Another Canonet QL17 question...

[mr. mohaupt]

I have had a G-III QL17 for a while now (purchased it from this site) and finally starting shooting with it again. I developed my first roll of film with it today and the negs all came out under exposed. I know the developing was right because I did two rolls of at the same time. One looked fine (shot with my SLR) the other looked underexposed. I love my Canonet but was wondering what might be the source of this problem.


Also most of them look out of focus but I am sure that is just my getting use to the focusing in low lighting conditions. I also cannot verify that they are all soft until I purchase a scanner or enlarger at the end of the month.


Suggestions?
~m

 

[mr. mohaupt]

Nothing? :-/

~m

 

[Gumby]

Also most of them look out of focus but I am sure that is just my getting use to the focusing in low lighting conditions.

I don't want to be the "bad news guy" but... it ain't a Leica. 😉

The exposure problem could be any number of things. I wouldn't even want to start speculating.

The soft focus... well, that has been my experience with Canonets... an dI know I know how to focus. What's more, my experience with "less htan crisp" results has been in regular daylight conditions.

 

[Gumby]

To start addressing the underexposure issue:

a. what battery are you using?
b. what film are you using?
c. autoexposure or manual exposure?
d. how dark was it... the lighting conditions?
c. how underexposed was the film?

 

[mr. mohaupt]

I know they are not leica's 🙂 but it is a fun way to start in RF photography.

I have got great results during sunny conditions at f/16 but that goes with out saying.


Gumby here were my settings
a.) PX625A ( Alkaline I know but with my OM-1 and Luna Pro I find they can get good exposure with B&W film)
b.) Agfa APX 400 @400 (have a bulk loader) Developed in Rodinal the same way I have always developed APX400
c.) Automatic
d.) The majority of them were indoors producing anywhere from 1/60 F/4-F/8 or in the shade
e.) Comparing them to the other roll that was developed at the same time I would say anywhere from 2/3-1 stop, but I have a terrible time determining exact exposure by looking at the negative. For some reason with my blacks and whites reversed I just cant "see" it right.


Looking at the negatives again I am about 80-90% sure I can salvage them in the (digital) darkroom with just some contrast adjustments but wasn't sure if this was a function of the camera.

Thanks guys for your thoughts so far.

~m

 

[Gumby]

I'd say more, but my broadband service is flaky this AM due so I'll be brief. Check your battery... it might be low on voltage/current. I use a Gossen adapter and silver cells with my Canonet and have good exposure. It could be the natural drop-off of the Li battery that's causing your grief.

p.s. Canonet IS a fun and affordable way to get into RFs. Enjoy!

 

[mr. mohaupt]

After you mentioned the battery I began to wonder. I have had the camera for more then 3 years and never changed the battery. I will get my hands on a volt meter and check it out. Thanks for the advice... I will look more into that.


~m

 

[jeckyll]

I wouldn't really waste time checking the battery, I'd just swap it out, roll a 12 exposure roll and test.

Just my $0.02

 

[fredsters_s]

Seriously, anyone who claims that you can't get crisp focus on a Canonet doesn't know how to focus an RF. Unbelievable the depth of Leica snobbery!!!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The Canonet was originally set up for 1.35v batteries. Unless it has been calibrated for 1.5v batteries, it will give underexposure. Set the ASa to 2/3rds of the films rated speed to compensate.

 

[Gumby]

Seriously, anyone who claims that you can't get crisp focus on a Canonet doesn't know how to focus an RF. Unbelievable the depth of Leica snobbery!!!

How 'bout I send you my Canonet and you can put your money where your mouth is. I'll let you have it for a while and you can return it with some examples of crisp pictures taken with it.

p.s. I don't have a Leica, nor do I want one, so there is no snobbery here Freddie.

 

[nzeeman]

your battery is too high voltage -just set meter on 320 aa instead of 400- it shoud be ok... i use it that way when i use meter on canonet...

 

[JohnTF]

With negative materials, your best latitude for exposure is on the over side, especially color negative. If you underexpose, you will not be exciting the silver, and if it is not there, it is not there.

I think you got your money's worth out of the battery. If you want there are a lot of solutions to using other batteries closer to the voltate if you look.

Lens should be sharp, but you may have to go more manual for the exposure.

Also, when you have a roll processed where the exposures are wildly off, be sure to look at the edge printing first, it should be well exposed.

Now how long has the developer been sitting? ;-)

You have more than a few variables.

Unless I read the post wrong, your inside exposures seem a bit light for most places?

Back in the day, when schools had about 100 ft candles, Tri X was about 1/30 at f 2.8, processed in D 76

You should also know/ find out. if the guy selling you the camera had it serviced and perhaps adjusted for the alkaline cells 1.5 V

Regards, John.

 

[JohnTF]

You can take out one variable by shooting XP2 and getting the film developed at the One Hour. J

 

[hks3sgte]

What does Leica have to do with focus?

 

[zuikologist]

Firstly, ask the seller if they had any issues with the camera.


Also, try a 1.4v hearing aid battery and adjust the ASA dial to 1/2 stop overexposure. This should give close enough voltage. Then check that the meter is reading about the same as a known good meter. Take some photos and develop (XP2 or APX or whatever) using your normal method. Knowing the meter is about right from the tests above, the results should give you some idea if the shutter is working properly. You can visually check the aperture by setting to manual amnd shooting at various apertures: the blades should close down well to the set aperture.

There is so much good information about the Canonets that if you want to tinker to fix it, you have a fair chance of success. Good luck and let's see some photos.

 

[zuikologist]

I don't want to be the "bad news guy" but... it ain't a Leica. 😉

The exposure problem could be any number of things. I wouldn't even want to start speculating.

The soft focus... well, that has been my experience with Canonets... an dI know I know how to focus. What's more, my experience with "less htan crisp" results has been in regular daylight conditions.

I assume the comment is about the lens. For most purposes, the Canonet lenses are more than good enough. You may just have a bad sample or the RF is not aligned.

 

[Gumby]

I assume the comment is about the lens. For most purposes, the Canonet lenses are more than good enough. You may just have a bad sample or the RF is not aligned.

Perhaps all I've ever experienced are bad samples; it is a possibility. For snapshots its OK but the negs wouldn't hold up to enlargement. It is also possible that I'm just too picky!

 

[zuikologist]

Anything is possible.

 

[mr. mohaupt]

I assume the comment is about the lens. For most purposes, the Canonet lenses are more than good enough. You may just have a bad sample or the RF is not aligned.

I know on the Canon 7 there is a way to adjust this, is this possible with the QL17?


I am thinking maybe it is just the battery voltage. I will start with that. Shoot a short roll at 320 instead of 400 and see how those results come out.

John TF my rodinal is less then 2 months old. I dont think I am wildly off with those number my bathroom is EV 10 according to my Luna Pro 1/60 @f/4 exactly and that jives with my mkII. I know about overexposing with negative's "shoot for the shadows print for the highlights."


I will give it another whirl and see what happens. Thanks for all the postings guys!