Thanks Jan, will give them a call for some advice on this, maybe
useful to know.
cheers,
Jonathan
--
Jonathan Turner, Photographer e: pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx t:
07796 470573 w: www.jonathan-turner.com
On 31/03/2014 21:25, Jan Faul wrote:
CAll Robert White in Poole and ask who they use. IF that
fails, write me off-list and I’ll give you another name.
On Mar 31, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Jonathan Turner wrote:
Hey thanks everyone for
all your comments - some useful suggestions. I kind of
thought much the same with regard to going with the longer
exposure, rather than the shorter, but hadn't thought of
adjusting the aperture (made slightly complicated that I'm
shooting with flash too and exposing for that...guess I can
just alter the power coming out of the flash head).
On the whole though, I'm not entirely sure I trust this
lens...I've done a couple of test shots with it and the
first batch of negs look a little thin...just shot a couple
more today so will see how they come back. Jan, I would send
it off to your man in Chicago but I'm actually based in
Leeds, England, so that may be a little far... I guess I can
find someone round here to look at it, but I'm thinking,
just to be on the safe side, I might just get another
lens...kind of fancy something just a little wider than
standard anyway. The rest of the camera seems fairly tight
and clean, and I've shot some Polaroids through it too and
there don't seem to be any light leakages.
Interesting to refer back to the thread about whether
digital is really enjoyable or not...I guess I love the
safety of shooting digital, as well as the process (yes,
there is still process in digital I think) but somehow using
this old beast of a 5x4...looking at an image upside down
and back to front, through a ground glass screen just feels
a little more exciting than looking through my DSLR
somehow... Maybe that's because I know that unless I'm
really concentrating on each step of what I'm doing, I will
mess it up somehow, and there will be no chance to rectify
it in photoshop's RAW window!
Thanks again, will let yo know how I get on.
Cheers,
Jonathan.
--
Jonathan Turner, Photographer e: pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
t: 07796 470573 w: www.jonathan-turner.com
On 31/03/2014 18:39, Jan Faul
wrote:
On Mar 31, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Stephen Ylvisaker
wrote:
A
local camera repair technician, if there are
any around still, would be able to clean, lube
and test the lens accuracy. That is if you
intend to be serious about large format
shooting. If this is just exerimentation to
get exposed to large format photography, do
some tests on your own, doing as Randy
suggested.
Before
taking the lens to the technician, do a couple
test shots to make sure you don't have light
leaks, or to find and "fix" the light leaks.
Stephen
Set aperture to f8.3 or
whatever fraction the shutter speed is
off by. But you are going to need to
test to even know what the shutter is
actually producing speed wise. Its
probably not very accurate any more.
On
Mar 31, 2014 4:32 AM, "Jonathan
Turner" < pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi,
I recently bought an old large
format field camera that came with
a lens which is so old it has
shutter speeds that don't
correspond with my light meter; it
has 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 100th,
200th, instead of the normal
shutter speeds (8th, 15th, 30th,
60th etc.)
So my problem is trying to work
out what the correct exposure
should be...working from my meter.
I'm shooting colour negative, so
I'm guessing it can take a bit of
latitude either way, but can't
quite work out if I should go with
an exposure that is slightly over,
or slightly under what the meter
says. For example, if my meter
reading is F8/125th, should I
shoot at F8/100th, or F8/200th?
Any input appreciated.
Cheers,
Jonathan.
--
Jonathan Turner, Photographer e: pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
t: 07796 470573 w: http://www.jonathan-turner.com/
Art Faul
The Artist
Formerly Known as Prints
------
Camera Works -
The Washington Post
.
Art Faul
The
Artist Formerly Known as Prints
------
Camera
Works - The Washington Post
.
|
