Re: Pin Holes, etc.

[Fred Ward <fward@erols.com>]

Some time back there was a thread on here regarding pin holes for 
Leicas. On page 9 in the August 96 issue of Popular Photography Magazine 
there is an article entitled ³Worldıs Priciest Pinhole.²

The article is about a new item made in Japan for Leica M bodies that is 
basically a body cap with a metal disk containing a tiny hole, producing 
a f/125 to f/250 aperture from a 0.21mm diameter hole. It is said to 
produce an image about equal to a 28mm and recommends you use that frame 
line or viewfinder as your guide. Available in 3 colors (for some 
unknown reason) the pin hole cap is $279 USD from Jimmy Koh at Kohıs 
Camera and Service, Hicksville, New York, phone 516-933-9790. 

The main reason that making one of these light-tight and with easily 
available products is that the only two versions of Leica M body caps I 
have to examine both are made in 2 or more parts, with a metal back and 
a screw right in the middle (where you would want the aperture hole). 
So, drilling a hole in a true Leica body cap is impractical. 

But there is another, slick, and inexpensive solution I think. The 
Minolta body cap for the CLE is all black plastic and can easily be 
drilled to produce the pinhole. In fact, I believe a hot pin would melt 
right through the plastic and give you a perfectly round hole. (I use 
the hot pin technique on the bottom of all-black Kodak film plastic film 
cans to get a tiny round hole that it vital in getting one type of 
accurate refractive index readings on curved gem stones. A match or 
cigarette lighter will heat a pin to red hot --hold the pin with pliers 
-- and it will then glide through the plastic.) 

On the same page at this item is an interesting little report on the use 
of high speed negative color film by Sports Illustrated and others for 
shooting night sports pictures. This use is producing better color and 
finer grain than equivalent slide films (ISO 800, 1600 or so). I would 
like to comment that I still do most of my original shooting for my gem 
books in Ektachrome 100. But I totally agree with SI that using negative 
film for final use in printing for publication is usually superior. I am 
getting excellent color and a creamier gradation that I get with slides. 
Whether I scan in the negatives on my own Nikon slide scanner or use 
PHoto CDs, the result is the same.... bringing in the reversed (now 
positive) images into Photoshop for final correction is almost always 
better and easier with color negatives as the originals. I do not 
believe this will change the way people work and shoot, but it is 
something to think about if published output is the goal. Obviously 
negatives are more difficult to deal with for viewing and editing. But I 
am dropping off my film to a local 1-hour shop, having a cup of coffee, 
picking up the negatives and sample 4x6 inch prints (which I use for 
proofing and editing) and scanning in the frames I want within 2 hours 
of shooting. This has altered my thinking about color negative. The past 
two books all had pictures done this way and no one can tell which 
images came from slides and which from negatives.  I am sold on it.

Fred Ward

***  Visit my Gem Book Publishers site
***  http://www.erols.com/fward/
***
***  fward@erols.com