|
Post by Peter S. on May 4, 2007 1:44:44 GMT -5
Dear John, dear Bob,
Thank You very much: That was exactly the kind of advice I was looking for!
Best regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on May 4, 2007 13:31:06 GMT -5
Dear Bob,
I heared that the people around are going mad for those Flektogons... but today I watched the first one in the bay of evil. It went away for 91 € (ca. 75 $)! Hell, this for shure has to be a damn good lens, that I'd invest that much money. Considering the load of Rokkor glass I got here already. I think I'll keep my money together in order to buy a MF film scanner sooner or later to get the best out of my Hassie stuff. Btw, I just acquired a 3.5/100 together with a black 500c/m...
Best regards Peter
|
|
PeterW
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 3,804
|
Post by PeterW on May 4, 2007 15:16:42 GMT -5
Peter, if that Flektogon was 50mm, complete with Compur shutter for a Hasselblad, and was in as-new condition, it wasn't all that expensive. When Valerie bought her Hasselblad 500 C/M new in the 1980s she bought a 50mm Flektogon as well as the standard 80mm Planar. If memory serves be rightly without looking back in old records, the outfit cost around £1,500 - near enough 2,000 Euros. Yes, she bought it for professional use so she got tax writing down allowance on it, and it paid for itself over and again in colour transparencies for magazine covers and calendar publishers, but it still seemed an awful lot of money to me, more so in the 1980s than it does now. It shows you what sort of bargains are to be had in Hasselblads these days. I wish I could afford one, but at the moment there are just too many prior claims on my limited budget, and even if I had the money to spare then for economical running costs I would probably go for a good DSLR instead. Twelve medium format shots per roll of 120, plus processing, soon amounts to a tidy sum, as I've no doubt you've found out if you shoot a lot of colour. Well, there's no harm in wishing On the other hand, if the Flek was for 35mm, and of course without a shutter, then I agree, it was on the steep side for today's prices, especially used and without a dealer's guarantee. PeterW
|
|
PeterW
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 3,804
|
Post by PeterW on May 4, 2007 15:44:01 GMT -5
Peter,
Following on from my last posting, if you're looking for a good flatbed scanner for MF, and not a dedicated film scanner, I can recommend the Epson 2450 Photo. It will take up to 5x4 inch with the correct film holder.
Some months ago I got one locally at a very resonable price, and I'm very pleased with it. I didn't get any software with it, so I'm using Epson's Twain 5, which is free from Epson, and which I've found is very good once you get to know it. If you register the serial number of the scanner with Epson, you can download a copy of Twain 5 which is configured for the 2450. It's also very good scanning up to an A4 size print. I tried the free trial copy of Vuescan but didn't like it as much as the Twain 5.
PeterW
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on May 4, 2007 15:46:53 GMT -5
Peter,
it was a M42 lens, 35mm at F/2.4. I have a hard time to believe it were substantially better than, say, my MC W.Rokkor 2.8/35. As long as I scan the Hasselblad lenses, I hardly saw any below 200 €. As a matter of fact, this is about the same money I have to invest in two of my acquisition to get them in a fully working state again :-(
But back to M42 - I got the impression, the prices for that glass is high these days, as a lot of folks got those lenses for their DSLRs (mainly Canon).
Btw. I never heard of a Flek for the Hasselblad (sorry for my incompetence in MF topics). Can it be, that some of the Kiev stuff were compatible to the Hasselblad? That would be a pretty interesting thing for me, as I still have a lust for a wider WA than that 50mm lens I have in the repair shop right now.
Best regards Peter
PS: sorry for getting OT here...
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on May 4, 2007 19:28:37 GMT -5
Like so many of you, I'm also trying to streamline my purchasing. I've finally got together a nice little pre-1955 Exakta kit for old times sakes, and that's what I mostly use for film, otherwise FED. Randy wrote "preferably M42" and I do have a 200mm Takumar with adapter for Minolta, so I might dig out the XE5 again (not used for 15 years but I do fire the mechanical 1/60 now and again). Interesting task, wheels exclusively through 200mm. But he also wrote that others would do as well, so John, that EOS 1000FN with TTL and autofocus has an equal chance. To say nothing of those Hasselblads that have been prominent recently.
|
|
|
Post by camerastoomany on Jun 4, 2007 4:46:04 GMT -5
I realise I am late on the scene but thought I'd throw in my two bobs worth nevertheless. About 18 months ago I bought a Fujica ST605 on Ebay (to go with my Minoltacanonnikonmamiyayashicavoigtlanderzeissetc). After running one film through it, I bought a second one on Ebay. Both cost about US22. I have since picked one up on Ebay Australia for AUD$9.99 (plus $9 postage). All in perfect condition and operating beautifully. The ST605 is small but not too small; light but not too light; feels like it was made to last; ergonomically spot on (at least to this little black duck) and looks like a real camera, too (I can happily carry it in one hand while wandering the streets or traipsing through the bush - average size man's hand). On all three, the meters nearly always agree with my guesstimates. It is fully mechanical with battery power for the meter only. Considering these are available at giveaway prices (or so it seems to me), in my opinion they have to win anyones approval as perfect manual M42 slrs. I have Fujinon 50mm f1.8s on two and Fujinon 50mm f2.2 on the other. Excellent lenses. The 2.2 reputedly is a lesser grade mass market lens but to my aging eyes it gives nothing away to more favoured standard lenses. I often ramble around my local coastline for hours with two of them (b&w and colour film) plus lunch in a small backpack. The major problem I have with them is that I have less time to use my Canon A1s, Nikon F3 and N200, Minolta X-700, Canon Ft and FTB and T70, Pentax 67, Mamiya, etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by Just Plain Curt on Jun 4, 2007 6:13:40 GMT -5
I hear you camerastoomany and I share your pain, LOL. If you ever solve the riddle of too many cameras vs. shooting time please feel free to share with me. Those Fujica ST605's are nice. I have 2 myself but due to an unfortunate bout of tinkering, one is purely a parts camera now. Very nice glass with Fujinons. I bought an X-Fujinon 50 f1.9 and a DM X-Fujinar-T 135 f2.8 for peanuts a while back only I have no Fuji bayonet camera so guess what's next on the acquisition list?
|
|
|
Post by Randy on Jun 4, 2007 6:40:10 GMT -5
I agree on the ST-605. I have one and it is a pleasure to use, and I like the bright viewfinder. I also have a FUJI STX-2 with a 50mm bayonet mount lens, and a M42 adapter is a must with this one, unless you want to search and purchase X mount auxilliary lenses. Oh....and welcome to our little group.
|
|
|
Post by camerastoomany on Jun 4, 2007 22:08:39 GMT -5
Thanks Randy. Guys, to tell the whole truth, I have all the Fujica slrs bar the first and one of the variations (I think I only need [??] two. I don't intend to enquire too closely at this point). Curt, I like the AX-3 from a haptic point of view (hah! I found a way to use that newly-learned word) and have two. To me, it has a similar feel to the ST605. Both cost me twenty something dollars. ............... I have been a mature-age student for the past couple of years, however, the time is rapidly approaching when I will have to re-enter the workforce. There have been advantages to being a student. ie loads of free time to play with cameras; photographic expeditions any day I choose. Now, where do I find an employer who will give me liberal time off for such pursuits (looks like I have to become self-employed so I can engage in the important things in life). .......... Geoff
|
|