|
What does the thread think about the various pentacon six system cameras and lenses? Something about the giant SLR form factor and second-world Zeiss lenses intrigues me. Are the Carl Zeiss Jena lenses about as good as the stuff Fuji & Pentax put out for their MF film cameras back in the day? I understand that the bodies are kind of a crap shoot in terms of reliability.
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
We talk about cheap and compact medium format cameras.. What about a Lubitel 166  (Not the overpriced lomography remake, the original that can be had on eBay for $40.) Its pretty simple, should work as long as it's intact, and actually makes nice photos if the taking lens was kept in good condition. Sure it's an f/4.5 with a maximum shutter speed of 1/250, but you're going to want to stop down anyway to get sharp results with that Lomo glass.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
I decided to flush some money down the toilet (buy a Lubitel 166) on impulse. It's just so small and light. I dream that I'll take it to places that I wouldn't want to lug my big MF camera. It has a red frame counter window on the back. Is that safe to use with color film? I've got a feeling that this thing is going to have some light leaks anyway. I just hope the lens is in decent condition.. I've actually seen a lot of fairly nice sharp photos taken with this type of camera.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Well I could but, as I understand it, Soviet cameras had extremely variable build quality and even good ones had a lot of idiosyncracies (like if you adjust the shutter speed without cocking the shutter first, it breaks, if you turn some controls in the wrong direction or in the wrong order, they break). Arax say that they fix those problems, plus a proper warranty is nice too. The 88 is considered generally less precise than the 60. Most of time it's the shutter that you'll have problems with on a Kiev. ARAX supposedly make an upgraded 88 with metal shutter but I haven't found it on their website yet. I've never used an 88, but I've inadvertently read a lot of forum posts about them while looking for information about the (supposedly more reliable) 60. I have yet to come across a 60 that doesn't have banding at 1/1000. I ordered one from ARAX and it was actually much worse than the eBay crap shoot cheapo model I ordered before. Plus it's been like pulling teeth to get them to take it back for service, even though there's a black smear across 1/3rd of the frame at 1000 & 500, noticeably uneven exposure down to 125, and the shutter curtains overlap too far at resting & ready position. (Remember this is supposed to be more reliable model than the 88) If you're in Kiev, though, you might have better luck getting resolution from them if your camera has an issue. And not having to pay shipping makes the price pretty attractive. And it's definitely worth it to get an upgraded model with MLU. But consider just getting a 645 model if you think you're going to use the higher shutter speeds very often. The apparently common shutter banding problems manifest around the left & right edges of the 6x6 frame, and the 645 mask crops out the problem areas.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Thanks for the advice on the Kievs and specifically the Arax rebuilds. I think I'm going to pull the trigger on one of the 88s. I'm not going to lie, the idea of shooting with old Soviet kit is a big draw for me and, while I appreciate that there are better built options at a similar price, I'm going on feels here. Trying to get good pictures with esoteric kit is a goal in itself (my pictures will still be bad even with a good camera). I'm of the same sentiment, and am actually a little jealous that you're over there and can have your pick of the crop from from the local second-hand market, let alone the surplus-refurbishing factories. I still don't know how you buy one new with it, but on the ARAX webpage there is a titanium shutter upgrade available for the 88. It's not cheap, except in comparison to other high-end MF cameras, but it's one potential solution to the shutter problem those cameras are apparently plagued with. And you've probably done your research, but don't forget about MLU and pentacon mount compatibility: two features that will make your kiev experience a lot nicer, IMO.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:things to ignore: how bad my white balance is That is a baller thing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
e: nvm
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Mamiya M645 (1000S or not) is a.) Good except the shutter can be unreliable b.) Cheap & prone to failure c.) A piece of poo poo d.) Just fine e.) Durable and robust f.) Generally ok for slide film, even g.) 645 lol (Choose all that apply) I want something that is small but also MF, not as expensive as an MF RF, can use my Pentacon Six lenses, and has quality accessible wide-angle lenses. Would also be great if it had a reliable shutter that didn't give me weird exposure on the edges like my Kiev-60. That thing is fine for portraits & such but I am envisioning something that I can take on long hikes and shoot Velvia landscapes with. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Does the lol 645 principle still hold up for optical printing? I get where it comes from. I've definitely found good high-resolution digitizations of 35mm negs to come pretty close to some 3:2 crops of my 6x6 photos. I think different scanning methods influence my results though. My old boss blew up some landscapes he shot on 35mm Ektachrome to ~36x24 and while pretty nice i would probably want to go MF to make similar-sized prints. Actually printing and displaying stuff is where I want to go. It's why I've felt restricted by the Kiev. It works fine when you can touch up stuff in Photoshop. I don't have a lot invested in p6 lenses but I really like what I've got. P6 bodies are just a little big for my intended application. Arax-kiev 88CM is tempting but their upgraded shutter model, which is what I'd have to go for, is pricy. I guess gsw690 would be another to consider. Interchangeable lenses wouldn't be a concern there. And is optical printing still done anywhere today outside of private and academic darkrooms? My local 'film-centric' camera shop only prints from scans. I used to do my own b&w prints in my school's darkroom but for color especially I would be fine with getting optical prints made by a lab. Edit: but is there really any appreciable qualitative difference in digital vs optical enlargements of color negatives? Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree... unless I set up my own b&w printing darkroom. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Jun 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
So if I let go of the P6 adaptability requirement, and also say gently caress it to 645 and 6x6 (because I want to shoot wide and whats the point if I'm cropping 6x6 to 3:2-2.25 or wider), then what's the light and/or cheap(er) option that still has a some reputation for reliability? Does such a thing exist? RB 67? The Pentax seems like a beast. Guessing maybe the Fuji is probably the closest I can get to ticking all the boxes. This seems like a pretty good deal, actually. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Jun 30, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
I guess it's hard to tell, just looking at pictures on eBay. My Kiev is a lot lighter than that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Light and portable. poo poo! I bought an rb67. One popped up on local CL for a pretty good price and I was able to check it out and verify that everything was working, so I've basically thrown out every single criterion I started with and saddled myself with this behemoth. Light and portable? No. P6 lens comparable? No. 645 format? No. Comes with a wide angle lens? No. (But the 65mm K/L & 50mm C are dirt cheap in camera gear terms) I like that it has leaf shutter lenses, and so far I've had no trouble with uneven exposure across the frame. Which is more important to me than anything else. The viewfinder is huge and bright. And it came with a grip so I can carry it around easily, although it's heavy as hell. Vibrations are well-dampened by the bulk, but it only has T mode so long exposures are going to be a bit more of a pain. Really happy with the pictures though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Just got this today: Oh man I've never seen one with a 65mm before. Edit: nope, not by much SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Jul 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 13:29
|
|
