Jack Conrad
Well-known
Yep, isn't it pretty? I just crafted it from a vitamin bottle. A perfectly snug slip on fit.
But that isn't really why I started this thread.
I've been working on this Zenobia for a while and it's almost an ok shooter at this point, but...
I'd like to ask a question about the filter. You see, after I made the hood and was thinking how nice it looked, I thought it sure would be nice to have a filter for this too... so I looked around and tried a 52mm off my F3, and it fit perfectly snug on the end of the hood.
My question is what are the drawbacks to sticking a filter on so far out from the lens. I've got lots of 52mm filters but not a single 25mm? that this Zenobia uses.
I can easily cut the hood down closer to the lens if necessary, but if this configuration creates weird light refractions or something, maybe I should just leave the hood as is.
What do you think?
But that isn't really why I started this thread.
I've been working on this Zenobia for a while and it's almost an ok shooter at this point, but...
I'd like to ask a question about the filter. You see, after I made the hood and was thinking how nice it looked, I thought it sure would be nice to have a filter for this too... so I looked around and tried a 52mm off my F3, and it fit perfectly snug on the end of the hood.
My question is what are the drawbacks to sticking a filter on so far out from the lens. I've got lots of 52mm filters but not a single 25mm? that this Zenobia uses.
I can easily cut the hood down closer to the lens if necessary, but if this configuration creates weird light refractions or something, maybe I should just leave the hood as is.
What do you think?
Last edited:
hans voralberg
Veteran
Shoot a roll and see? My guess is if you paint the inside of the hood matt black it shouldn't create too much problem.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
Thanks. Yes, I will do that... I was just thinking someone might already have discovered the consequences of such an arrangement, good bad or indifferent.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Jack,
Considering the 75mm is a pretty long lens, that should be okay as far as vignetting goes. But that's just my guess.
Considering the 75mm is a pretty long lens, that should be okay as far as vignetting goes. But that's just my guess.
Brian Legge
Veteran
The distance between the glass isn't that big of a deal. There are lenses with built in hoods with the filter threads on them, similar to what you've made here.
The main issue is vignetting; does the hood + ring of the filter itself clip into the light the lens is taking in. Easiest thing to do would be to shoot a few test shots permutations. Examples would be no hood, with hood, with hood and filter at both stopped down and fully open* to see if you see any differences in quality.
* I can never remember if you're more prone to see problems fully open or stopped down. I'm sure someone here can tell you if you don't know already.
The main issue is vignetting; does the hood + ring of the filter itself clip into the light the lens is taking in. Easiest thing to do would be to shoot a few test shots permutations. Examples would be no hood, with hood, with hood and filter at both stopped down and fully open* to see if you see any differences in quality.
* I can never remember if you're more prone to see problems fully open or stopped down. I'm sure someone here can tell you if you don't know already.
hanskerensky
Well-known
That's a real nice lens hood which you made !
Considering the place of the filter, apart from the allready mentioned possible vignetting issues, it's of course a fact that there on the front the filter is not protected by the lens hood against stray lights. Guess you have to keep it very clean, especially when shooting against frontal sidelight.
Considering the place of the filter, apart from the allready mentioned possible vignetting issues, it's of course a fact that there on the front the filter is not protected by the lens hood against stray lights. Guess you have to keep it very clean, especially when shooting against frontal sidelight.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
Ok, I ran a roll through the Zenobia(Zen) using the pill bottle hood with an ND4 filter attached as above.
It seemed to work. I was able to shoot mid day sun and chrome at around f5.6 to f11, at 1/500, though probably more like 1/300. I had it loaded with Tri-X 400 which should have been slower film but it's what she was loaded with.
Oh, and I've had quite a time with the lens/shutter on this camera. I replaced what I found it with, a Voigtar on a one speed shutter with a Neo-Hesper in a Diachi rapid that has all its speeds.
The Neo-Hesper lens however, came with a horribly crusted rear element. Anyway, these shots represent an ongoing project to learn cameratography, more often than not, the hard way... or at least the cheap way. Haha...
So after having polished up that rear inner element, by hand mind you, with a cloth and some red polishing rouge,...lol, I took these shots and I think they came out ok. Not sharp like a Rollieflex perhaps, but with a nice big atmospheric personality, I think.
My next experiment will be to try replacing the hand polished Neo-Hesper rear group with a real Tessar rear lens group,
which visually looks to be the same size.
It fits right in... Long shot I suppose.
I would use the front group on the Tessar as well, but it's off a unit focus TLR, and that means I'd have to change the lens bodies as well. I don't really wanna do that.
Anyway, I'm gonna try the next roll with my New"Neo-Tesper" Frankenstein lens. and see what happens.
It looks nice and sharp on a ground glass back.
Has anyone tried this? I suppose it would be amazing if it turns out to be sharp like a full fledged Tessor.
It seemed to work. I was able to shoot mid day sun and chrome at around f5.6 to f11, at 1/500, though probably more like 1/300. I had it loaded with Tri-X 400 which should have been slower film but it's what she was loaded with.
Oh, and I've had quite a time with the lens/shutter on this camera. I replaced what I found it with, a Voigtar on a one speed shutter with a Neo-Hesper in a Diachi rapid that has all its speeds.
The Neo-Hesper lens however, came with a horribly crusted rear element. Anyway, these shots represent an ongoing project to learn cameratography, more often than not, the hard way... or at least the cheap way. Haha...
So after having polished up that rear inner element, by hand mind you, with a cloth and some red polishing rouge,...lol, I took these shots and I think they came out ok. Not sharp like a Rollieflex perhaps, but with a nice big atmospheric personality, I think.
My next experiment will be to try replacing the hand polished Neo-Hesper rear group with a real Tessar rear lens group,
which visually looks to be the same size.
It fits right in... Long shot I suppose.
I would use the front group on the Tessar as well, but it's off a unit focus TLR, and that means I'd have to change the lens bodies as well. I don't really wanna do that.
Anyway, I'm gonna try the next roll with my New"Neo-Tesper" Frankenstein lens. and see what happens.
It looks nice and sharp on a ground glass back.
Has anyone tried this? I suppose it would be amazing if it turns out to be sharp like a full fledged Tessor.
oftheherd
Veteran
Fascinating experiments you are doing. Keep us informed.
I like the results you have so far with the lens and hood + filter.
I like the results you have so far with the lens and hood + filter.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
Alright, this time I shot a roll with the Tessar rear element and a
red filter, but somehow I over developed the Tri-X film and nearly
lost the whole roll.
At least now I know what over developing looks like. It clips the shadows and highlights and makes lotsa grain.
I knew I screwed up the second I poured out the HC-110 soup.
Most of the silver poured out with it. Oh well, live and learn.
One observation I might mention here is that it appears the Frankenlens Tessar rear lens combined with the Neo-hesper is showing excellent promise for sharp images.
Anyway, here's a sample or two...
Fire gutted abandoned house
56 Chevy Pickup in rain
Pool side
Post Panties
red filter, but somehow I over developed the Tri-X film and nearly
lost the whole roll.
At least now I know what over developing looks like. It clips the shadows and highlights and makes lotsa grain.
I knew I screwed up the second I poured out the HC-110 soup.
Most of the silver poured out with it. Oh well, live and learn.
One observation I might mention here is that it appears the Frankenlens Tessar rear lens combined with the Neo-hesper is showing excellent promise for sharp images.
Anyway, here's a sample or two...
Fire gutted abandoned house
56 Chevy Pickup in rain
Pool side
Post Panties
Brian Legge
Veteran
Very nice! I'm rather surprised shots with a randomly grabbed rear element came out so nicely! What tlr was this from?
Do you have those posted at a larger size anywhere? I'd love to take a look at something much larger.
Do you have those posted at a larger size anywhere? I'd love to take a look at something much larger.
Steve M.
Veteran
I'm surprised that the filter on the end worked so well, because I've done similar things and it flared quite a bit. It probably just depends on your lens, as some lenses are much more prone to flare than others. Thanks for posting this, as I'm always amazed at how much hoods cost for some cameras. Great idea.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
Zeiss Ikon Ikomat... I'm really surprised myself, that the neo hesper lens worked at all, considering the rear group element was completely non transparent, like trying to see through rock salt. I actually scraped the element with my pocket knife to get the crust off. Car shots.
And then when I replaced it with another rear group from that broken Zeiss Ikomat TLR that had been frustrating me for months, I was feeling seriously doubtful, and had to force myself to get out and shoot the little beast to test it.
Maybe I was just lucky with the light, although I definitely didn't push my luck and shoot into the light. I don't think the old lenses were made for flare, but they sure did have some terrific character.
And character is really what I'm looking for in a lens. Not consistency or reliability or uniformity. I don't care at all about those concerns. I'm not a professional who needs to satisfy time frames or other peoples expectations. I "Shudder" at the idea.
No, what I'm interested in is the pursuit of serendipity. And it appears this little Zen 645 has the magical-ness or whatever it takes to find it. I'm very pleased with it.
It's an easy folder to use as well, since it's so small.
Although the hood, filters and add-on meter kind of eliminate that advantage.
Still, medium format is sooooo awesome.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
At the moment, no. But honestly, I'm not sure these shots would hold up very well under close pixel scrutiny. I think the chunky grain would fall apart.