Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,661   Posts: 1,481,592   Online: 944
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    New Jersey (again)
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,932
    The camera has a very narrow base rangefinder, and I think that you can expect only so much accuracy because of it -- even when coupled with a 35mm lens.

  2. #12
    Aristotle80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Baton Rouge and New Orleans
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    Images
    3
    I dunno, this has never been a problem with my XA. Accurate focus and ample depth of field have been the rule. That said, I usually use my rangefinders for subjects between 5 feet and infinity. I DID have two or three times when the electromagnetic shutter "froze", but a few swift whacks into the palm of the hand cleared it up. Perhaps when someone else did the same thing the rangefinder shifted a bit? I did read about the sticky shutter solution on the web many years ago, so it's out there. The focus nub moves so little to begin with...If it's really out of spec its possible someone took it apart and reassembled it wrong sometime in the last 30 years. Stranger things have happened.
    I confess I'm a gear nut within my price range. ;)
    Nikon FM2n, FG, FG20, N2000, Nikkormat, Olympus Stylus Epic
    Minox 35EL, Voigtlander Bessa-L
    Yashica-D TLR 6x6, Seagull TLR 6x6
    Agfa Isolette 6x6, Welmy 6x6
    Kodak Tourist 6x9 Anaston lens
    http://www.wendelstout.com/

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Calgary, AB, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    198
    The rangefinder on my XA once failed altogether (secondary image did not move) on a long trip to Asia. Since I was shooting mostly scenics with 400 ISO film I did OK by using the distance scale on the lens and smaller f-stops. When I returned and took the camera to a technician for repair (those were the days) he told me a part had broken and that the rangefinder mechanism on the XA was quite delicate. Since then I've guarded the camera against bumps and have had no trouble.

  4. #14
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,871
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    121
    anyone ever had a sticky meter needle?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by EASmithV View Post
    anyone ever had a sticky meter needle?
    Not yet, but it seems like my camera is slowly metering lower than my handheld meter tells me, at least via the indicator in the viewfinder. Hopefully just a tired battery.

  6. #16
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,871
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    121
    my meter keeps sticking to the top of the display, its getting annoying. does anyone still work on them, or is it better to just buy another?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  7. #17
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,164
    Oh, grommi, the density in my head has suddenly subsided. Now I finally 'get' it.

    OK, with many RFs the close focus is surprisingly 'off'. I use a tape measure, measured from almost the rear of the camera (i.e., film plane) and find that I often have to make an adjustment as to what the RF is telling me. (Remember, the film plane 'rules' here.) In the OP's immediate case it would be very interesting to find where infinity actually is on his camera's distance scale. In other words, with aperture wide open, take pictures (rigidly mounted camera) of detailed, very distant (at least 1/4 mile) stationary items (like skyscrapers) at these four settings: infinity, between infinity and 30 ft, 30 ft, between 30 ft and 15 ft. Then process these four negatives and put them into your enlarger, rack the enlargement distance to maximum, and, with a magnifying glass, take a critical look at both the center and far corner of each negative image in order to determine the optimum infinity focus.

    If BOTH close focus and infinity are off, all you need do is ascertain that they are off in the SAME direction. Unfortunately, sometimes when the camera RF (which can be incorrect) focuses CLOSER than the film plane finally reveals (in the processed negative), infinity cannot be fully achieved because you cannot bring the lens close enough. (In other words, if the actual negative reveals a more distant actual focus than the shorter, apparent distance shown on the RF image, it will also reveal a more 'distant' actual focus on the negative when you set the RF to infinity. Of course, this is this situation is rare but has happened; however, depth of field usually comes to the rescue here. But, nevertheless, it is an interesting (and revealing) experiment. Remember, what the RF 'says' is not necessarily what the film plane (i.e., negative image) reveals.

    There are other situations whereby the infinity setting is absolutely accurate BUT... the close focus is not. This is a dilemma and must sometimes force one to revert to scale focusing and, unfortunately again, a scale that you make based upon the ACTUAL close focusing distance that you find with the tape measure. For this I take a rigid acticle (I find an LP record jacket ideal here) and place it 45 degrees from the rigidly mounted camera. I focus upon the center text (measured precisely in either inches or CM) and slightly underexpose and overdevelop so that I will get a nice, contrasty negative. Then, the moment of truth comes when I put the negative in the enlarger (again, racked up to full enlargement). With a magnifying glass I carefully study the image and find that the ideal focus could well be either further from, or close than, the dead center focused upon. - David Lyga

    NOTE: EASmithV: the 'sitcky' meter needle in an XA I have found NOT to be 'sticky' but, again, a malfunction of the internal circuitry. In other words, not a physical impairment but a hesitation with the circuitry. Try pressing again on the exposure button. In your case you COULD be correct but the XA has annoyances of this type and is the reason that I am cautious when using them. - David Lyga
    Last edited by David Lyga; 02-22-2013 at 04:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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