Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,780   Posts: 1,671,196   Online: 817
      
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    Hi, it is unusual to have any problem with the Magna Sight. It is really a work horse. It is easy to use and not at all expensive.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    Try a Magna Sight, easy to use, not expensive, great quality

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    London, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    130
    If , as I have , you have spent many hours tinkering with autofocus enlargers (Leica V35, Leitz Focomat 11c, and Durst DA 900 in my case), using a Focoblitz precision grain magnifier as seen in picture, you will have learnt that the only sure solution is glass top and bottom, As it happens I have AN on top and plain below but I haven't tried AN above and below, or plain above and below. Perhaps I am lucky but dust is not a problem for me. a squeeze of my blower brush suffices and if a spot appears a very fine brush and Martin's ink eradicates the irritation.
    Richard
    PS To learn more about the Focoblitz, type Focoblitz in the search box in APUG Home Page
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Focoblitz.jpg  

  4. #34
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,821
    You need to see the corners of the projected image. As far as I know the Peak 1 is the only one that allows that; therefore the only one worthwhile to use.

  5. #35
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,323
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    Most people will recommend a Peak model. I have their top-of-the-line model (shown in b) and rarely use it. Its edge-to-edge capability is impressive but hardly ever needed with a well-aligned enlarger and glass carrier. Its 10x magnification is too low to identify the grain in my negatives at my typical 5x enlargements.

    I prefer the much cheaper MicroSight (shown in a). It is less sophisticated but has 20x magnification and also a very sturdy aluminum body.

    Depends on what you need and what you're willing to spend.
    +1exactly my experience.I have both for sale;make an offer
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    163
    Images
    4
    Ralph, sending PM for the Microsight.
    These are The Good Ole Days!

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    London, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    130
    My post just above this was meant to be in the Darkroom Equipment thread about flatness and double glass carriers. Sorry
    Richard

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dunedin,New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    272
    I had to replace the line on my focuser - instead of monofilament, I used a hair from my head. On the principle that ,for best accuracy,the thinner the better.

  9. #39
    RobC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Sceptered Isle
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    796
    The peak 2000 retails @ $384.50 from their own site. All that finder gives you over other finders is the ability to look in the corners and all that does is prove to you they equi sharp or not.

    Instead of paying that amount, buy a Versalab parallel for $190 (nearly $200 cheaper)

    http://www.versalab.com/server/photo...s/parallel.htm

    this will provide you with the means to align your lens perpendicular to neg stage and easel which trumps a peak finder by a long way.

    Then all you need is cheap focus finder for under the lens. I use a paterson. I have a peak and a versalb parallel too. I find the paterson is perfectly good and easier to find focus than the peak. The Versalab is indespensible.
    An old dog learning new tricks

  10. #40
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,821
    Too many variables to hand one's hat on the laser alignment providing sharp 4 corners. For example are all 4 feet of the Varsalab on the surface? Is the paper easel flat or does the versalab wobble on it. Has the Versalab been knocked out of alignment? Is the front barrel of the enlarger lens perpenducular to the optical axis? Is there any play in the negative carrier? Is the lensboard parallel to the negative stage at all points of bellows travel? Is the head parallel to the baseboard at all heights? etc.

    What about perspective correction? The Versalab won't help there, you need the Peak-1.

    Anyway, I think the Peak 1 is more value than the Versalab, but I have the Versalab and two Peak-1s so you really need both.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin