I raised a question over the 'copyright 2000,2001 photo.net' that they put on all the forum pages. The question was never answered. Their 'terms of use' now include the dreaded words "All material...
Type: Posts; User: Alan Gibson; Keyword(s):
I raised a question over the 'copyright 2000,2001 photo.net' that they put on all the forum pages. The question was never answered. Their 'terms of use' now include the dreaded words "All material...
A one-degree rotation of the camera, enlarged to a 10x8 print, will indeed give the same blur, no matter what the format.
This is not the reason some of us like handheld LF. Sure, a 5x4 SLR has...
Oops. My spreadsheet had a bug. I was correct that the tech support were right: the figures given in the table are consistent with CofC 0.12mm (which is often quoted for 5x4" film), measured from...
I'm sure their tech support is correct. I took the standard figure of 0.12mm (not mentioned, as far as I know, on their site) and plugged this into the standard formulae. This gave exactly the...
I beg to differ. The tables on, for example, http://www.schneideroptics.com/large/depth/300depth.htm, appear to be measured from the film plane, with a 0.12mm diameter circle of confusion. It's a...
I use +4 dioptre glasses for composition and rough focusing on 5x4, and a loupe for precise focussing. If my eyes were younger, perhaps I wouldn't need the loupe. It is cheap loupe, I can't see any...
Yes, you've got it. LV isn't quite as well defined as EV, but the usual coincident value is at ISO 100.
With EV, 1 second at f/1 will be EV 0 (zero), whatever the film speed. But an LV value of...
Your Pentax doesn't show EV (Exposure Value) numbers. Instead, it is showing LV (Light Value) numbers.
Don't forget that the simple theories around CofC are concerned with what is 'acceptable'. You might find that what is 'acceptable' to you doesn't quite match any particular theory.
My...
47mm lens, fixed at 6-foot focus. Hand held, with what passes for daylight here in the UK. No problem.
Tilting the lens, or the back, doesn't change the depth of field as such. Instead, it tilts the plane of sharpest focus. Where did you read that you should also use front rise? Seems very strange...
Or look at it another way: If you tilt your lens (or back), you can get everything on the ground in focus, all the way from 10 feet (or even 5 feet) to infinity. Then the question 'at what distance...
You might like Ilford Delta 400, developed in Peterson FX-39.
For the 72, 58 and 47 XL lenses, I constructed cardboard holders for 100mm square filters. They hold the gels against the front rim, so have no vignetting.
I'm not sure I understand the question. The illumination on the ground glass at f/4.5 will be the same, whatever the focal length of the lens.
Just for the record, there were a number of varieties of the Schneider Componon S 150 mm lens. With mine, I can switch the clicks on or off.
Lee, do you currently use a different format? You may be able to judge what focal length you would like from that. Multiply by about 3.5 from the 35mm format. For example, if you use a 28mm lens on...
'Yes' to almost all your questions.
>> Does this mean that the aperture is fully adjustable from completely open to completely closed when you first buy the shutter...
Most apertures don't...
I spend a couple of minutes explaining. If I don't have any more time, I say something like "excuse me, I have to get back to work before the light changes."
I'm never rude, because a curious...
I've never used any of the lenses you mention, so I can't say whether any of them are sharper than any other lens. However, in real life we don't judge the overall impression of sharpness by the...
To clarify: I often disagree with what people in the forums report Ctein as saying in his book(s).
I think that the often quoted limit of 5 lpmm (or 3 lpmm, whatever) came about when the materials (film and paper) and equipment (camera lenses, enlarger lenses) could only achieve that. So a...
AA, or Kodak, or any other book, might give the answer, and they might well be different.
I agree with the other posters, you have to decide what is important, and you can only make that choice...
It would be very convenient if paper could accurately reproduce a certain number of lpmm, and no more. Similarly, if human eyes could see a certain resolution and no more.
Unfortunately (or...
The only way to be sure is to try it. I suspect that if you compared the results with a Componon-S 150mm (which isn't very expensive), you wouldn't want to return the Componon-S.
Delta 100 or 400 in FX-39 works for me, as does HP5+ in Acutol. Certainly the grain is finer with the Delta films, but up to 20x16 I can't see the difference with my naked (and weary) eyes.
It really is a very personal decision. I find that 47, 72 and 150mm works well for me, but I'm quite a wide-angle freak.
You might be able to create darkslides that only expose a quarter of the sheet at a time. Not a perfect solution, of course, because you have to fiddle with the lens for each of the 4 shots, and...
I don't know 'The Practical Zone System'. Of the first two, if you can only afford one, it's a tough choice. Have you a library near you, where you can read both?
Overall, I think I prefer The...
Photography is a language. It allows communication between people who can expres s themselves in that language. Images of Photography is a forum for photographic conversations . Not conversations...
Thanks for your contribution. In the future, please respond in the thread in question, rather than starting a new one.
Michael: not quite right. For the SAME SIZE PRINTS, then if you double the size of the negative, the same diffraction obtains at double the f-number. So f8 on 35 mm is about the same as f16 on 6x7 ...
The camera looks really nice. I have seen cameras that focus by pressing against a spring before, but yours looks especially neat. Congratulations!
Just putting something in angle brackets...
See also Rodenstock Lens Wrench. I don't know if mine is a Rodenstock.
Wow, is it made of gold or something? I paid #10 UK for mine, about $16, and I consider it well overpriced. I keep meaning to make some up out of brass so I can 'afford' to lose the real thing.
You can get a rough idea of coverage by holding a sheet of paper in the focal plane and pointing the lens towards an outside window. Rotate the lens and paper together to place the image of the...
For tray processing, if you already do your own printing,the capital cost is virtually zero. I describe a method for this in How do you process B&W sheet film?
If you use a more sophisticated...
Another method is to sandwich your negative with another one while printing. The second negative is a high-contrast photograph of a large sheet of white paper 'sloppily' painted black, but not up...
As a general rule with LF, it is worth considering what plane you want entirely in focus, and then consider how much in front and behind you want 'reasonably' in focus.
When my subjects are...
You might be better off talking to an astronomy forum. Many astronomers also use cameras. You might pick up an astronomy magazine in a local shop.
Many telescope mounts can also take a 35mm...