Koni Omega... I think I like it A LOT!

[kuzano]

Shutter speeds....

Shutter speeds....

Do you guys find a tripod necessary? If not, what's the slowest shutter speed you can manage to get sharp negatives out of? I'm using a 90mm Omegon.

Well... 90 is the normal focal length for the format, so I always used the normal reciprocal 1/100th to 1/125th. Bear in mind it's a heavy camera and I presume you are asking about Hand Holding???

The heavy part is good and bad. It's a tank and if you're strong and stable you may be able to pull another stop out of it... 1/60th. It's a leaf shutter so there's no shutter shooting across the back. It's a rangefinder so no mirror slap. So it boils down to your ability to hold steady and brace yourself for stability.

Frankly, I understand the value of the tripod and have used both tripods and monopods for stability for the last couple of decades.

I never buy into the ego trip... "oh yeah, they're good and I hand held those shots.....". Film and processing are too expensive for that kind of head trip.

Both the omegon and the hexanon are good lenses, but personally favored the hexanon. Seemed just a bit sharper to me at f11 and smaller. The Super Omegon is sharper wide open. So for landscape work, long depth of field, favors the hexanon. If shooting the Super Omegon at f11 or smaller, I'd surely use a tripod.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The bigger the format, the longer you can hand-hold it (proportionately) as the negative is not enlarged as much, i.e. the angular movement is less. The 'one over focal length' rule of thumb applies only to 35mm, and not very reliably then. I quite happily shoot an 80mm lens at 1/60th or even 1/30, and go to 1/15 if I have to.

Remember, 90mm on 6x7 equates roughly to 45mm on 35mm.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sanmich]

The bigger the format, the longer you can hand-hold it (proportionately) as the negative is not enlarged as much, i.e. the angular movement is less. The 'one over focal length' rule of thumb applies only to 35mm, and not very reliably then. I quite happily shoot an 80mm lens at 1/60th or even 1/30, and go to 1/15 if I have to.

Remember, 90mm on 6x7 equates roughly to 45mm on 35mm.

Cheers,

R.

Roger,

I understand the explanation, but it seems to me that having a small amount of blurring in MF is less acceptable than in 35mm, because of the purpose or the use of the format. Isn't a small blur immediately killing the sharpness and details of an image?
That being said, and after having had the opportunity to taste the slam of a MF SLR, my uneducated guess is that the MF RFs are probably able to stand a lower speed than SLRs.
I personally don't like to walk around with tripods.
So my compromise, if it is one, is to use Tri-x.
At 400 ISO, even with an orange filter, I usually have enough light to shoot hand held at decent speeds.
It also helps because of the limited aperture of the MF lense.

 

[furcafe]

The 135 is a stellar lens, but unfortunately does not focus closer. In fact, like the 135 Sonnar on the Tele-Rolleiflex, the close focus on the 135mm is actually farther than the standard 90mm lens (though partially compensated by the longer focal length).

The 135 is incredible (and focuses a bit closer, as I recall) . . .

 

[shadowfox]

I always thought that the amount of movement that a leaf shutter on these big cameras (I mean the KO and the MUP) are small enough compared to the mass of the camera, that's why I can handheld shots at slower shutter speeds.

Add to that the fact that 400 ASA grain is barely visible a that negative size. A 400 speed film is a fine choice for most situations.

 

[sanmich]

The 135 is a stellar lens, but unfortunately does not focus closer. In fact, like the 135 Sonnar on the Tele-Rolleiflex, the close focus on the 135mm is actually farther than the standard 90mm lens (though partially compensated by the longer focal length).

I think it just misses the "...than the 180mm"

 

[jvan01]

my KO 200's rangefinder sounds "creaky" when I turn the focus knob, like the twanging sound of old attic door springs. Is this normal?

 

[sanmich]

my KO 200's rangefinder sounds "creaky" when I turn the focus knob, like the twanging sound of old attic door springs. Is this normal?

Doesn't sound normal, and be aware that there is a small set screw there that has a tendancy to fall in the focus mechanism.
Time for a CLA?

 

[IK13]

C'mon guys,
I was just ready to part with KO200/58mm and rebuilt (by me) back. Put a roll through it a couple of months ago to make sure it is still fine. It didn't make it to the classifieds back then only because of my laziness.
And just as I remembered to do it - a thread with this name doesn't help...

 

[jvan01]

I've gotten light leaks on some of my negatives, always in the same place as seen below:

Is this more of a light leak on the dark slide slot or the lens mount?

 

[IK13]

Can't tell you where's the light leak.
I did replace the light seals on all my bodies and backs, yet I still put black electrical tape over the dark slide slots. Might be a bit paranoid, but never had a problem this way.

 

[rjbuzzclick]

I also replaced the light seals on my backs, and also the seal around the lens opening that presses against the front of the magazine on my Rapid M. I decided not to replace the seals around where the dark slide goes in as I've never had a problem there. I wasn't having any leaks before I redid the seals, but I could see that they were starting to break down.

 

[simonankor]

I'm in two minds about my Koni... The results are just gorgeous but I struggle with the, er, quirky ergonomics. It works best for me shot "Weegee style" with a big handle-mount flash, 1/300, f/16 and just shoot it.

But I have a Mamiya 7 on layby now so I'm looking forward to a more conventional RF body!