|
Jesus. Hope you have room in your hiking backpack for that thing!
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
Oh my God I wish I could have taken a photo of the thermal acoustic imaging system at my previous job. It was a Speedotron system with a capacity of 38,500 Ws. The light was used to heat up a sample and capture the heating gradient with high speed FLIR system to detect defects inside of metal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Y'all ready to be gearshamed? now were fukkn talking  lets post some weird poo poo    
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
Film scanners? I have a couple of boxes of prints with their negatives and I want to scan them all. Not expecting any of them to be printed bigger than A3 (probably will only ever be viewed on a screen) and the majority of them are family snaps rather than great works of art. The Epson Perfectio v550 seems to be a sweet spot of quality vs price. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 14:17
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Don't put WD-40 anywhere near your camera or lens. Evaporates from it will end up coating your lens and getting all kinds of poo poo stuck to it. Doing more research online, apparently Ronsonol can be very lightly dripped into the outside of the aperture ring to help loosen up the grease and clean out the gunk. Anyone ever try this out? I can't seem to find decent tutorials online on how to take apart the specific lens I've got (Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM, but specifically the chrome one with the focusing tab, not the black and chrome one which almost every tutorial is for). I can find some info on lubing up the focus ring, but not the aperture. I'm hesitant to take that apart in case I gently caress up the aperture blades.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
That is a temporary and dangerous solution. Best case scenario it improves the viscosity of the dried out grease for a little while until the solvent evaporates and the grease dries up again. Worst case the grease becomes too liquid and filthy grease migrates into your lens. The aperture section is usually open to the inside of the barrel and oily grease will happily flow into it and get all over your blades.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
Sauer posted:That is a temporary and dangerous solution. Best case scenario it improves the viscosity of the dried out grease for a little while until the solvent evaporates and the grease dries up again. Worst case the grease becomes too liquid and filthy grease migrates into your lens. The aperture section is usually open to the inside of the barrel and oily grease will happily flow into it and get all over your blades. Welp, guess I’m disassembling a lens soon. Hopefully the aperture ring disassembly is as easy as that of the focus ring.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
It’ll be an adventure! You know, if you were inclined to make a thread out of that I’d read the hell out of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
Just take it slow, document and photograph each step you take and never force anything. If a screw or a retaining ring doesn't want to move with moderate force apply a little acetone to the joint and wait a bit; there's probably lacquer in place as thread lock. Use real JIS screwdrivers as well if you can get them, phillips head are the wrong shape and will cam out and strip a screw without to much trouble. Aperture blades won't go sproinging everywhere for no reason; the assembly will be held in with a retaining ring that you almost certainly won't have to remove unless the lens's designers were evil people. These old lenses were designed to be hand assembled and serviced so they have logical internals for the most part... except the 35mm Flektogon, gently caress that lens and its jigsaw puzzle aperture linkage. Being a rangefinder lens yours probably has pretty simple internals. Richard Haw has a series of lens repair fundamentals articles that are helpful. He only repairs Nikkors but the basics apply to any lens. Especially the bit about helicoids: Fundamentals: Screws and Drivers Fundamentals: Grease and Lubrication Repair: Helicoids You said you have the chrome one with the focusing doohicky. If this article is accurate for your lens it looks like its a snap to get into; the whole focusing stack is a separate module that optical block is screwed in to. Sauer fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Sep 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
Sauer posted:Just take it slow, document and photograph each step you take and never force anything. If a screw or a retaining ring doesn't want to move with moderate force apply a little acetone to the joint and wait a bit; there's probably lacquer in place as thread lock. Use real JIS screwdrivers as well if you can get them, phillips head are the wrong shape and will cam out and strip a screw without to much trouble. Aperture blades won't go sproinging everywhere for no reason; the assembly will be held in with a retaining ring that you almost certainly won't have to remove unless the lens's designers were evil people. These old lenses were designed to be hand assembled and serviced so they have logical internals for the most part... except the 35mm Flektogon, gently caress that lens and its jigsaw puzzle aperture linkage. Being a rangefinder lens yours probably has pretty simple internals. Thanks for these links, they’re all great! I can’t seem to find much info on the actual aperture ring disassembly itself, most articles seem to center on the focusing ring. Hopefully the aperture ring will be just as easy to take off and clean. While I have the thing taken apart, I may as well try out using some rust remover on the chrome bits to see if I can polish it up, since I won’t need to worry about it getting into the lens itself. I’ll make a thread detailing this poo poo, so we can celebrate together when I succeed (or laugh together when I inevitably ruin it and wind up with a rusted $100 brick). Maybe it can also serve as a DIY camera repair megathread, but I dunno how many others try this poo poo out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:I’ll make a thread detailing this poo poo, so we can celebrate together when I succeed (or laugh together when I inevitably ruin it and wind up with a rusted $100 brick). Maybe it can also serve as a DIY camera repair megathread, but I dunno how many others try this poo poo out. When I get back to Australia I'll be taking apart a couple of lenses to (hopefully) fix sticky aperture blades so there'll be at least one other post there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
President Beep posted:You know, if you were inclined to make a thread out of that I’d read the hell out of it. CodfishCartographer posted:I’ll make a thread detailing this poo poo, so we can celebrate together when I succeed (or laugh together when I inevitably ruin it and wind up with a rusted $100 brick). Maybe it can also serve as a DIY camera repair megathread, but I dunno how many others try this poo poo out. If you do make a thread, I might contribute. I'm now inspired to try to take apart my 50mm lens and see if it's reasonably possible to fix its broken autofocus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 07:27
|
|
|
I got my Spotmatic F back from Eric Hendrickson yesterday and he fixed everything wrong with it (Shutter capping, replaced dead meter cells) and replaced the light seals (with black yarn, neat). Cleaned up the mirror and exterior glass surfaces of the viewfinder but not the dust inside the prism assembly which I thought was odd but its maybe one of those things that's best left alone these days unless its really bad, prisms are hard to come by if something goes wrong. Costed about $80 USD and took three weeks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
spog posted:Film scanners? I use the V550 and it does work well for the price point. The software is a tad bit goofy (auto exposure for film scanning is on by default, and the only way to turn it off is to reset ALL post processing functions) but it works. Though if you have a lot of dark images trying to scan in thumbnail mode may make it misread frames. So probably better to scan in normal mode for film and then just select the areas you want.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
Sauer posted:I got my Spotmatic F back from Eric Hendrickson yesterday and he fixed everything wrong with it (Shutter capping, replaced dead meter cells) and replaced the light seals (with black yarn, neat). Cleaned up the mirror and exterior glass surfaces of the viewfinder but not the dust inside the prism assembly which I thought was odd but its maybe one of those things that's best left alone these days unless its really bad, prisms are hard to come by if something goes wrong. Costed about $80 USD and took three weeks. That seems like a pretty reasonable price, really.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
ReverendHammer posted:I use the V550 and it does work well for the price point. The software is a tad bit goofy (auto exposure for film scanning is on by default, and the only way to turn it off is to reset ALL post processing functions) but it works. Though if you have a lot of dark images trying to scan in thumbnail mode may make it misread frames. So probably better to scan in normal mode for film and then just select the areas you want. Cool, thanks. Guess I will do some shopping then. Been sitting on these negs for far too long. E: when I do get it, may I pick your brain about work flow and best settings? spog fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Sep 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
Silverfast makes the v550 like 5x better. The interface just blows away the Epson one. There’s also a guy on eBay who sells an anti Newton ring glass holder for the Epson scanners which help with film flatness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Y'all ready to be gearshamed? my Swedish flashes don't need no stinking mains power  but oh my god do I love them. 
Yeast fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Sep 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
If you guys take apart your lenses then I will join in the fun. I have a Vivitar 70-210 3.5 that has an annoying mild spot right behind the front element. I never figured out how to get to it but I’d like to use it again because it was the first lens (along with an FD Canon 50 1.8) I ever got back in the day so it has sentimental value, as well as me just really liking it. Speaking of disassembly, I removed the back baffle from my Sigma 30 2.8 to try it on my a7ii. With the baffle it had a hard circle vignette since it is an APS-C Mount lens but after removing the baffle it actually covers a surprising amount of full frame. I can remove some of the vignetting in post except for the extreme corners and there is distortion up there but I really like it despite that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
I have a SMC Takumar and SMC 40-80 macro I need to disassemble to clean some fungus filaments off the elements. Party!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 05:23
|
|
|
Here ya go, folks, let's all brick our gear together!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
spog posted:Film scanners? How many rolls of film worth are we talking? I don't know how much you value your time, but scanning that much is pretty tedious. In your position, I'd probably find one of those services that send them to India - I can't remember the name of the one we used at work 8-odd years ago, but my boss was *really* happy with the quality and price point, worked out far better than paying a bunch of undergrads a hair over minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
How much time do you guys spend on flatbed scanning for medium format? I'm considering picking up a flatbed in the future for when I get some more medium format developed so I can get better control over the output. I'm shooting pretty sporadically but I'm planning on some trips in the near future, so I'm expecting it'll come in waves.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
cerious posted:How much time do you guys spend on flatbed scanning for medium format? I'm considering picking up a flatbed in the future for when I get some more medium format developed so I can get better control over the output. I'm shooting pretty sporadically but I'm planning on some trips in the near future, so I'm expecting it'll come in waves. If you don't get a V700 then prepare to spend a while scanning. The V500 can only do one negative at a time if they're larger than 6x6, the V700 can do much larger batches at once, so you can watch a movie or something and only come back to reload it once every 20 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:If you don't get a V700 then prepare to spend a while scanning. The V500 can only do one negative at a time if they're larger than 6x6, the V700 can do much larger batches at once, so you can watch a movie or something and only come back to reload it once every 20 minutes. So I have both a 645 and 67 camera, so it's a bit of a mix. There seems to be quite a price difference between the V500/600 and the V700/800. Is there much of a difference in scan quality besides throughput as well?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 23:43
|
|
|
I just picked up a godox 860ii and the x1 trigger for my a7iii. All of my previous flashes (Olympus, then canon canon) were natives because i was wary of off brands. $200-300 bought you the entry level ttl with zero wireless capabilities and went through AA batteries like candy and the top lenses were closer to $400-600 and only on the last few years started incorporating wireless abilities. It's crazy how good non native gear has become. High speed synch, multiple groups, lithium ion battery with a second recycle time on full power ... it's crazy. I'm all in I'm less than $300 with a light sphere. Any additional flashes won't need triggers and could be the 650s which run closer to $100. Mind blown. We'll see how the reliability hores but it beats spending the cash on a Sony equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
cerious posted:So I have both a 645 and 67 camera, so it's a bit of a mix. There seems to be quite a price difference between the V500/600 and the V700/800. Is there much of a difference in scan quality besides throughput as well? According to filmscanner.info, the V600 measures at about 1560 PPI and the V700 is 2300 PPI, so about 50% more resolution. the V800 and V500 are just cosmetic/software variations of the same basic optical pathway. That puts the V700 on par with older dedicated film scanners, but below a Coolscan 9000 or Imacon or other modern high-end dedicated scanners. Drum scans are also still the gold standard at ~4000 PPI effective resolution. Generally the V700 is more than good enough for amateur usage, but you do have to watch film sag on flatness with larger formats. Maybe get one of those ANR holder kits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 01:04
|
|
|
V550 and 600 are the same thing with different software packages (eg no photoshop elements with the 550) It can do 2x 6x7 at the same time. Quality is pretty alright. Silverfast makes the process a lot faster. The big improvement of the v700 is that it can do sheet film. And also 24 frames of 35mm at once.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
I had a V600, it can do 3 6x6 or 2 6x9 frames at a time. I guess there's enough room in the holder for 3 6x7 frames but I don't remember for sure. I used the default Epson scan software, with the update that fixed the 'stops after each frame' issue on Macs. Worked ok for me but I turned everything off and just generated unadjusted positive (i.e. not inverted) scans. Took around 5-7 minutes per strip, plus another minute or so loading the holder and dusting everything each time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
Not shot for a while. Used to mainly shoot cars for ads and motorsport. Going on the holiday of a lifetime to Bora Bora and the rest of FP. Sold my 7D and canon setup with the intention of grabbing a Sony A7Riii. If I have around £1000 to put into glass for my trip what would you guys recommend? I’m currently thinking a Sigma Art 50 and the Samyang/rokinon 14 2.8. I’d love to try some star stuff and obviously landscapes. I was thinking the 50 as I love fast glass, but I’m wondering if that new Tamron 28-70 2.8 may be a better choice when wandering around. I used to love my 30 on my 7D so I imagine I’d love the 50 on this FF. I’ll grab the 70-200 2.8 when I get back but don’t want to spend atm and carry it around while there. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 10:15
|
|
|
Ethics_Gradient posted:How many rolls of film worth are we talking? About 7 shoeboxes' worth of prints and negatives. It's a good suggestion, but I think I am happy to do a handful every now and then - there's 30 years of stuff in those boxes, so it's nothing I need to hurry with. I'll plod through them whenever I get bored and am watching youtube videos. Plus, I'm going to have to organise them all and then decide which get medium and which get high quality scans and that will take almost as long as the scanning itself. What do people suggest for scanning settings for a) P&S random holiday crap and b) something significant that deserves better quality and c) occasional works of art? (Both negs and prints)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 10:50
|
|
|
spog posted:What do people suggest for scanning settings for a) P&S random holiday crap and b) something significant that deserves better quality and c) occasional works of art? Since P+S probably implies 35mm film, you still want to be running in 3200 dpi mode (35mm is a very small format and home scanners have trouble getting enough resolution off the film). If it's MF stuff that's not shot on a particularly sharp camera, 1600 dpi will be a bit faster, but you might as well scan it as sharp as you can. 6400 dpi mode is terrifically slow and you're not getting anywhere near that anyway - remember the scanner can only do about 2300 dpi at best anyway. You might be losing a very slight amount of resolution in 3200 mode but probably nothing significant (especially on the V500), so really that is just your default mode. If they're color negatives/slides, you can do infrared cleaning, although that can damage sharpness a bit it's probably not noticeable. True B+W negatives and Kodachrome don't work with infrared cleaning, it thinks the image is dust and the algorithm goes haywire trying to clean it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:24
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:
Thanks. Yeah, should have said that most of the stuff was color negatives (Kodacolor Gold 200 was my film of choice, except for when the green of Fujicolor seduced me) and I am hoping that my filing system means that I can scan from the negatives, rather than the prints (I was pretty good at looking after negatives) So, 3200 dpi for all the scans with infrared cleaning only if they are dirty? Any other settings you recommend? Looks like I'll be getting approx 5MB jpegs for each image, which seem a good balance. If it is a Work of Art, bump it up to 6400 and have a cup of tea while it scans?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 11:54
|
|
|
spog posted:If it is a Work of Art, bump it up to 6400 and have a cup of tea while it scans? I think 6400 is relatively pointless on these scanners. The bottleneck is the optical pathway, not the CCD. It might be very marginally better, but I'd be astonished if there was more than a 5% or 10% difference in resolution, which you'd have to be looking at 100% blowups to see. In practice it's just running up your scan times and increasing your storage/processing requirements. So, use it on Works of Art if you really want, but personally I think it's just a security blanket, I scan everything at 3200 on my V500 (which admittedly doesn't even hit 1600 dpi anyway). If you want to be mathematical about it, the Nyquist Rate is the amount of resolution necessary to sample a discrete signal without aliasing, and that's 2x the frequency. So if the optical resolution is 2300 dpi, then 4800 dpi should be mathematically sufficient to capture the data present in that signal. Anything past that is pushing on a string at best and almost certainly just placebo. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Sep 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 12:11
|
|
|
It’s all fake resolution at that point so don’t bother just buy a better scanner
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 13:06
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I think 6400 is relatively pointless on these scanners. The bottleneck is the optical pathway, not the CCD. It might be very marginally better, but I'd be astonished if there was more than a 5% or 10% difference in resolution, which you'd have to be looking at 100% blowups to see. In practice it's just running up your scan times and increasing your storage/processing requirements. Wild EEPROM posted:It’s all fake resolution at that point so don’t bother just buy a better scanner Ah, gotcha. I was confused for a while because Epson quotes quote:Optical Resolution: 6400 dpi with Epson MatrixCCD I did briefly price up one of these on ebay, but the postage and packaging was a little too high: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:Not shot for a while. Used to mainly shoot cars for ads and motorsport. Have you actually sold your Canon lenses yet? Anything worth keeping? You could always adapt onto the Sony - as someone pointed out to me in the Mirrorless thread, the Sony A7r III actually handles the razor sharm Canon 85 1.2L better than a 5d4. If you were open to adapters you could bring EF glass to FE. I am considering this very same transaction myself. I can't tear myself away from Canon for internal BS brand loyalty reasons but after looking at the miss rate from my 7D at my friend's wedding (as a guest) last weekend, I'm not saving much. For travel, I always prefer a zoom as sometimes zooming with your feet isn't an option. Also, how about a Samyang/Rokinon 35 2.8. Only 85g and 1.3" long. Not quite a pancake but with the 18mm flange on full frame, it's not going to get much more compact.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Question regarding thorium lenses. I read that you can use a UV light to get rid of the yellowing - my Takumar 55 1.8 has quite a yellow cast but I don’t have one. Could I just leave it out in the sun for the day, if so how long would it need to get more back to normal and away from the yellow tint is has now?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
Several weeks from what I've seen. Not a huge fan of leaving a lens to cook in the sun; especially a lens using old lubricants that love to vaporize and condense all over the inside of your glass. You can apparently get far more rapid effect from a strong LED lamp. The one most commonly cited being the Ikea Jansjo. Seems to work from providing a better concentration of light to the small surface area of your lens. Also doesn't heat up. Supposedly works within just a few days. I received one of these lamps today and also have that same lens that is quite yellow; going to see how well this lamp works.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2018 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
Think I'll do the 50mm f1.4 first. Its got the worst case of pee lens: This is how its setup and I'll see how its doing in 48 hours or so: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2018 04:40
|
|