Category Archives: Gadgets

Horseman 980 technical camera – some thoughts

Posted by on October 9, 2011 13 comments

I’m no stranger to medium format photography. I’ve owned a few box cameras, a basic folding camera, and a cheap TLR for a while. Last year I started to take it seriously by buying a Mamiya RB67 outfit. I’ve been using it mainly for landscape photography and perhaps inevitably, I ran into the need to have movements on the camera.

I don’t have a scanner or an enlarger capable of taking 5×4″ negatives, and with the added cost of the sheet film, it would be an expensive venture. So I decided to buy a medium format technical camera, aka field camera. After looking around, I settled on one of the Horseman cameras – 970, 980, 985, VH or VH-R.

Horseman 980

But this isn’t my life story, nor is it a review of the Horseman 980. This is supposed to be a few snippets of information that I have found out for myself about the 980, and have decided to publish here given the scarcity of information about the Horseman 6×9 technical cameras.

Mamiya RB67 backs

Compatibility with RB backs is an important factor for me, since I already have several Mamiya backs for my RB67. Information is hard to come by, but as far as I can gather…

Will work with RB backs Will not work with RB backs
  • Horseman 985
  • Horseman VH
  • Horseman VH-R
  • Horseman 960
  • Horseman 970
  • Horseman 980

I think this can be roughly summarised to say that the Horseman cameras with rotating backs can take Mamiya RB67 backs. The older ones can’t.

The baby Graflok mechanism is the same, but the older Horseman models have raised silver metal areas around the film gate that do not allow the Mamiya backs to get close enough to the camera body for the sliding Graflok blades to mate. To mount a Mamiya back on a Horseman 960, 970 or 980 you will need to modify the camera itself. I haven’t seen a later Horseman body to compare.

Horseman 980 film gate

Film counter

This note particularly concerns the older roll-film back (pictured) with a chrome knob advance rather than a lever – although I have no idea if the same also applies to the lever-advance backs.

Horseman old-style 6×9 back

When loading a new film, there is no painted or engraved mark to align with the arrow on the paper backing. Instead you have to wind the paper on until you see the arrow peeping through a hole in the pressure plate. At this point, you close the back and wind until number 1 appears on the film counter.

However, in my experience, this means the film is wound about 5cm too far before the first exposure, meaning the last exposure is cut off. Now that I’m aware of this, I’ll just advance a little less to begin with. After I’ve figured out the best way of doing this reliably, I’ll comment on this post.

Shutter release

These Horseman cameras do not take a standard cable release. The standard type of cable release found on 99% of (non-digital) cameras has a small screw thread on the tip of the cable, and screws into a socket somewhere on the camera or lens. There is no threaded socket on the Horseman lenses. Instead, there is a tube that the cable release sits in, with a screw clamp to hold the cable in place. Sounds OK, except the diameter of the tube is 6.5mm and almost all cable releases are too thin to be gripped by the clamp.

Horseman cable release socket

The Horseman cable releases seem extremely rare – I haven’t found one anywhere online. There is also an adapter that exists but is very rare. I’ve searched extensively and found them only occasionally supplied with lenses – never on their own. I’ve pinched this photo from an eBay auction, to illustrate what the adapter looks like. It’s the small chrome thing in the shutter release hole.

Lens with shutter release adapter

I’ve contacted the Analog Photography Users Group and a camera shop that sells Horseman accessories, but neither were able to offer any insights.

I have worked around this by taking a standard cable release and wrapping it in a few layers of electrical tape to fatten it up a bit, so it gets clamped in the Horseman shutter release. It works reliably enough for me, and even looks OK when mounted.

Modified cable release

Modified cable release in Horseman socket

Mamiya RB67: Size & weight comparison

Posted by on March 3, 2011 1 comment

For a while I’ve fancied a Mamiya RB67 medium format SLR. I’d read about the tech specs, the wonderful lenses, the high resolution, and all the other benefits of such a powerful camera, and last week I splashed the cash and bought one. Optically, it was just what I was expecting – but nothing could have prepared me for the size and weight of this beast.

Sure, I’d seen figures online that said it weighed so many grammes and was so many millimetres wide. But that didn’t mean anything to me as an abstract number. Now I have the RB67 in my possession, I decided to take a few photos to put the figures into context. Most other photography equipment websites concentrate on how the gear performs, but I’m going to ignore that and focus solely on size and weight in a light-hearted and unscientific way.

I’ve got several other medium format cameras, although they are not SLRs. I knew the RB67 would be bigger than the others, but here the RB67 dwarfs my Coronet Conway Synchronised – not a small camera itself.

Mamiya RB67 with Coronet Conway Synchronised

And to put this size into a more tangible context for normal people who don’t collect box cameras, here it is with my Canon AE-1 Program – a popular consumer SLR in the 80s. It’s slightly larger and a little heavier than a modern digital SLR.

Mamiya RB67 with Canon AE-1 Program

And then we come to the matter of lenses. The RB67′s lenses have a longer focal length due to the larger film format, but they are also chunkier in every dimension. Here I have photographed a Mamiya-Sekor 50mm wide-angle lens with an equivalent Canon 28mm wide-angle lens for the AE-1 Program.

Canon FD 28mm with Mamiya-Sekor C 50mm

Canon FD 28mm with Mamiya-Sekor C 50mm

The Mamiya-Sekor 50mm lens on its own weighs about the same as the whole Canon AE-1 Program camera with a lens. It also weighs about the same as a collection of four Canon FD-mount lenses (135mm, 35-70mm, 28mm and 50mm, if you’re interested).

Mamiya-Sekor C 50mm with FD lenses

A basic RB67 set-up with standard lens, waist-level finder and film back weighs in at around 2.5kg, or about the same as a bottle of Pepsi and a can of soup.

Mamiya RB67 with Pepsi and soup

With a bigger lens and a few accessories, you can easily add a kilo or more to the RB67. Meanwhile, the Canon AE-1 Program with lens weighs about the same as a pint of Pepsi in a glass.

Canon AE-1 Program with Pepsi

Well, I hope this has proved entertaining and possibly even useful to someone who may be considering buying an RB67. It is most definitely a camera for use in a studio, or perhaps on a tripod for landscapes. Don’t even think about sport. :)

I offer my apologies for these poor still-life shots of camera equipment. My flashguns are in the loft and it’s cold up there, so I used a single macro LED ring flash, and it seems to have done OK.

Asus EeePC 901 and Kingspec SSDs

Posted by on January 28, 2011 2 comments

Recently the 16GB SSD in my EeePC 901 failed. I was surprised how little variety there was in compatible replacement SSDs, and so I bought practically the only option – a Kingspec 16GB SATA SSD. I paid just over £40 for it.

I’ve no idea how it performs in comparison with the original Asus SSD, but I don’t care. I only use my netbook for SSH sessions so it doesn’t really matter.

I swapped the two SSDs over but was annoyed to find that the Kingspec SSD wasn’t recognised. I did a little light reading, and found that only newer BIOS versions support this SSD. Fortunately, updating the BIOS on an Eee 901 is pretty straightforward.

  1. Download the latest compatible BIOS image, e.g. 901-ASUS-1703.zip
  2. Unzip the file, and rename it to 901.ROM (in capitals)
  3. Format a spare USB memory stick as FAT16 (FAT32 will not work) and copy 901.ROM onto it
  4. With the EeePC switched off, make sure that all USB devices and SD cards are removed. Attach the USB stick you just prepared.
  5. Turn the EeePC on, and at the grey ASUS splash screen, press Alt+F2.
  6. EZ Flash should detect your USB stick, find the firmware and update. On my system, it took about three minutes.
  7. Power off when prompted, remove your USB stick, and replace any SD cards.
  8. Power on, and your system should detect the Kingspec SSD. You might have to change the BIOS boot order, but you’re now free to go ahead and reinstall the OS.

Where I've been

Posted by on January 27, 2011 1 comment

My iPhone automatically records geo-location information with each photo I take. I’ve never used the information, but today I happened to be prodding about in the menus and it drew me a map of where I’ve taken photos.

It struck me that, by pure coincidence, all of the places are in a straight line.

So, where might I go next? Land’s End? Hull?!

Failing that, Norway or Venezuela.

Apple's swear box

Posted by on November 9, 2010 No comments

I recently noticed when using my iPhone that Apple have some sort of a list of swear words in their spelling dictionary.

For those unfamiliar with the way text input works on the iPhone, if you make a typo (or enter a word not in the dictionary) then one of these happens:

  • If the word you typed is similar to a dictionary word, the iPhone autocorrects it to the dictionary word
  • If the word you typed is not similar to a dictionary word (or you reject the suggested autocorrect) then it just gets underlined in red

I know there’s a “swearword list” because if I type a word very similar to a swearword (e.g. fick instead of fuck) then no autocorrect suggestion is made.  This would suggest that the dictionary doesn’t include the word fuck.

But when you directly type fuck, it is not underlined in red – so it exists in the dictionary! We conclude that there’s a special list of words regarded as swearwords which the phone will accept when given directly, but will not autocorrect anything else to.

I would love to see this list, and to find out what Steve Jobs regards as rude and inappropriate :D

Review – Samyang 8mm f/3.5 aspherical Fisheye lens

Posted by on November 4, 2010 5 comments

The background

For ages I’ve wanted a decent fisheye lens. Back when I was shooting with my Fuji S9600, I bought a filter-thread screw-on fisheye adapter. It was only about £30 and the chromatic aberration was awful, even in the viewfinder. But it opened up a new world of photography to me, and I enjoyed using it, taking pictures like this self portrait and these shots of Bristol.

Fast-forward a couple of years and I upgraded my S9600 to a Canon EOS 450D. Presumably due to the larger sensor size, the fisheye adapter had practically no effect. I never used it again, but I missed it and I kept looking at proper fisheye lenses (as opposed to the fisheye adapters). I rather liked the look of Canon’s 15mm fisheye lens. Trouble is, it has a list price of £880 (although can be had for around £600 on Amazon). For an occasional-use lens, this is just too much.

Recently I had another craving for more fisheye photos and I decided to have a look at third-party options.

The manufacturer options

Of course Nikon and Canon do their own lenses, and most of the “big name” lensmakers such as Sigma and Tamron also have offerings. But there are also some from lesser-known names. Peleng, Samyang and Opteka all offer fisheye lenses for Canon SLRs for around the £200-£250 mark.

It seems that the Samyang and Opteka lenses are virtually the same, although they have different advertised focal lengths – 8mm and 6.5mm respectively. I haven’t quite worked this one out yet, but I think it’s because of the projection that is used. I settled upon the Samyang since it’s available for a few pounds less on eBay and Amazon.

Samyang 8mm

Samyang 8mm

I was a little hesitant about buying a lens from a virtually unknown manufacturer. £200 is in that “danger zone” where it’s too expensive to risk wasting the money, but not quite expensive enough to be sure you’re getting something that’s any good. So I read some reviews, primarily these:

Amazingly, both reviewers gave the Samyang lenses a glowing review. They both noted that there is some chromatic aberration, but for the price, this can’t be argued with.

The thing that’s most likely to throw a spanner in the works is that this lens has no electronics. It can’t communicate with the camera, so there is no autofocus and no automatic aperture. This isn’t a problem for me, since I usually use Canon FD lenses which are also fully mechanical. But be aware, if you don’t like manual focus, think twice before buying this lens.

My thoughts

There’s nothing so formal here as a detailed review. I haven’t taken any measurements, but I can say a few things about using this lens.

  • When mounting or removing the lens from the camera body, it’s really hard to hold and twist the barrel of the lens without also twisting the aperture ring. I know it’s hardly a big deal, but it stands out from all my FD-mount lenses in this respect.
  • Having no electronics, you have to use the camera in aperture-priority or full manual mode. In Av mode, my 450D seems to consistently overexpose the image by about 11/3 stops. This is easily fixed with exposure compensation.
  • Again having no electronics, you have to manually open up the aperture when composing your shot, and then stop it down for taking the photo. If you don’t, the viewfinder can be very dim and difficult to focus.
  • The lens feels heavy and expensive – I guess due to the large glass elements inside. The focus ring is damped and feels much nicer than the manual-focus mode on most of Canon’s newer EF-mount lenses.
  • Despite some warnings about chromatic aberration and flare, I saw very little evidence of this in my photos. I deliberately challenged the lens in unusual lighting conditions by taking silhouettes against the sun and so on, but they all came out nicely.
  • Aside from adding some electronics, there’s not much that can be improved about this lens. For the price, the optics are incredible.

Sample photos

I can’t be bothered to duplicate my photos on this blog, but you can see the results of my evening photo-walk to the Clifton Suspension Bridge over on my photo blog ;)

Accessorize!

Posted by on October 16, 2010 1 comment

No, not handbags and shoes. I’m talking about accessories for my collection of film cameras.

My film cameras date from the late 1920s to the late 1990s, and between them they have a variety of different methods of controlling the focus and metering. Most of them don’t have any automation at all. This is fun, but can sometimes be a pain, and stand in the way of taking a great photo.

One of the great things about having an interest in photography that lags half a century behind everyone else is that it’s cheap. Provided you aren’t buying antique gear, you can generally get a lot of kit for your money – much more fun to be had for £100 than in the digital world.

So I bought a rangefinder, a light meter, and a power winder.

I took their photos with my DSLR and an LED ring flash. It worked really nicely for the rangefinder (about the size of a cigarette lighter), a bit worse for the light meter (the size of a pack of cigarettes, and flat and shiny) and really badly for the SLR (camera-sized :P and angular). I ended up cutting out the picture of the SLR, rather than over-exposing its background. Next time I’ll make the effort to set up some proper lighting!

Photopia rangefinder

My very crudest cameras have fixed-focus, and the most advanced have split-screen focussing. But there are some that have so-called “guess focussing“. My cameras that do this are a Braun Paxette Electromatic II, a Halina Paulette Electric, and a Voigtländer Bessa. You have no idea what the image will look like, as the viewfinder is totally separate from the main lens. These lenses do have a dial on them to help with setting the focus properly, but how do you know how to set it? That tree could be thirty feet, or forty. Or fifty.

Photopia rangefinder

Enter the rangefinder. This nifty device has two windows that point at your subject, and one viewfinder that the photographer looks through. You see two ghost images of your subject, and as you adjust the knob, the images move around. When the two images are perfectly aligned, you look at the dial and read off the distance. Then you just set the focus ring to this distance. Simple!

Photopia rangefinder

You can pick up 35mm rangefinder cameras cheaply from eBay, but I decided instead to buy a standalone rangefinder. This Photopia one will sit in the hot shoe (or sometimes “accessory shoe”) of any camera.

Realt light meter

Only three of my cameras have any sort of automatic metering. They range from full automatic (Canon EOS 300) to semi-automatic (Canon AE-1 Program) to a needle that waves around (Halina Paulette Electric). All the rest require the photographer to work out what the settings should be.

Of course, the sunny sixteen rule is a huge help here, but sometimes it’s no use. What if there’s a weather condition that’s not sunny, overcast or shade? What if you are taking a photo indoors? A light meter is the answer to your problems.

You can get all sorts of light meters, but I think the prettiest ones are the ones with needles that move around. I found a French Realt meter on eBay for a few quid, and bought it. It’s selenium-based, so not very accurate, but that’s half the fun.

Realt Photo light meter

The background scale behind the needle slides out, and you replace it with the relevant scale for the film speed you are using. Pretty neat. If you have a film for which there exists no scale (and since this dates back to 1949, that’s anything above 100 ASA) then you remove the scale altogether and read off the EV (exposure value) – which you can convert to real settings for your camera by looking them up in a table.

Canon power winder

This is one of things I bought just because I could, and because it was cheap. My Canon AE-1 Program has a lever to wind on the film. This makes a nice sound and feels satisfying, but can slow down the momentum of taking pictures rapidly. Often, I forget to wind on, and I don’t realise until after I’ve set up the next shot and then find the shutter won’t fire.

Canon AE-1 Program with Power Winder

As it was only a fiver, I bought a Canon Winder A. It does what it says on the tin – it winds on the film and can achieve a “few” frames per second. It doesn’t say how many, and I haven’t measured it. More to the point, it makes the camera look big and professional!

How things change

Posted by on August 13, 2010 No comments

Recently, I would say that photography is my favourite hobby. But it wasn’t always that way.

Throughout my childhood, I’ve taken pictures of important occasions on single-use cameras. My parents would always buy me a single-use camera before a family holiday, for example. I wasn’t interested in the camera, though.

A few years ago (2005, I think) I lived in hall of residence with a guy who had a “fancy camera”. I was so uninterested in it that I have no idea what it actually was. It was digital, and it had a big lens on it. This just goes to show that I didn’t care about photography at the time.

More recently, in 2007, I had a Sony Ericsson K800i camera phone. For a phone, it had an extremely decent camera and could compete with some of the entry-level digital compacts available at the time. But I still only really used it for taking photos of things that were happening around me.

But then, my colleague Paul starting doing his photo-a-day in 2008. I became a keen follower of his photo blog, and started to take “arty” shots on my phone. I enjoyed it so much that I quickly ran into the limitations of my phone and started wondering about buying a “real” camera.

There was a decent superzoom “bridge” camera in the office so I borrowed this for a few days and had great fun with it. Then unfortunately I was involved in an accident and dislocated my shoulder. Stuck at home, bored, I bought a camera. It was a bridge camera, one mark up on the one I’d borrowed from work. I bought it primarily as a high-tech toy, and with not much interest in the art of photography.

This was the stimulus I needed, and with a powerful and versatile camera I tried all sorts of photography. Gradually I became interested in the art of taking photos, and I now try to take photos that are nice to look at, as well as fun to take.

In 2009, I was given an unwanted 35mm SLR. At first I was sceptical – how useful could film be? I bought some film and had a go. I really enjoyed using an SLR for the first time and immediately wanted a DSLR.

In 2010, I caved in and bought a DSLR. I also continued shooting film and I now have a collection of around ten cameras – all film except for the DSLR. I’m still more interested in the cameras and the techniques in using them, but I hope that my work is also pleasing to look at. Make up your own mind.

New camera: Lomo Lubitel 166

Posted by on June 26, 2010 1 comment

I’ve been on a bit of a rampage with vintage cameras lately. Not content with three “boring” Canon 35mm SLRs, I recently acquired a late 1950s Paxette point’n'shoot and a mid 1950s Conway box camera.

The Conway was my first foray into the world of medium format, and I like it. Only days after developing the first couple of rolls of film from it, my Hana’s dad lent me a 1934 Kodak Six-20 Brownie. This takes a slightly different format film: 620 instead of 120 (but that’s a different story).

But I digress. Today Hana and I went to a car boot sale, and I spotted a LOMO Lubitel 166.  (cyrillic: ЛОМО Любитель. Means amateur in Russian). I’ve been looking at the Lubitel range and other inexpensive TLRs on eBay for some time, so I snapped it up. Yay for my sixth camera.

Lomo Lubitel 166 Universal

It’s in extremely good condition, albeit without the neck strap, lens cap or any other accessories. The glass is scratch-free and shows no signs of fungus. All of the mechanisms appear to work correctly, apart from the self-timer (which counts down, but fails to fire the shutter).

There’s not really much more I can add at this stage, except to say that I plan to get film in it as soon as possible, and the results will be on my photo blog when I’ve found a better method of digitising 120-format negatives than the one I used here..

User manual for the Conway Synchronised box camera

Posted by on June 23, 2010 3 comments

Whenever I buy old or hard-to-find things from the Internet I often like to look at the user manuals first. But it can often be hard to find them, and I’m grateful when other people take the time to scan or type out their product literature.

I recently bought a Conway box camera, dating back to the late 1950s. It came with a user manual, so it’s the least I can do to scan and reproduce it here. Hopefully it will be useful to somebody.

I’ve also linked the manual on camerapedia.org – a great resource for finding out about vintage cameras.

Coronet Conway manual