File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
So I got back the test rolls i shot with my old cameras, an argus C3 and an Argus AF. The AF was a disaster, i basically got a bunch of clear, transparent negatives with maybe one or two hints of an image here and there, but the C3 turned out decent. Dont know why that happened, the shutter doesn't stick, and the aperture opens and closes nicely. Winds fine. Oh well. Here are the best shots of the crop. I had more than half of the 20 or so shots that turned out ruined by two main things. 1) Forgetting to wind after shooting, and 2) Blocking the shutter cock with my pinky finger, essentially making the shot a B exposure.

Other than that, It's what I expected from the cintar, soft wide open, and sharper as you close it up, but it surprised me how sharp it can actually get. it softens towards the edges at all stops. Don't know if that's a cintar thing or a lens thing in general. Unfortunately, you can't really see it in the pics cause my scanner is shit. On top of that, they came out really grainy and off-color, with iso200 fuji. I gather that's because the film expired in 2004, has been kept in heat, and damp dark, etc. I think i'm going to run a fresh roll of Ilford HP5 through it now that I know it works. Those should turn out much better.

Also, the Matchmatic is not as bad to use as I'd read. There are no conventional speed or F markings, but it's still useable. it just involves a bit of guess work.
Anyone know what the Matchmatic numbers match up to when it comes to shutter speeds and f-stops? That'd be quite handy.

Got a roll of tmax 200 coming in tomorrow that was the tester on my rolleicord. Hopefully that turns out much better.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 2.6Image-Specific Properties:Unique Image ID1b759a91d79efedab5a1841ca3a2137c
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 2.6Image-Specific Properties:Unique Image ID19207b870edb37ab0435c8cb951c99f4
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I also need to tune the rangefinder a bit more. It's still slightly off, making most of the pictures a bit on the soft side if I dont measure carefully.

Here's the cintar wide open.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 2.6Image-Specific Properties:Unique Image IDc52c475017e8f7a1a7b465d5fb67a45d
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
and closed all as far as it goes.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 2.6Image-Specific Properties:Unique Image ID00880f02cda0dbd9578fc82460fe6dc1
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
This was actually the sharpest image I got back. Scanner did a good job in fuzzing it up though.

Well, this was my adventure of my first Old camera roll of film. Yay.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 2.6Image-Specific Properties:Unique Image IDbda7a71e7cad83ded30eebdebb20ce9a
>> ac
Hm. What did you use to meter with the AF? Sunny-16ing it, or using an external meter of some sort? Might have been your metering was just way off--slide film's not very forgiving with that sort of thing.

Might also could be a light leak, but it's rare for a light leak to totally expose your film. Usually just leaves big-ass streaks all over it.
>> Anonymous
These pictures are very, very boring.
>> ac
>>45979
Test rolls.
>> Anonymous
>>45983
Your point?
>> Anonymous
>>45970

I was doing sunny/16. My estimates were probably off though. Also, I think there's just something wrong with the shutter on it. It does click, but I get the suspicion that it might not be opening all the way, If at all. It's simple to work on, but its a pain to get at it. Have to remove the lens elements and mind some small screws, etc.
>> ac
>>46033
How much practice have you gotten metering from the hip like that? It could be that you were vastly overestimating the amount of time each exposure needed.

(I personally suck at calculating exposures in my head. With my meterless camera, I generally meter with my digital)
>> Anonymous
>>46034

Honestly, not much. Learned it in high school couple years ago, and still remember the basics, but i'm out of practice. Usually I let my slr do the metering for me.

I'll need to start doing it more though, since I have no working external meter at the moment, and I need some way of guesstimating exposure with this old camera and with my rolleicord. Practice makes perfect, etc.
>> ac
Huh. For some reason, I thought you said you were shooting slides, not negatives. So most of what I said was backwards.

So yeah, shutter not opening all the way would definitely lead to some clear negatives. Or underexposing using the sunny16 rule.

Also, a quick google turned up this re: the Argus AF:
>The f4.5 designation of the lens is probably optimistic. If you estimate exposures based around f6 wide open you will probably get more accurate exposures.

So there's that, too.
>> Anonymous
>>46054

Thanks for the heads up. Hopefully I can get the next roll through it to work.