[Lord Lucan]

Slide duplicator (why copy a slide to uh another slide?)

In film days, publishers and stock image companies mostly worked with reversal stock (ie slides), at least for colour pictures. A stock image company would not send out the original but would send a copy, I think they called them "dupes" in the trade. I think there was special film for dupes, with lower contrast because normal daylight film ended up too contrasty for some reason.

[WPRESTO]

I think there was special film for dupes, with lower contrast because normal daylight film ended up too contrasty for some reason.

Kodak made a special chrome/slide/reversal film for copying chromes/slides.

Copying was the one of only two ways to crop a chrome/slide. The other was to add a mask to the mount for the chrome/slide. Plastic snap-shut mounts were available with a variety of masking shapes, all of which preserved to center of the image. I have quite a few of these still in my "leftovers."

Copying could also be used, within limits, to correct undesirable color cast in the original


Beseler made a special chrome/slide duplicating system. It was based on a Beseler enlarger/copy stand equipped with a special baseboard light source that had dials for changing the color of the light. Special lenses were used, all corrected for near 1:1 reproduction (and consequently not suitable for use at infinity).

I'll try to find the original name of the Beseler device. For may years it was the "gold standard" for duplicating chromes/slides.

BESELER Model 4100 Dual Mode Slide Duplicator

"

[gofour3]

Kodak made a special chrome/slide/reversal film for copying chromes/slides.

Yep I used to get slides duped all the time,but this film is long gone. One of the new "Lomo" films put out, uses the old Kodak duplicating film and it's rated at 6 ISO.

Kodak Edupe (35mm, 6 ISO) Slide Duplicating Film: A Dive · Lomography

Phil

[cooltouch]

Years ago, I duped a bunch of slides using a Canon Auto Bellows with slide duplicator attachment and a Canon FD 50mm macro lens. For film I used Kodachrome 25. I chose it because of its extremely small grain. The downside to using Kodachrome or most any other slide film not made specifically for dupes is the shadows block up. And if you make dupes of dupes, the blocked up shadows increase. To reduce this tendency, some folks who used Kodachrome 25 would prefog the film by using a brief, dim strobe. This prefogging apparently did a good job of reducing contrast. I never tried it, but my results were excellent and the blocking up of the shadow detail was minimal but noticeable.

[womble]

We have one of those Beseler machines at work that we use to digitize slides. Works quite well.

[ismaelg]

Hello,




My K2 paired with my all time favorite lens, the M50 f1.7
Couldn't fix this one so it was sent to a pro for service.

Thanks,

[goatsNdonkey]

This just arrived a very few days ago:



(Tamron Adaptall2 01A f2.8-3.8 35-80mm + Pentax K110D)

[ramseybuckeye]

I was taking a couple photos of the MX that I just got back from Eric Hendrickson, and I thought it was interesting comparing it to a K1000 and a P3N, thought I would throw a k-50 in there for the heck of it. The K-50 is sporting a Super Takumar 1.4/50, the MX has an SMC 1.8/55, the K1000 has an M 2.0/50, and the P3N has an M zoom 2.8-4/40-80. I only got the P3N yesterday, it came with a F 50/1.7 that has a slight bit of fungus on the front element. I'm attempting to clean that fungus off, I started last night and was part way through before the hurricane shut the power off, power's back tonight and I started again, but got stopped in need of a spanner, so I ordered it from Amazon and hope to get back on that in a couple of days.

[stevebrot]

I was taking a couple photos of the MX that I just got back from Eric Hendrickson, and I thought it was interesting comparing it to a K1000 and a P3N, thought I would throw a k-50 in there for the heck of it. The K-50 is sporting a Super Takumar 1.4/50, the MX has an SMC 1.8/55, the K1000 has an M 2.0/50, and the P3N has an M zoom 2.8-4/40-80. I only got the P3N yesterday, it came with a F 50/1.7 that has a slight bit of fungus on the front element. I'm attempting to clean that fungus off, I started last night and was part way through before the hurricane shut the power off, power's back tonight and I started again, but got stopped in need of a spanner, so I ordered it from Amazon and hope to get back on that in a couple of days.

Nice grouping, though perspective makes the P3n look huge! BTW...I really like the lipstick red on the K-50.


Steve

[gofour3]

P3n

You mean "nEd" ..........

Phil.

[ramseybuckeye]

Nice grouping, though perspective makes the P3n look huge! BTW...I really like the lipstick red on the K-50.


Steve

Grouping those four like that really does throw relative sizes out the window. The P3N looks quite small, until it sits beside the MX, while they are nearly identical in length, width, and height, the P3N is much bulkier, only the MX's pentaprism brings it up to the overall height of the P3N, if that makes any sense.

[stevebrot]

Grouping those four like that really does throw relative sizes out the window. The P3N looks quite small, until it sits beside the MX, while they are nearly identical in length, width, and height, the P3N is much bulkier, only the MX's pentaprism brings it up to the overall height of the P3N, if that makes any sense.

The miniature K1000 also makes for a double take!


Steve

[Jonathan Mac]

This just arrived a very few days ago:

(Tamron Adaptall2 01A f2.8-3.8 35-80mm + Pentax K110D)

I have a hankering to try a Fujica SLR but every one I come across is either faulty in some way or has a very dirty viewfinder. How is the 55/2.2? It seems to be the most common Fujica lens and as far as I'm aware it doesn't get great reviews.

[VILLAINofOZ]

[goatsNdonkey]

I have a hankering to try a Fujica SLR but every one I come across is either faulty in some way or has a very dirty viewfinder. How is the 55/2.2? It seems to be the most common Fujica lens and as far as I'm aware it doesn't get great reviews.

The ST605N is the entry level body of the ST series of Fujicas, but is also the updated version of the ST6 _ _ group. It takes 1.5v batteries, not 1.3v, if you find one with a working meter like mine seems to have. I'm pretty sure that the Fujinon 2.2/55 was the kit lens that came with all of the ST 6 _ _ cameras. I suspect that the ST801 either came with the Fujinon 1.9/55 or that lens was the option those buyers chose. The ST801 had a much wider range of shutter speeds than the ST6 _ _ group, going up to 1/2000 sec, and it also took 1.5v batteries. (You have to read the manuals or other detailed camera spec providers to know about the battery issue; there's no way to tell from the body name.)

The ST series Fujicas all use their modified m42 screw mount. It has a little tab their stop-down metering employs somehow. The tab has to be removed to mate the lens properly on a screw mount Pentax body. I tried a couple of shots with my 2.2/55 on my K110D using an m42 adapter, but the tab gave me around 1mm of extension (no infinity focus). Otherwise it worked. The ST605N will take non-Fujica m42 lenses, but I haven't checked to see exactly what changes with Fujica-tabless lenses. The last ST-series cameras came out in 1978, and in '79 they started selling their new bayonet mount cameras and lenses.

If you search our Third-Party lens reviews for Fujica or Fujinon, you'll find that several lenses come up. The 2.2/55 does have lower numbers than some others, but if you look at all of its reviews, you will find that people posting beautiful pictures they've taken with that lens give it a 9 for sharpness. And the people who give it a 7 for sharpness post no pictures to show what they mean. You could PM some of those reviewers with more experience with the lens than I have. It'll be a week or so before I know how my first film shots with it come out.

I agree that on ebay there are a lot of Fujica ST bodies and compatible Fujinon lenses listed as "untested," "as-is," "for-parts," "used," or other conditions not the same as "tested and fully working." Last week usedphotopro (at there website, not sure about their ebay listings) had a guaranteed Fujica ST body for sale for about $45, but I forget whether it was an ST701, ST705, or ST801. No help though if one is looking for a lens or body with lens, and they don't still list it now. I wasn't actually following the ST6 _ _ models on ebay, and really only looked at this one because it had a lens, and might be a good way to get a lens inexpensively if it didn't get bid up high. Then looking more closely I saw it said the camera was working and the lens was clear. There were few pictures, but I thought I'd take a chance. Nobody else bid on it.

Good luck in your Fujica quest!