multigrade-ness. But exposing ISO 100 film should require pretty much the same darkroom timings as exposing grade 0-3 prints. Paper ISOs are different from film ISOs. As noted, it's usually something like film-ISO 5. You may want to preflash to reduce contrast a bit too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 03:47
|
|