Niels - NHSN

Intrepid’s backs rotate without removal. They are very light, but I don’t know if plywood would qualify as “wood” in your mind or if you are thinking about more precious wood types? https://intrepidcamera.co.uk/blogs/guides/setting-up-the-intrepid-4x5

This is a response to a very old post but I suppose people still use pol filters, so still relevant when it shows up in search results, I guess. A pol-filter test on a Polish site back in 2015 had Marumi in the top 3. https://www.lenstip.com/139.25-article-Polarizing_filters_test_2015_Results_and_summary.html It is also said that Leica uses Marumi for some of their filters (don’t let yourself be fooled by a Made in Germany label - “assembled” is more like it). I only own one Marumi filter (UV) but wouldn’t shy away from getting others if they were easily available- which they are not where I live.

I ended up buying the Pen FT I borrowed a few weeks back. The price was good and the camera nice. I have tentatively decided that half frame will be my format of choice for color film. Shooting color film is just getting too costly otherwise. I prefer BW when shooting film but it is nice to have room for a small camera with color in the bag. I ran half a roll of Fuji C200 through this one over the weekend.

I’d love to hear about anyone with the ability and not least willingness to repair a Nikon F Photomic meter, regardless of turnaround time. Please share. The often seen challenge is that if you have a functional meter, you’ll expect to get a functional meter back from the repair tech. Without parts this poses a serious risk for the tech. Since if diving into the Photomic meter unsuccessfully, any mistake will likely be un-recoverable and a liability for the repair technician. Luckily my FTn Photomic head works fine (with a zinc-air adapter or MR-9 Kanto converter) but if it wasn’t completely in alignment with a modern meter, I’d probably rather analyze the deviation and adjust, rather than opt for repair.

Or upload the images to flickr.com (if you use that) and simply paste the share links into a post. The photo.net forum software will parse it automatically and show your images.

That would be a strong indicator that your lens is a 7 element. The protrusion is cause by the 8th element - hard to imagine it could be an 8 element without it. But how about some pictures of your lens and perhaps a link to the video you mention? Here’s a site that seemingly has assembled quite a bit of data on how to ID those 8 element lenses. https://takumarguide.weebly.com/1--14--50-358-8-element.html

Rolleiflex 3.5E (Planar 75mm f/3.5) for the weekend. Loaded with a roll of Fujicolor Pro 400H from my last box. I will miss this film.

I am assuming those numbers are of the factory rolled films prior to use? I am thinking they may be rolled on different assembly lines that may not deliver the same exact tension, and I probably wouldn't give 0.5mm on the feeding spool too much importance. It I am guessing that differences in the backing paper tension you apply when you load the film onto the take-up spool will affect the final diameter and thus the final wind-on tension to some extend. Or/and as @kmac suggests; possible variations in thickness of backing paper and film and possible tension introduced by the friction/resistance of various film/backing-paper materials that occurs during film winding. Combined this may result in variations on the take-up spool diameter and potentially affect the total resistance you feel at the end of the film wind-up. Just speculations.

This weekend I will be trying out another camera that just returned from an overhaul: A Leica IIF Red Dial (1955) - "Red Dial" or RD is just a reference to the color of the flash sync dial numbers under the shutter dial and indicates it is the last IIF/IIIF model with minor improvements on the shutter and in flash capability. I have mounted a modern Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f/1.5 Aspherical LTM on the camera. A lens produced from 1999 and a few years forward. I bought in Japan around 2010. The accessory finder is a Leitz SBOOI 5cm brightline finder that improves the framing vastly over the build-in finder. I didn't quite finish the film in my Leica IA last weekend so I brought that along as well. I did a few side by side photos to see the differences between the two 50mm lenses manufactured almost a century apart.

My Leica I (A) from 1930 came back from a general overhaul yesterday. The shutter wasn't completely reliable and the camera scratched the film. I expect that to be fixed now and will take it out into the sun loaded with a roll of Fujifilm C200. The repair person could see that the 93 years old shutter curtains had never been replaced, and he claimed that they did not need replacement! Impressive. This is in contrast to my three Leica IIF and IIIF's from the 1950's which all have needed replacement of their deteriorating curtains. Another interesting piece of semi-related trivia: Also yesterday, I stumbled upon this quote in my copy of "Walker Evans at Work" (p.44). "That photo I sent you was made with Grotz' [Paul Grotz] little Leica camera, using a special close-grain film imported from Germany at a stiff price, but allowing enlargements to huge proportions if desired. We have thrown that one up to almost life size" The quote comes from a letter to his friend Hanns Skolle from May 1929. Given Leica only sold the Leica I (A) model with the 5cm/3.5 Elmar in the 1920's (with a few very rare exceptions) it is almost certain that Evans is referring to a camera just like the one below. The film he is talking about appears to be of the brand "Perutz", judging from the contact prints reproduced in the book.

@stephen_mcateer Repeatedly testing the operation of a camera with fresh film can be costly over time. I'd recommend you keep a test roll at hand for the times when you inevitably will need to verify camera functions unrelated to actual exposures on film. It is especially relevant in situations where you receive a camera back from service, to be able to quickly communicate if there are any anomalities in order to avoid delayed discussions about who is responsible for a possible re-repair. I am saying this because during the past years I have had many cameras serviced, and perhaps 35-40% have needed additional adjustments. I have used both the usual recommended suspects as well as lesser known, and both groups are equally good/bad when it comes to the need for returns. Re. your current issue, running a test roll through it a couple of times may give you an indication if this specific issue is perhaps periodic and therefore camera related or if it is more likely film brand related or whatever. It is also easier to get a feel of the consistency of operation if you don't have to compare incidents that happened weeks apart. Not saying you have to sacrifice an expensive color film. Maybe one you know you may have mis-exposed, or if you find one in an old camera, or an expired roll you accidentally left in the glove compartment, or maybe just get a roll of cheap Fomapan (or Arista - depending on where you live). Good luck. BTW: It is practical to have an extra spool to roll the test film back onto - you should be able to get one free from your lab if you don't have them lying around.

Playing around with one of my Barnacks in anticipation of a 1(A) that is on the way back from an overhaul. This is a IIIf ST RD and a Summicron 50mm f/2 v.1 loaded with Fujicolor C200 for the weekend.

😆 Yeah. I don't think NASA used many F65's.

I was aware of the Nikon/NASA relationship from the film era, but not that it continued into the digital era. Does anyone know if this is an exclusive relationship with NASA or if other manufactures also have cameras on board on recent NASA missions (I'm thinking about cameras operated in human hands)? BTW. It reminds me of the ad below. I find it interesting because it is from around 1980. That was the era of Nikon F2 and F3, yet it shows a modified Nikon F. Apparently NASA used the Nikon F throughout the 1970's and skipped the F2, and at the time of the ad, the F3 wasn't space ready yet. I also notice the following wording "Nikon has never failed on a NASA space mission.... Or Jammed." (my emphasis). I imagine this is a friendly poke at Hasselblad and their infamous tendency to jam.

The iPhone 5 had defective batteries. Apple extended the warranty for those. My wife had the battery in her iPhone 5 replaced at no charge 3 years after purchase - it is still working fine for her today as a secondary phone. Other than that, I have only experienced swelling rechargeable batteries with 3rd party brands. I have seen several leaking rechargeable batteries in long unused Hasselblad 500 EL/M’s, but they were probably NiCd, although I am not certain.