[stevebrot]

Even all metal monsters like the Pentax K1000 or Minolta SRT-101.

The illustration I included above is of a Spotmatic, which is essentially the same body as the K1000. Strangely enough, my SRT-101 is not that much heavier, 705g vs. 635g for the Spotmatic and 620g for a K1000.


Steve

[Sakura]

For that purpose i use a sturdy tripod with the central column reversed. Camera hanging under the tripod and using a remote.

I use it to reproduce very old documents (some 300+ years old) Of course no flash allowed with that kind of old documents, so we use the existing daylight and need some longer exposure times of 0.3 seconds or so.

I always work together with someone. One person flipping the pages and holding them in position, and the other person (me) clicking the remote.

It is no exception that we take some 3000 pictures a day. And of course, hand-held is no option

[jatrax]

Of course no flash allowed with that kind of old documents

Just curious if LED light panels would be allowed? I have a tiny one about 6" square that generates a lot of light. It can be mounted on the flash bracket or a light stand.

[Lord Lucan]

it starts to feel a bit top-heavy and I'm afraid it might topple over with its spindly legs , So I was wondering, what was the intended use of this stand?

I asked for people's experiences with the Copypod some time ago (can't find the thead now), when I was tempted by one on Ebay. But they advised that it was too flimsy for a modern heavy camera, having dated from the Spotmatic era, and certainly not up to a 100mm macro on a FF DSLR.

As for intended use, documents and old photos for one (although I got flamed in that earlier thread for not using a scanner LoL!), but also for things like coins and stamps. I understand the legs are designed to stay out tof the field of view of a standard lens, but obviously any longer focal length macro would be OK too.

I suspect this would work better with a mirrorless camera than a DSLR.

I don't follow. Do you simply mean because they tend to be lighter, or is there some other advantage of mirrorless that I am not aware of?

old documents (some 300+ years old) Of course no flash allowed with that kind of old documents

Why is flash not allowed? The light energy in a flash is a fraction of what is contained in a moment or two of natural light (the equivalent natural light shutter duration in fact). Having said that I don't like flash when copying (from a sturdy tripod). If it is in line or near (like ring flash) it tends to reflect back as glare if the subject is the slightest bit glossy, and if angled there is uneveness across the subject. I have had more success with a powerful flash aimed at the ceiling but there is really no point in flash. I get best results using natural daylight (north-facing room) using as long an exposure as needed.

[stevebrot]

I don't follow. Do you simply mean because they tend to be lighter, or is there some other advantage of mirrorless that I am not aware of?

Shallower form factor with native lens attached. The Copipod uses an adapter that attaches to the filter thread, making longer lenses less stable on the device, particularly if the body is heavier on one side than the other.


Steve

[stevebrot]

The light energy in a flash is a fraction of what is contained in a moment or two of natural light (the equivalent natural light shutter duration in fact).

I had an experience late last week that caused me to smile when I read this. I was testing a new attachment and did a single discharge from my Vivitar 283 about 0.5 centimeter from the side of the ever-ready case on my XR7 without even thinking about proximity. Imagine my surprise to see smoke rising from the side of the camera case immediately afterward. There was no visible flame, but I did take care to wet the area of the case down to make sure we had no camera fires.


Steve

[jatrax]

Why is flash not allowed? The light energy in a flash is a fraction of what is contained in a moment or two of natural light

Museums, historical buildings and other archives generally prohibit flash being used. I am not sure that the science really bears out that flash use can cause damage. A study by University of Cambridge indicated that potential flash damage was negligible but the "no flash" rule is firmly embedded. From what I have read it is a myth propagated either by faulty logic or as a way to prevent photos being taken so that people will buy the photos rather than snap their own. In film days it likely did prevent a lot of photos, but with high ISO digital I don't think it works so much any more.

Reproducing documents might be a case where flash could cause harm since the documents might be stored out of natural light. Anyway, if you work in their building you follow their rules.

[c.a.m]

We're diverting away from the CopiPod topic, but I'll add these links as a reference to the Canadian Conservation Institute. The first link is their Light Damage Calculator, which includes parameters for exposure to light from camera flashes. The second link gives some scientific background.

There is a definite concern about long-term effects of exposure of artifacts to light, including camera flashes.

The CCI is the Government of Canada's centre of expertise on the subject matter.


Light damage calculator - Canada.ca

Light, ultraviolet and infrared - Canada.ca

- Craig

[Sakura]

I had an experience late last week that caused me to smile when I read this. I was testing a new attachment and did a single discharge from my Vivitar 283 about 0.5 centimeter from the side of the ever-ready case on my XR7 without even thinking about proximity. Imagine my surprise to see smoke rising from the side of the camera case immediately afterward. There was no visible flame, but I did take care to wet the area of the case down to make sure we had no camera fires.


Steve

I did kill mosquito's with my old Metz 45 CT1, just use the flash test button with a distance of some 10 cm or closer to the mosquito. Worked like a charm

[Steve Beswick]

...

I don't follow. Do you simply mean because they tend to be lighter, or is there some other advantage of mirrorless that I am not aware of?

...

Lighter as in half the weight, and probably even lighter if paired with a matching lens. Probably a pretty thrifty setup too. I imagine a NEX 5 and a Meike 35mm f/1.7 would make a great, inexpensive combo for this when paired with a $5 wireless remote. That flip up screen and permanent live view would be a dream compared to something like a K5.

[stevebrot]

I imagine a NEX 5 and a Meike 35mm f/1.7 would make a great, inexpensive combo for this when paired with a $5 wireless remote.

Or a Pentax K-S1 with DA 35/2.4 for 100g more, but with built-in flash (probably needed) and viewfinder for other than copy work.


Steve

(...just being contrary...)

[Steve Beswick]

Or a Pentax K-S1 with DA 35/2.4 for 100g more, but with built-in flash (probably needed) and viewfinder for other than copy work.


Steve

(...just being contrary...)

But the K-S1 doesn't have a flip screen, and like most DSLRs it isn't designed for non-stop live view, which is why a mirrorless camera is better for this.