70mm Film FUN up ahead

Nokton48 said:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/sear...9519Xd7ad039e5b240f879ee7e555f7eaedfc&DFF=d60

B&H has 70mm type II perfed HP5+ back in stock 🙂
Click to expand...

I bought another a couple of weeks ago from B&H. I didn't know they had been out of stock.

Meanwhile, I have acquired 3 more A70s. Two were given to me, the other was $80. None worked. A friend gave me a factory tech manual for all magazines. I fixed two pending arrival of new light seals.

Of the two my friend gave me, one just had a spring that came unhooked. Easy peasy. The second had a stuck camming lever that was a PITA to get off. I used a small rounded file to carefully file out the pivot hole and chamfer the edges of the hole. Greased and BOTH now work!

Then the 3rd one...broke the screw that holds down the main gear clean off. 🙁 Now relegated to parts. I was very surprised to see some horrible servicing done to two of those mags. The one with the stuck cam had grease gobbed onto the wheel adjoining the cam and what happens to grease when it gets hot? Runnnsss. Dave Odess recommended red HD lithium grease and a very fine tipped paint brush to apply.
 
Nokton48 said:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/sear...9519Xd7ad039e5b240f879ee7e555f7eaedfc&DFF=d60

B&H has 70mm type II perfed HP5+ back in stock 🙂
Click to expand...

I've been using some SS pots to process the 70mm in. I've noticed some white grit here and there on the negs, which is most likely fixer. I have been placing the wash pot under the bathtub facet on low and cold and move the reel up and down a few times per minute, but seems to not suffice.

Any suggestions? I've thought about getting another pot and drilling a series of small holes in the bottom to allow the water to pass through while under the faucet.
 
Is the water filtered?

Do you pour all the water out periodically? I do

Also Hypo Clear step can be added if it is fixer

Are you using Photo-Flo?

I mix mine with distilled water for final step
 
Nokton48 said:
Is the water filtered?

Do you pour all the water out periodically? I do

Also Hypo Clear step can be added if it is fixer

Are you using Photo-Flo?

I mix mine with distilled water for final step
Click to expand...

Just tap water.

Yes.

I use the Ilford wetting agent. I assume that's different from the hypo clear? I do the same process for 70mm as I do for 120. I have had zero issues with the 120.
 
nZ5BNB0rkCgHp8y_1YbbofArpaZAMUPpZrKSRyUmGQBbHv50qCZDa6oJw7VnXUXWA-Fe5mADYN7Ztblf8BiDyxrMkmXAdh4jhB7sBIF-LfYpomXLU-pl1rQDBQECqTRzAGEWMX6iI4Q=w600


eiGLvNI9GYKz6qIfXiRfqfNwDP7_BMY0rcGetukfI2PQKjtFvLK2xChu_pDReKl5_XD3yThM17P2IQ_qGtRIQx2dGZ1ZEo2usO7tajL32-Vxa2pgCRpIMxhesHfd4X9NZtrjHoU5kPU=w600
 
It seems to me that the value of 70mm is the ability to take a large number of frames before reloading. If there is a need for that, maybe for aerial photo mapping, and little need for a variety of films, then there could be an economic reason as well. But you would have to accept the same development for a great many frames, and would be limited in film choice.

Browsing through the 28 pages of this thread, I saw a nice portrait; a landscape; a street shot; cars; underwater shots; and a snow scene. The other 95% of the photos were of film backs, film cans and boxes, developing reels, cameras and lenses. Gearhead stuff. Since I am a gearhead, I think that's fine; but am I right in thinking the satisfaction of 70mm for hobby purposes is in the gear, not the pictures?
 
Rob-F said:
It seems to me that the value of 70mm is the ability to take a large number of frames before reloading. If there is a need for that, maybe for aerial photo mapping, and little need for a variety of films, then there could be an economic reason as well. But you would have to accept the same development for a great many frames, and would be limited in film choice.

Browsing through the 28 pages of this thread, I saw a nice portrait; a landscape; a street shot; cars; underwater shots; and a snow scene. The other 95% of the photos were of film backs, film cans and boxes, developing reels, cameras and lenses. Gearhead stuff. Since I am a gearhead, I think that's fine; but am I right in thinking the satisfaction of 70mm for hobby purposes is in the gear, not the pictures?
Click to expand...

I have a single purpose for 70mm and that is so that I can have more than 12 exp underwater as I can stay down for up to an hour. Maybe longer if I drop the $$$$ for a rebreather. Then maybe I'll need to find the A100 mag. Haha
 
For me I make 24 exposure rolls, and I have five or six kinds of film in the freezer. I have four A70 backs so there are plenty of choices. I've never used +1 and -1 backs although that's an interesting idea for me.

70mm is a challenge to get working and I enjoy the challenge. Lots of questions and interest about different ways to do this, so lots of postings about gear. This is a gearhead forum 🙂

If you have a Hasselblad you have probably seen those dirt cheap A70s around and wondered if there is a way to make them useable for photographing?

Ilford and Agfa make fresh 70mm film. Outdated film works very well so plenty of choices.
 
Nokton48 said:
For me I make 24 exposure rolls, and I have five or six kinds of film in the freezer. I have four A70 backs so there are plenty of choices. I've never used +1 and -1 backs although that's an interesting idea for me.

70mm is a challenge to get working and I enjoy the challenge. Lots of questions and interest about different ways to do this, so lots of postings about gear. This is a gearhead forum 🙂

If you have a Hasselblad you have probably seen those dirt cheap A70s around and wondered if there is a way to make them useable for photographing?

Ilford and Agfa make fresh 70mm film. Outdated film works very well so plenty of choices.
Click to expand...

Yes I have seen the 70mm backs and wondered if I could use them for something!

What are the +1 and -1 backs? I didn't know about them.

Edit: Oh, now I see. For exposure compensation for contrast control. Somehow I thought you meant they were special models of 70mm backs.
 
Last edited:
Assign a roll and back for +1 development, and one for -1 development, and one for normal development. With three A70's you could do this.

220 film has gone the way of the dinosaur; this is a way to keep that type of workflow going. With 120 I would always run out at the peak of action or when things were getting good.

Also usually if I get something I think might be good I want to soup it right away; 24 exposures is not too many...........

Shooting with a motorized Hasselblad and 70 exposures is pure luxury! 🙂
 
The_Darkness said:
I've been using some SS pots to process the 70mm in. I've noticed some white grit here and there on the negs, which is most likely fixer.
Click to expand...

I bought a box of laboratory filter paper to use a large funnel to filter my D76 derivitive ADOX Borax MQ. That eliminates all the little floaties for me

Maybe also filter your fixer?

Takes a while I can tell you but worth it
 
Nokton48 said:
I bought a box of laboratory filter paper to use a large funnel to filter my D76 derivitive ADOX Borax MQ. That eliminates all the little floaties for me

Maybe also filter your fixer?

Takes a while I can tell you but worth it
Click to expand...
I used some Kodak hypo clear for a roll and it helped a lot.

I'm also noticing very small aberrations after scanning that seem like "holes" in the film, like the grains are just clear. I don't see them when holding the neg up to light. Thoughts?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Not familiar with that issue, sorry. Do the holes show when you scan?

Send the film to Ilford and ask them what it is

BTW those latest diving photos are great. Really like the seals 🙂

Makes me miss scuba diving
 
Calzone said:
UPDATE: I got the rare Linhof 645 CINE from Germany. Came with a pair of Linhof cassette bodies, but no spools.

I loaded and tested it. First off it seems the mask is not removable without taking off the Graftek flange which I will do later today at work, but the good news is that the shell will allow me to use the darkslide slot to make a removable mask. Also know that the 4x5 and circular 2x3 Graftek back plates both use ALL the same screw locations so they kinda are modular.

So in loading the 645 CINE the first thing that is noticed is the shorter throw of the film advance. I takes 5 strokes to advance to "1" on the film counter instead of only three strokes on a 6x7 CINE.

The next thing is I learned the frame counter alternates; one stroke will advance the counter; but the next stroke will skip advancing the counter; so it really takes two strokes to increase the counter by one increment. Know there is a second window that shows and indicates that the film is positively advancing.

The huge surprise is that I get 60 plus counts on the 645 CINE, meaning I get 120 plus 645 exposures on 15 feet of film.

The end game her is to have a common shell with the circular 2x3 Graftek backing plate and use a 645 mask using the darkslide slot that can easily be removed. I can then utilize a 6x7 CINE insert that comes from a 4x5 6x7 CINE without the mask for 6x7 format; but I can also use the 645 insert with mask in the same 2x3 Graftek shell.

Also know the added weight of a CINE counters an otherwise front heavy Linhof. This camera would be great to shoot the Gay Pride Parade, the Halloween Parade, or the Mermaid Parade.
Cal
Click to expand...
Hi Cal,
I have found a 2x3" 6x7 Cine Rollex at a reasonable price locally. Whilst I love the Baby Linhofs, I don't have one at the moment, so, I'm planning to shoot 70mm with my 4x5" Technika III. As Cine Rollex backs don't come along terribly often in Australia, because this one is keenly priced, I thought that I would pick it up and swap out the Graflok mounting plate from an ordinary 4x5" 6x7 Super Rollex that I have here.

As far as you know there are no differences between Eg the Cine Rollex 4x5" and 2 x 3" mounting plates and those on ordinary 120 or 620 Rollex/Super Rollex, are there? I can't see why there should be. If you are shooting 6x7 on 120 or 70mm in either case the film gate is the same size and it would make little sense for the plates to not be universal.

The other thing is that (as you mentioned above), with the mounting screw holes in the same location, you're fairly sure that converting a 2x3" to 4x5" Graflok mount, or vice-versa, is a straight swap, yes?

Your input much appreciated. Just want to check before I grab the 2x3" Cine Rollex.
Cheers
Brett

EDIT
After much checking of images on eBay listings and various websites the following seems to be the case:
It may be possible to convert a Linhof 2x3" Cine Rollex to a 4x5" version (or vice-versa) by swapping over the mounting plates, however standard Linhof Rollex or Super Rollex magazines have different attachment points for their mounting plates. It does not appear possible to convert a Cine Rollex from one format to the other by grafting in the mounting plate from an ordinary 120/220 Rollex. Back to square one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom