Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]My meter underexposes between 1 and 2 stops... Well, at least I can use 1600 film now. :D Yes, the images are good, here are two: http://www.justinlow.com/paw.php?year=2003&week=35 http://www.justinlow.com/paw.php?year=2003&week=29 It's quite susceptible to flare, however. Sincerely, Justin Low justin@justinlow.com - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Afterswift@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:00 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: Minox 35 In a message dated 9/17/03 3:28:13 AM, justin@justinlow.com writes: << The only problem I have is an inaccurate meter; aside from that, it's a lovely camera. >> Yep, the meter can be a problem. But as Minox points out in their manual, we're supposed to make tests to figure out the correct ISO for a particular film. For example, I found that setting the meter to ISO 160 for ISO 200 film solves the meter difference. What is remarkable about the Minox 35 is that the quality of images we get is so good despite the diamond-shaped aperture blade arrangement. br - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html