What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Questions about prism finders

While I can't speak from enough experience yet, I am sure that both WLF and prism finders have their own advantages & disadvatages. Though I am currently shopping for a prism finder, I think I will want to experiment with both.

How about the NC -2 though? Has anyone had any experience with that one? It seems to have 3x magnification, which I think is more than what the the PM series provide. It doesn't have the hot shoe flash connector, but that's not an issue for me at this point and it is a lot more economical than the newer prism finders. I am mostly just concerened about faster and more intuitive focusing and having a different view point. Any thoughts?

Judit
 
Judit,

The viewfinder magnification of most of the PME prisms is the same as that of the NC-2s. Only the PME45 has a bit lower magnification.

The NC-2 prisms are very fine prisms indeed. No problems.
They produce a bright view, with good eye relief/high eyepoint.

The only bit one could fault is that they do not quite show the entire focussing screen (which, by the way, none of the Hasselblad prisms do). But all you see does end up on film, so is it a problem?
 
Hi Judit

I'm new here but I thought I'd chip in because I tried an NC2. For me the PM45 was way ahead, bright, contrasty, and I see the entire screen -worth it for me. Good luck with your choice.

best, Nik
 
It doesn't have the hot shoe flash connector, but that's not an issue for me at this point and it is a lot more economical than the newer prism finders.>

Judit:

Neither does the PM45 have a cold shoe. Perhaps you could also find the 2x flip magnifier for the PM45 finder as well.#3042642

Regards:

Gilbert
 
For me, it was easy:

a really ugly NC-2 for $20 that works for me, or the PM90 that came with the outfit I bought (that I like, but for 99% of the shooting I use the Hassy for, it doesn't work).

In fact, you'd be surprised how much of a difference a few hours of time and a $250 can of spray enamel can make.



erie
 
$250 can of spray enamel can>

Erie:

That Hassey paint sure is expensive, but you get what you pay for, as they say.
happy.gif


Regards:

Gilbert
 
I've refinished some black photographic items in the past, and here's the best way I found to match the look and feel of the originals and provide a tough finish that won't crack, flake or rub through very easily ...

Use flat black model spray paint found at hobby stores (and some Hardware stores) ... the spray is much finer. I use Zynolyte "Midget Enamel". Prep the surface as you would any paint job ( water sandpaper scratches, etc) ... then apply very thin coats and let them dry in-between (overnight). Once this is painted evenly ... apply a couple of thin coats of Krylon matte clear ... This provides a tough sealed top surface that gives the semi-gloss sheen of black chrome.

I've refinished older Leica lens shades (not collectors pieces) to look like new to such a degree that my Leica dealer could hardly believe they had been redone. I even refinished part of a black Contax G2 camera (notorious for wear spots on the finish).
 
Great tip Marc. I have a bunch of old camera bodies from 1930s to 1960s with black paint needing touching up. Thanks.

Any suggestions on silver paint? I need something that matches the old German silver/chrome bodies with some wear back to the metal. Cheers.
 
Marc:

Great tips.

I have a 500CM Hasselblad with a wlf that has some paint peeled off.

How would you proceed to paint it? Would you put it apart before applying the paint?

It is peeled off on the top right rear corner. My left eye is the dominant one.

Thanks for advice.

Eduardo
 
I have a 503CW, 150 lens, with a PME90, all used and I am having a devil of a time getting accurate exposures. Everything is underexposed. I am a complete newbie, I took a photography class ages ago with my Olympus 35mm and then fell in love with medium format when playing with a Holga camera. In dark areas I try to use the spot meter function to get a good idea what the darkest area is and even when I bracket photos and do a test roll I was still getting underexposed photos. I am ready to put the Hasssy on the shelf and just start taking photos with the stupid $25 Holga. Can someone suggest a good light meter and a good flash so when I save up money I can hopefully fix some of these "user errors". Thanks.
 
The PME90 should be a really good light meter. So i'm not sure whether getting another one would help.

But have you considered that - given that you consistently get underexposed results - you can improve things quite simply by rating the film at a lower ISO?
 
> How under exposed is it? Do you get the same result with different > films taken to different processors?

> Have you checked the current flash and meter for accuracy? Does > manually setting the flash give better/worse results than Auto or > TTL?
 
I do not have a flash right now and I was not planning on getting a new PME90, insetad I was thinking of getting a handheld meter. I did switch to a different processor who was much better and he suggested setting the film to a lower ISO. Instead I did a test strip where I took a reading and got the EV at say 12, and took the photo at EV 12, then took photo 2 at EV11, photo 3 at EV 10, photo 4 at EV 13, and photo 5 at EV 14. Of all of them photo 3 was the closest but it was still underexposed. These photos were inside my house in low light by the way. I just changed the battery on the PME90 and have taken another roll and I am waiting on those results. I really have no idea what I am doing - is there any way there is something set funny on the lens that I am overlooking? I have a 150 mm that I am using now. I have a 80mm but I am not using it now.
 
> [Although the meter is reading the proper values, don't forget that it does not automatically adjust settings for you. You must transfer the settings to the camera and lens manually. Otherwise you are simply taking a shot with your original settings and not actually adjusting for the exposure]
 
Proper exposure is not an automatic function of any meter. If there is a strong backlight the images will be underexposed. If there is a predominate dark background or subject, the image can be overexposed .. if you just do what the meter says.

We have no idea of your ability to evaluate a scene and adjust exposures accordingly.

The way to test your meter is to shoot an evenly lit photographic grey card that fills the frame without a shadow falling on it. Then calibrate the meter accordingly, or adjust the ISO based on your findings if there is no way to calibrate the meter.
 
I did have strong backlit scenes where I spot metered a foreground object and still underexposed and I took predominate dark background scenes and all underexposed. Thanks for the grey card idea. That sounds very do-able. And yes, I was actually transferring the readings to the lens. I said Newbie - but I did get that point when I read the photopraphy books and manuals.
 
> Actually, shooting film at something other than the "published" > ISO is not uncommon. Many people use to rate Velvia 50 at ISO 40, > and Eugene Smith (a famous B&W shooter (1918-1978)) use to rate > many of the B&W films at 1/2 the published ISO in order to get > detail in the shadows.

2 EV off might be a slight miscalibration somewhere along the line, or simply "your" eye as to what is proper. Someone else might find it acceptable at 12. Now I shoot both 35mm and 6x6, and often find the 6x6 negs "thinner" than the 35mm, even for the exact same film, yet when blown up to the same size print, both are fine. It may be totally subjective, but it seems that way. As I said, it may be completely "subjective" on my part.
 
The scene that was backlight was my home office. It has a big floor to ceiling window and I was shooting the hanging lightcatcher in the window as I view it towards the yard. There is an overhanging porch out side of the window so there is some shade right outside. Here are my readings:

pic1 = EV12, F11, 30
pic2 = EV11, F11, 15
pic3 = EV10, F10, 8
pic4 = EV13, F8, 125
pic5 = EV14, F8, 250

Pic 3 was the best and even that was not even close to filling in the square of the negative. The negative was way too thin. The whole roll is basically clear. I put a new battery in the PME90 after that and have another test roll with the photo guys so I think I will wait to see what that turns out before i stress much more. I did find a nice grey statue outside to test on so I will see. I naively was hoping I could just set it based on what the readings said and boom get fabulous photos.
 
I would not recommend shooting a grey statue, or indoor scenes, or even a gray card, at this point, since you have nothing to compare it with. And shooting the grey statue could lead to all kinds of misreadings, depending on where the light is coming from, and how much sky, or other bright areas, are around the statue.
Instead, go outside during the midday, place the sun behind you, and shoot some scenes (with NO overly bright or dark areas) + or - a couple of stops from what your meter indicates. For sure, do it on color transparancy film. This will give you a good indication of where your meter is. It is not so important that your meter yield the best result at the film's given ISO, but that your metered results are consistent. The idea here is to shoot several different scenes with even lighting, bracketing on the plus and minus side. When you lay them out on a light table, or even up to a l&, pick the exposure from each group that you like best. Hopefully, you'll find that one particular ISO works best in "most" situations. This will be your new ISO/EI setting henceforth. You will still need to second guess your meter for tricky light situations, and will probably have to bracket here.
BTW - my own meter prism, a PME51, requires me to double the ISO for "correct" exposures. With 100 speed film, I set the meter to 200.
Michael H. Cothran
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top