Looking like a camera fault?

Peter B

Peter B

Double Numpty
Messages
5,969
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
Yes
I bought a Canon Z135 zoom compact recently, and was happy with the b&w film I tested it with. I ran a roll of Fuji Superia X-tra 400 through it last weekend, and it has come back with a dark band across the frame on some of the film. Now the film has not been processsed well by Jessops, but that doesn't seem to be the issue with the band as it doesn't appear on all frames or all of the film length, and is much worse in some of the photos. Here's a scan of 3 adjacent frames where the band is visible near the bottom on the outer frames, but not the one in the middle. Any thoughts? :thinking:

2019-06-28-0031-copy-t.jpg
And here's a particularly bad one, unprocessed after scan.

2019-06-28-0048-tp.jpg
 
Last edited:
When discussing film faullts, it is of more use to photograph the negatives. That way we can see how the film rebates are and how the edge markings have been developed (or not).

Do these bands extend past the image area? If the camera has a focal plane shutter (I don't think it does) it could be the shutter. Whatever it is, it is occurring at the top of the film gate.
 
h'mm as the B\W results being OK I'd guess it's Jessops fault.
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
Do you have a home scanner to see if it's Jessop's fault......no need to scan all just a few.
Click to expand...
Hi Brian, these were scanned by me as Jessops scanner is broken. I did them on the flatbed originally and then scanned selected frames on the Minolta film scanner.
 
Peter B said:
Hi Brian, these were scanned by me as Jessops scanner is broken. I did them on the flatbed originally and then scanned selected frames on the Minolta film scanner.
Click to expand...

I changed my post as stupid me forgot it's a negative fault and re-scanning won't prove anything :rolleyes:
 
The other thing that strikes me is that it was a very sunny day, and I had the camera switched on/lens extended for a while. This is because the Z135 has to have the flash disabled by a 3 button push every time you switch it on, which is a pest. :rolleyes:
 
Well usually for a light leak then a bit of the neg would be black therefore the print would be white (or shades or white depending how severe the leak).......but if the rollers are not cleaned properly in the dev m\c it can give smudgy tram lines .
 
Those lines are consistent over several adjacent frames. They are also pale on the negative which means we can rule out a light leak. The first three frames you show do not have the defect but the last five do. I also note that the last five frames are nearer to the end of the roll - does the fault occur any nearer to the beginning of the roll? If not, I would suspect poor development technique. I do not know how many films Jessops develop each week or how much value Jessops give to this income stream but some places give the job to poorly trained juniors who cannot run the kit properly. Dirty rollers have been mentioned. Low chemical levels can also have an effect as can old chemicals and poor agitation.
 
john.margetts said:
Those lines are consistent over several adjacent frames. They are also pale on the negative which means we can rule out a light leak. The first three frames you show do not have the defect but the last five do. I also note that the last five frames are nearer to the end of the roll - does the fault occur any nearer to the beginning of the roll? If not, I would suspect poor development technique. I do not know how many films Jessops develop each week or how much value Jessops give to this income stream but some places give the job to poorly trained juniors who cannot run the kit properly. Dirty rollers have been mentioned. Low chemical levels can also have an effect as can old chemicals and poor agitation.
Click to expand...
Thanks John and Brian. The outer 2 of the first 3 frames have them when you see the positive, and there's maybe a hint in the middle frame as well.

2019-06-28-0031-copy-t.jpg
The line only appears around frame 18, so you're right about it being later in the film. Tragically, Jessops could only offer development as their broken scanner meant they couldn't scan or print, so I have a horrible suspicion that the processor was only fired up for my 3 films. Having said that, the sticky numbers on the negs are not consecutive, so who knows?
The negs are grainy when scanned and don't look right, so I suspect a chemical issue of some sort. These films are obviously never going to improve, but I've just finished another roll of the Fuji through the Z135 and it'll be going to Filmdev on Tuesday with a note that there may be an issue with a line running through the frames. I hope not, as I'm hopeful of a few good shots on this roll and I'll not be back there in a hurry.:thinking:
 
Peter B said:
These films are obviously never going to improve, but I've just finished another roll of the Fuji through the Z135 and it'll be going to Filmdev on Tuesday with a note that there may be an issue with a line running through the frames. I hope not, as I'm hopeful of a few good shots on this roll and I'll not be back there in a hurry.:thinking:
Click to expand...

..but Peter you said the B\W film was OK and that should have been good enough to test the camera, But looking at your shots there is nothing unusual e.g. shooting into the sun.
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
..but Peter you said the B\W film was OK and that should have been good enough to test the camera, But looking at your shots there is nothing unusual e.g. shooting into the sun.
Click to expand...
Nothing unusual as far as I'm aware Brian, although it's my first roll of colour through it. Here's a straight scan from the b&w with only a reduction in size to post here, and no signs of any problem.

2019-06-08-0026-copy-tp2.jpg
 
john.margetts said:
I do not know how many films Jessops develop each week or how much value Jessops give to this income stream but some places give the job to poorly trained juniors who cannot run the kit properly. Dirty rollers have been mentioned. Low chemical levels can also have an effect as can old chemicals and poor agitation.
Click to expand...

I think this is the likely cause. I had similar bad experiences using Max Spielmann that I put down to the person in the shop being inexperienced at the film processing role. I suspect the same person would have been an absolute whizz at getting people connected to the printing machines with their phone or whatever as that is likely where much of their custom comes from, but I might have been the first person to ever ask this individual for film processing.

I did have better results at a different branch where the person who processed my images was older and so had possibly worked there for longer and had better experience of the film processing machines.

At the end of the day though, I wouldn't use any high street processor now unless they were also clearly knowlegeable (e.g. a shop also selling a wide range of film and film cameras might give me faith that they had an interest in making sure they did film processing well).
 
Last edited:
john.margetts said:
If the camera has a focal plane shutter (I don't think it does) it could be the shutter.
Click to expand...

I would put a small bet on this being the cause>

I had a camera ( I forget what model) which produced a similar fault however it seemed to depend upon what shutter speed was selected.
Turned out to be the focal plane shutter that was faulty
 
Asha said:
I would put a small bet on this being the cause>

I had a camera ( I forget what model) which produced a similar fault however it seemed to depend upon what shutter speed was selected.
Turned out to be the focal plane shutter that was faulty
Click to expand...
This isn't a focal plane shutter Asha. According to the manual, it's a "Fully automatic lens-shutter camera" with an "Electromagnetic drive shutter with combinable programs", so a fancy leaf-shutter type thingy.
 
Peter B said:
This isn't a focal plane shutter Asha. According to the manual, it's a "Fully automatic lens-shutter camera" with an "Electromagnetic drive shutter with combinable programs", so a fancy leaf-shutter type thingy.
Click to expand...

Well in that case the cause can only be due to an infestation of haggis inside the mechanics of the camera! :runaway::LOL:
 
Asha said:
Well in that case the cause can only be due to an infestation of haggis inside the mechanics of the camera! :runaway::LOL:
Click to expand...
Just checked the Troubleshooting section of the manual again, and you might have a point. :eek:
"H" is displayed in the LCD panel (obviously not enough space for the full haggis) -- This is a self-diagnosis display when reset is necessary.
Click to expand...
 
FishyFish said:
I got charged £15 by HMRC for my Secret Santa stuff that came from America last Christmas.
Click to expand...

:eek: What can you do when basic f4 bodies are being sold abroad (US and Japan)....overall this is going to work out a very expensive F4 maybe £180 total o_O
 
excalibur2 said:
:eek: What can you do when basic f4 bodies are being sold abroad (US and Japan)....overall this is going to work out a very expensive F4 maybe £180 total o_O
Click to expand...
Is that the total price for both to make one 'good' one?
 
Thank goodness for that, I thought for a moment that was the end cost of buying and importing a 45 dollar camera! Anyway, let's hope it's a good one when it arrives and I wish you much enjoyment in owning and using it... even if it is a Nikon! ;) :canon:
 
Mr Badger said:
Thank goodness for that, I thought for a moment that was the end cost of buying and importing a 45 dollar camera! Anyway, let's hope it's a good one when it arrives and I wish you much enjoyment in owning and using it... even if it is a Nikon! ;) :canon:
Click to expand...

Well the advantage of the F4 is that it can take any Nikon lens from old MF to modern AF (dunno how modern) and it's only neg is it can't take m42 screw lenses which the Canon can.
 
Asha said:
Yeah perhaps, but personally I prefer kit that can do less, but better! :exit::naughty::LOL::LOL:
Click to expand...
Well, Brian's F4 certainly managed to avoid repair better than any Canon I've ever owned! ;)

excalibur2 said:
What's the catch with this Canon as it seems cheap? :-
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-EO...012116?hash=item3fc66d9d54:g:YOEAAOSw4RNdGlMn
Click to expand...
Not exactly the sort of detailed description and reassurance of 'film tested' full working order that would tempt me to bid. Also, I believe it's the EOS 1v that tends to sell for two or three hundred £, rather than the older 1 or 1n.
 
What happens if you pays customs etc for something and it's faulty do you get your money back if returning to original owner and how does the original owner abroad avoid customs to get his goods back ......h'mm get out of the EU and have a trade deal with the US and Japan etc and maybe we can get things cheaper.
 
excalibur2 said:
Well the advantage of the F4 is that it can take any Nikon lens from old MF to modern AF (dunno how modern) and it's only neg is it can't take m42 screw lenses which the Canon can.
Click to expand...

Probably NOT "G" lenses - their apertures are electronically controlled rather than having a lever/ring (IIRC).

[QUOTE="excalibur2, post: 8472588, member: 17847"]What's the catch with this Canon as it seems cheap? :-
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-EO...012116?hash=item3fc66d9d54:g:YOEAAOSw4RNdGlMn[/QUOTE]

It's a Canon? :p
 
excalibur2 said:
do you get your money back if returning to original owner
Click to expand...

Doubt it,!
Perhaps it's possible to request a refund although I suspect it won't be a simple process.

excalibur2 said:
how does the original owner abroad avoid customs to get his goods back
Click to expand...

No idea, but that's his concern!

excalibur2 said:
.h'mm get out of the EU and have a trade deal with the US and Japan etc and maybe we can get things cheaper.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maube not.
I'd be surprised if the UK government didn't still demand their "cut" regardless of their EU standing.
 
Heading back to the original question, I think this resized-only shot from Filmdev pretty much nails it. Big pat on the back for those who identified it as a Jessops processing fault. (y)
000096350034-copy-tp.jpg
 
Peter B said:
Heading back to the original question, I think this resized-only shot from Filmdev pretty much nails it. Big pat on the back for those who identified it as a Jessops processing fault. (y)
View attachment 249141
Click to expand...
It's a Canon, Peter; how could you ever have doubted it? ;)

Banter aside, glad you got to the source of the problem; now you can concentrate on enjoying your camera.
 
Mr Badger said:
It's a Canon, Peter; how could you ever have doubted it? ;)

Banter aside, glad you got to the source of the problem; now you can concentrate on enjoying your camera. avoiding Jessops for processing.
Click to expand...
Fixed that. :mad: ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top