OFFICIAL I HAVE A NEW (FILM RELATED) TOY THREAD!!

i am using 1999 dated FUJI ASTIA 220 size -- rated 100 ASA box speed -- I had a couple done professionally and was amazed how they came out -- albeit with a lower D-Max due to age fogging BUT the Colours can be corrected in Software after scanning . So I rate outdated VELVIA though at 40 ASA . If you over-develop in First Developer you get an even LOWER D-Max so do not Push Develop.
Outdated VELVIA ---
Wedding Bus and The Traffic Warden.jpgOne For The Ladies.jpg
 
pentaxpete said:
i am using 1999 dated FUJI ASTIA 220 size -- rated 100 ASA box speed -- I had a couple done professionally and was amazed how they came out -- albeit with a lower D-Max due to age fogging BUT the Colours can be corrected in Software after scanning . So I rate outdated VELVIA though at 40 ASA . If you over-develop in First Developer you get an even LOWER D-Max so do not Push Develop.
Outdated VELVIA ---
View attachment 403632View attachment 403633
Click to expand...

I presume that's Velvia 50 Peter, not Velvia 100??

Will bear this in mind as I have some expired Velvia in my stash somewhere.
 
Probably 3 months since I last bought a camera so time to remedy that...

rsz_img_20231101_202602124.jpg

There are a number on the auction site but aside from the case this crucially came with the proprietary take up spools (on the left - 9 inc 1 in camera) and the dispensing canisters (on the right - 10 inc 1 in camera).

rsz_1img_20231101_202651255.jpg

The steel bar with red dot extends to the right which simultaneously winds the film on and cocks the shutter. Pushing the bar back fires the shutter.

rsz_img_20231101_202759846.jpg

Aperture dial (f 3.5- 16) at the front, distance at the rear.

IMG_20231101_203231020.jpg


Left is frame counter with the other for shutter speed (B, 1/25, 1/50, 1/100 & 1/200 - limited but usable. The updated Mikroma II came with 1/400)
rsz_img_20231101_203309514.jpg

The seller said the winding, cocking, firing bar was stiff. It is but loosening nicely after multiple actions. Winds on nicely with aperture and all shutter speeds working. I have about 60ft of single perf Orwo Un54 (ISO 100) and about the same of Double X. Designed to work with perf 16mm but should work with non-perf as the take up spool also winds on film.

It's a lovely little thing (approx 1 1/2" high, 1 1/8" deep & 2 7/8" wide with the lens protruding a further 1/2"). If the wind/cock/fire bar doesn't free off I'll see if I can get this Meopta Mikroma serviced. Of course I'll post some pics if it works as designed.
 
Last edited:
Last night I spotted on freecycle an Epson V700. Figured it would be long gone but took a punt and two hours later, I had the beasty in my possession.
Little bit of what looks to be fungus (but not etching in like in lenses), it had no cables (but takes the same power adapter as my V500) and has no film holders.
I'm going to clean it up today and I've already tested it and it works like its supposed to, so I just need to get the film holders, and I'll have a fully working V700 :O
 
VirtualAdept said:
Last night I spotted on freecycle an Epson V700. Figured it would be long gone but took a punt and two hours later, I had the beasty in my possession.
Little bit of what looks to be fungus (but not etching in like in lenses), it had no cables (but takes the same power adapter as my V500) and has no film holders.
I'm going to clean it up today and I've already tested it and it works like its supposed to, so I just need to get the film holders, and I'll have a fully working V700 :O
Click to expand...
Good for you, I've never been disappointed by the V700, although the Epson Scan software is mediocre, to say the least.
 
ilikebowens said:
Just an A-1, nice condition however. The only issue is a broken battery door so I'm looking out for a spares or repair donor!
Click to expand...
A weakness with Canon A series and the T70 etc (not T90) are battery doors, apparently Canon didn't expect some gorillas were going to use their cameras.:rolleyes:
 
Keep an eye on the for sale section for a linhof super colour kardan.
 
The Toyo is a field camera and the Linhof is a monorail (or view camera).
The Linhof is easier to use and has a greater range of movements but is not as portable as the Toyo.
A young man would not have any issue with the Linhof but I'm old and can't carry heavy things all day.
 
Last edited:
Well, my camera turned up yesterday complete with revolving back and Rodenstock 180mm.
The bellows and lens look good.
Sadly the lens was mounted in an incorrect board so the dealer is shipping out another one today.

The dealer I bought this from, Analogue Cameras, was helpful but not particularly knowledgeable.
I discovered from the invoice that they are in actuality The Second Hand Darkroom.
 
jemdna said:
This may be a little premature but I've just completed a deal in the classifieds for a Praktica MTL5B :D

Going to attach my MIRAGE 100-200mm F5.6 and SIGMA 80-200mm and go for a wonder when it arrives :)

I love new goodies :p

Bry
Click to expand...
Thinking back over the years, my most productive time was when I was using early Pentax (SV,, S1aor a Spotmatic) and the Praktika range. Thjey were simple to operate with a reasonable meter with enough speeds to cover what we needed to do. Lenses almost always a selection (if we were lucky) of prime optics. If they could be found the Zeiss wide angles and telephotos they were enough. Pentax lenses were the creme de la creme. There was an advert that appeared on billboards which read 'Just hold a Pentax' accompanied by a picture of one of the Spotmatics. That says it all for me.
 
I think I was most productive when I bought a Zenit B and 50mm f2 lens. So, I have lots of negatives of stuff, mainly my young children from the early 1970's. I'm not saying that the pictures are wonderful or earth shattering but I wasn't afraid to just shoot what I saw. Nowadays I seem to be too constrained and wonder about how my often flawed shots will be viewed by others. To be honest, I think the digital obsession with perfect (?) sharpness, colour balance, lack of camera shake, theoretically correct composition and all that isn't an answer. Perhaps it sidelines creativity?

I don't want to open this thread to an argument based on this premise, by the way.
 
PeterSpencer said:
To be honest, I think the digital obsession with perfect (?) sharpness, colour balance, lack of camera shake, theoretically correct composition and all that isn't an answer. Perhaps it sidelines creativity?
Click to expand...
I've always worked on the principle that photography is about sharing what I've noticed. Technical quality is far down my list of priorities.
PeterSpencer said:
I don't want to open this thread to an argument based on this premise, by the way.
Click to expand...
Too late! The cookie has gone from the jar, to quote one of my American in-laws. ;)
 
auntiemaryscanary said:
It's a lovely little thing (approx 1 1/2" high, 1 1/8" deep & 2 7/8" wide with the lens protruding a further 1/2"). If the wind/cock/fire bar doesn't free off I'll see if I can get this Meopta Mikroma serviced. Of course I'll post some pics if it works as designed.
Click to expand...
I once saw a Mikroma in a North London camera shop.

I'd read about it in a magazine and, having used the Opemus enlarger for several years, thought it might be nice to try one. When I looked at it more closely, I decided that it was a bit too basic for me and 16mm frames were not really my thing.

In the end, I bought a nice little second hand Rollei B35 which was a little bit bigger but much nicer to use, especially the viewfinder.
 
How’s the viewfinder? Is it as big as they say?
 
Now if only they could make a SLR that was as compact, similar quality and as light. I found it difficult to get on with rangefinder cameras and separate viewfinder. I had use of an early double wind M3 which looked as if it had been used as a door stop and as rough as old boots. That is what mainly put me off rangefinder cameras.
 
Jammy Dodger said:
some don't get the 'Leica thing', but I seriously do!
Click to expand...
I don't think there's anything to get.

Leica reached its peak with the M3 - in my opinion the nicest rangefinder camera to use. Unfortunately, Leitz chose to cheapen the design with the M2 and the M4 seemed uncompetitive compared to Canon's 7 and Nikon's SP.

Now a M3 digital, with the original castings, rangefinder and controls; that might well have me reaching for the credit card... :)

Leica M3 with 90mm lens.jpg
 
When I was a British Soldier in Iserlohn, GERMANY in 1957-58 where I worked in the Path Lab of the Military Hospital in a Camera Dealer's window in the town was a LEICA M3 priced at 820 DM when the British got 11.5 DM to £1 -- do the maths -- but it was a FORTUNE for me on £6 -15 shillings a week and that was on Corporal's pay ! Also in the Canadian Maple Leaf Store they were selling NEW LEICA IIIf + 50mm f3.5 ELMAR for £45 !
 
@AndrewFlannigan how’s the canon P compared to the Leica m3? I’m asking because i Remember you telling that you owned one in the past. The fact that they’re both screw mount makes them comparable
 
Marino said:
The fact that they’re both screw mount makes them comparable
Click to expand...
They are not.

The M3 introduced the Leica bayonet mount (although a range of adapters enabled screw mount lenses to be fitted into the bayonet mount and retain rangefinder focussing).

As to comparisons, The Canon P is equivalent to the M2, having the three bright lines for 35mm, 50mm and 100mm. The M3 has switchable bright lines for 50mm, 90mm and 135mm and requires a 35mm with an auxilary "spectacle" finder to show the appropriate bright line.

The Canon P is very effective with the 35mm lens, which was the only one I used with mine. I think the finder is quite a lot better than the M2 - at least, than the M2 I owned. The M3 is superb with the 50mm lens and adequate with the 90mm. The 135mm finder is just about usable, in my opinion.

As to general construction and ease of use, it's swings and roundabouts, with the "P" scoring high, thanks to having a rewind lever and a hinged back, both of which the M3 (and the M2) lacks.
 
pentaxpete said:
When I was a British Soldier in Iserlohn, GERMANY in 1957-58 where I worked in the Path Lab of the Military Hospital in a Camera Dealer's window in the town was a LEICA M3 priced at 820 DM when the British got 11.5 DM to £1 -- do the maths -- but it was a FORTUNE for me on £6 -15 shillings a week and that was on Corporal's pay ! Also in the Canadian Maple Leaf Store they were selling NEW LEICA IIIf + 50mm f3.5 ELMAR for £45 !
Click to expand...
When I was there in Munster between 1977-80 the exchange rate was 4.5DM to the pound. I had a contact in the US Army who managed to get me a Mamiya c330 + a 55mm lens + 105mm lens+ a 180mm lens from the PX And even then the cost was about 1/3 of the UK price
 
Last edited:
pentaxpete said:
When I was a British Soldier in Iserlohn, GERMANY in 1957-58 where I worked in the Path Lab of the Military Hospital in a Camera Dealer's window in the town was a LEICA M3 priced at 820 DM when the British got 11.5 DM to £1 -- do the maths -- but it was a FORTUNE for me on £6 -15 shillings a week and that was on Corporal's pay ! Also in the Canadian Maple Leaf Store they were selling NEW LEICA IIIf + 50mm f3.5 ELMAR for £45 !
Click to expand...

So... what I understand from your comment here Pete, is that Leica's have actually never been cheaper and I should buy more of them? Interesting.... ;)
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
They are not.

The M3 introduced the Leica bayonet mount (although a range of adapters enabled screw mount lenses to be fitted into the bayonet mount and retain rangefinder focussing).

As to comparisons, The Canon P is equivalent to the M2, having the three bright lines for 35mm, 50mm and 100mm. The M3 has switchable bright lines for 50mm, 90mm and 135mm and requires a 35mm with an auxilary "spectacle" finder to show the appropriate bright line.

The Canon P is very effective with the 35mm lens, which was the only one I used with mine. I think the finder is quite a lot better than the M2 - at least, than the M2 I owned. The M3 is superb with the 50mm lens and adequate with the 90mm. The 135mm finder is just about usable, in my opinion.

As to general construction and ease of use, it's swings and roundabouts, with the "P" scoring high, thanks to having a rewind lever and a hinged back, both of which the M3 (and the M2) lacks.
Click to expand...
I thought it's screw mount, ha :LOL:
I read that the m3 has 0.91x viewfinder magnification and the canon P 1x
is that correct?
You see i own a Bessa R and even though it looks "cooler" than a canon P it's probably not as well built.
Looking to get a canon P instead and keep the screw mount lens i already have.
Probably will buy a Canon P before i sell the Bessa in case there's something i don't like.
Thx for the info!
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
They are not.

The M3 introduced the Leica bayonet mount (although a range of adapters enabled screw mount lenses to be fitted into the bayonet mount and retain rangefinder focussing).

As to comparisons, The Canon P is equivalent to the M2, having the three bright lines for 35mm, 50mm and 100mm. The M3 has switchable bright lines for 50mm, 90mm and 135mm and requires a 35mm with an auxilary "spectacle" finder to show the appropriate bright line.

The Canon P is very effective with the 35mm lens, which was the only one I used with mine. I think the finder is quite a lot better than the M2 - at least, than the M2 I owned. The M3 is superb with the 50mm lens and adequate with the 90mm. The 135mm finder is just about usable, in my opinion.

As to general construction and ease of use, it's swings and roundabouts, with the "P" scoring high, thanks to having a rewind lever and a hinged back, both of which the M3 (and the M2) lacks.
Click to expand...
I might have mentioned this before but I sold my Leica IIIA because I couldn't cope with the squinty viewfinder and minute engraving on the lens. I toyed with the idea of buying an M type camera but the cost was too much. So I bought both a Canon P and a Canon 7, 50mm f1.4, 35mm f2.8 Canon lenses and kept my 90mm f4 Elmar. I like both cameras but the 7 is the one I prefer because the framelines are selectable. However, the P is a bit lighter and more compact. Also with both Canons film loading is so much easier. I have no idea whether the Canon lenses are equivalent to the Leica lenses, pretty surely they will have different characteristics. The setup works for me though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top