Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/10/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If there is a thousand parts in an SLR there are ten in a few camera. That's rounding it off but you catch my jist. Compared to the moving parts in a Leica rangefinder camera or an SLR 35mm or medium format a view camera is an exercise in extreme simplicity itself. A very old view camera its nice to use it right way to see if there is a light leak in the bellows. Other than that there's just not that much to go wrong. A new camera is not going to have a light leak in the bellows. And by very old you can buy them having been made straight back to the 1880's and used them. A camera like a Deardorf or this Shen Hao 617 is a direct reflection of this non technology going back 130 years or more. I'm never heard of any of my photographer friends buying a new view camera and lens and having to send it back like there's something wrong with it or something. They just use it. They just work. The odds of there being something "wrong" with it close to non existent. Its not like a pixel is going to be missing in the sensor or something. Make a stack photographs with it. Show them to people. Try to get yourself around other people who are doing view camera work so you're not working in a vacuum. You're not going to figure this about by posting to chat groups on the internet. Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > From: leo wesson <leowesson at gmail.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:31:35 -0500 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] THE 617 tests, something is very wrong here > > Richard, > > It's probably something to do with how the film back mounts to the body.... > > leo > > -- > leo > Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig) > > > On Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Richard Man wrote: > >> Ha ha, I never did that one, but on the Hassy, I did load the film >> backward >> once or twice - so no film images! >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com >> (mailto:mark at rabinergroup.com)>wrote: >> >>> I loaded my Hasselblad backs wrong the first few years I used them. I >>> didn't >>> put them under the tab but let the film just rest over the tab. So I'd >>> got >>> the left edge soft and felt like I had to shoot everything way stopped >>> down. >>> I finally learned my lesson from an assistant. Should have gotten the >>> Ernst >>> Wildi book straight on. >>> >>> Mark William Rabiner >>> Photography >>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >>> >>> >>>> From: Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com >>>> (mailto:richard at richardmanphoto.com)> >>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org >>>> (mailto:lug at leica-users.org)> >>>> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 04:30:49 -0700 >>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org (mailto:lug at >>>> leica-users.org)> >>>> Subject: [Leica] THE 617 tests, something is very wrong here >>>> >>>> First the caveat, these are "high" resolution scan from the Epson 3200, >>> not >>>> my usual Nikon LS-9000, but trust me on this, the results don't look >>>> that >>>> different. I'm having trouble getting the LS-9000 to scan the two halves >>>> correctly sfor stitching so Epson it is. >>>> >>>> The camera was set as level and neutral as I could, and then I used some >>>> front rise to take less of the road, and more of the subjects. >>>> >>>> Second, something terribly wrong with my techniques, as the left edges >>> from >>>> all 3 lens are markedly softer than the right. I have made sure that the >>>> negs are as flat as possible on the scanner holder, and this is visible >>>> >>> >>> on >>>> the negs also. This probably mean I did something wrong somewhere. I >>>> noticed that the SH 617 has front swing and the lensboard was ever so >>>> slightly might not have been parallel (but the amount is very minor), >>>> and >>>> it may very well be that the film plate was not set parallel enough. So >>>> this is probably a user error. >>>> >>>> Third, even at the best sharpest areas (on the right), things don't "pop >>>> out sharp," unlike for example, the negs from the XPan. >>>> >>>> I am having a dreadful feeling that someone can make this setup sing, >>>> but >>>> that someone may just not be me :-( >>>> >>>> I applied 20% sharpening with LR4.2, with the radius and detail set up >>>> their defau >>>> 150mm Fuji @F32 >>>> http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20121018-Scanned-8.jpg >>>> >>>> 210mm Symmar-S @F32 >>>> http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20121018-Scanned-9.jpg >>>> >>>> 90mm Fuji SWD @F32 >>>> http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20121018-Scanned-10.jpg >>>> >>>> -- >>>> // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information