Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,445   Posts: 1,570,024   Online: 900
      
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 98
  1. #71
    q_x
    q_x is offline
    q_x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    165
    Lamar, Welcome to the world of imaging without a ground glass!
    The photos look OK, there's something wrong with corner sharpness (there's a twig disturbing the frame in the upper right corner for example), but it's maybe me being picky. This is how I see a Jupiter should work, it's even too sharp sometimes, mine is way softer.

    Frame offset, well, looks serious this time. This is what I've got in my Kiev, plus uneven spacing every third frame or so - one just about to overlap, another one twice wider, than it should. The Kiev is no longer here...

    If you can live buying bulk film and loading it into modded/vintage cassettes, this may solve the issue cheaply. Also, there should be something like 0.6mm of washers in the film chamber, removable, but it's usually not enough to fix this issue. I've also seen something about cutting the corner of a lightseal from a canister, tension the spring in the back plate, magick like that, and you're using Kodak already... People have same issues with Leicas and Contaxes, again it's an issue worth of a separate thread in this forum, as I'm curious myself (and I have an old Soviet reloadable cassette in my Zorki C, but I won't process it in a month or two).

    Common prices in Poland: 30USD+ for the simplest TLR or folder, 100USD+ for Yashica/Rolleicord/Moskva(!!!), 200-300USD for a Contax, 300-400 for a cheapest Leica, 80 for a Flexaret or a Seagull, 25USD+ for any Pentax body, 15 USD for FSU RFs with a lens on, twice more for a Kiev with a lens, FSU SLRs for under 10USD, sometimes with a body cap (Helios type) on, 5-7USD for a Smena. Beaten up but working, "buy now", not auctions. My old Praktica went for under 50 cents (broken plate around the lens mount, shutter needing CLA), Zenits, Smenas etc. are basically perceived as rubbish here, cause maybe in some sense it is like so.

    I'm still looking for service manuals (free, downloadable) for "local" models of M42 SLRs, Prakticas are of most interest, being abundant, reliable and cheap where I live. Meizenberg book and few Pentax manuals is pretty much the only thing I've found, which is a pity, but it will have to suffice for a while (checked here already: http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/index-en.html ). M42 mount is kinda native to his part of Europe, Pentax gear is just better in terms of IQ and service manuals, so this is where I landed. There are Zeints with K-mount... Not sure about how sturdy my cameras will be, but it always depends on a given item, not only a brand or a model.
    Use the Force, Luke!

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    215
    I can explain the corner softness. It comes from the lens on my scanner. It is noticeable in every scan I make that should be sharp in the corners. When I first discovered it I was blaming the lenses until I noted the pattern was the same regardless of aperture or lens. If I remember correctly I made some marks on a negative at the corners that should have been sharp but they were a bit fuzzy when scanned. Also the grain goes soft there as well which indicates the softness is not from the camera lens. Another scanning problem I have encountered is a small hint of a double image / softness in very sharp, high contrast areas. It comes from internal reflection related to the glass plate over the ccd. The ghosting is worse on reversal film though and is barely noticeable with negative film. I sent the scanner back to Nikon for cleaning and service but there was no change. I feel certain the lenses are good in the corners.

    Here's a full uncropped scan from a 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor at f/11. It shows that same problem.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20131114-01 Tmax 100 FT2 01 full scan frame.jpg 
Views:	7 
Size:	715.4 KB 
ID:	78409



    Also for the rangefinder type shooting in general I have found framing requires a bit of a different approach as well. Most of my shots were not framed well, requiring more cropping than I would have been doing with my SLR shots of the same. It will just take a bit of practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by q_x View Post
    Lamar, Welcome to the world of imaging without a ground glass!
    The photos look OK, there's something wrong with corner sharpness (there's a twig disturbing the frame in the upper right corner for example), but it's maybe me being picky. This is how I see a Jupiter should work, it's even too sharp sometimes, mine is way softer.
    Last edited by Lamar; 12-13-2013 at 08:07 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #73
    q_x
    q_x is offline
    q_x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    165
    My super-cheap scanner is providing me with images of limited palette, flat, black shadows and one edge is a bit darker, than the other. At least it's quick. But I'm not serious about scanning, I'd rather print, but I need to make a selection somehow, contact prints are a no-go for me.
    So I guess one may live with soft corners...

    Yups, diopter-adjustable combined viewfinder/rangefinder of those cameras is not the best tool to determine frame contents. I've had serious problems also with Kiev - horizontally it was all OK, but vertically I was sometimes wrong, even by about 20% of the frame, that's with landscapes, framed carefully on a tripod. This still puzzles me. I've been writing about sketching what goes into every frame and what's left outside. That's the fastest method to learn I know of to get a grip on that issue, at least to some degree. I've found what I see is slightly more, than what goes onto the film, it's better than the other way around, cause if needed, I can even make a mask and slide it behind the top cover.

    Cheers!
    Use the Force, Luke!

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    215
    I found three washers you mention and removed them. I think maybe this is enough to help. I did mess up though and did not see where the one, very small, thin washer goes. it fell off without me noticing it. I re-assembled with it between the set screw collar and the diopter adjuster on the top of the body. Is that correct?

    Quote Originally Posted by q_x View Post
    Also, there should be something like 0.6mm of washers in the film chamber, removable, but it's usually not enough to fix this issue.

  5. #75

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    215
    Removing the washers looks to have resolved the film track angle in the 3C. It seems to sit in the body just as it does in the 4. I'll shoot another roll to see. Thanks for the advice!!!!


    Edit: I'm too used to metered bodies. I loaded the film and put the back on the camera then started to set the ISO. It took a second to realize I couldn't do that...........
    Last edited by Lamar; 12-13-2013 at 09:23 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Lamar View Post
    Scans from the Zorki-3C with the Jupiter-8. Kodak Tri-X 400 developed in XTOL.

    Attachment 78400 Attachment 78401 Attachment 78402

    Attachment 78403 Attachment 78404 Attachment 78405

    Attachment 78406


    And the only thing that bothers me about this camera is the film offset. The 4 wasn't too bad but the film is really offset in the 3C. q_x, i believe you mentioned the older ones were worse about this. I have seen it first hand now.

    Attachment 78407
    Looks like the contrast issue is resolved!

    As for the film offset, I think this is an issue of different dimensions of modern film cannister vs original reloadable cassettes; at least it is in the Canon I have. I solved it temporarily by making a ~.5mm flexible plastic washer to go between the bottom of the (Kodak) film spool and the recess in which it sits on the camera's baseplate. You camera is obviously a bit different.
    Last edited by E. von Hoegh; 12-13-2013 at 10:11 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #77
    q_x
    q_x is offline
    q_x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    165
    I certainly can't see any small washer, so if it's there, it was well hidden
    Glad it helped!
    Use the Force, Luke!

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    215
    I actually stuck a bit of fuzzy side velcro cut into the shape of a washer to the film back locking lug on the film canister side to make sure it stays pushed up. Hope it works.....

  9. #79

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Lamar View Post
    I actually stuck a bit of fuzzy side velcro cut into the shape of a washer to the film back locking lug on the film canister side to make sure it stays pushed up. Hope it works.....
    That's essentially what I did, except I used a disc of plastic cut from a yogurt container. Eventually, I would like to get a set of the correct reloadable casettes (anyone out ther know for certain if the Canon II series will accept Leica casettes? I get mixed info from the 'net) and bulk load B&W film. For commercial cannisters, I'll make a couple delrin or maybe brass/aluminum cups to snap onto the botton of the film spool.

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    215
    I just developed my film from the 3C after pulling the washers. It's much better now, no more angle and its better aligned, barely touching the holes now, if at all. That washer trick made the difference. Thanks for the tips again q_z, and E. von!!

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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