Jump to content

Adriano Cimino

Basic Member
  • Posts

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Adriano Cimino

  1. To be "apodictc" in this issue one has to know the optical science behind the visible outcome. I confess I mostly ignore it, that's why I am asking here. I perceive the typical "Cooke look" * in sunset-like, vivid colors, well rounded contours frequently coming out from Kinetals or Panchros.

    My (empirical, experiential) question is if other, non professional Cooke series - Ivotal 25 and 50 in particular - do give a similar look, in order to integrate the set I have with more accessible lenses covering the missing focal lenghts, or I better wait for some lucky appearance of C mount Kinetals in the market.

    * (I borrow the marketing expression as a joke: we're talking about lenses quite older than ourselves).

     

  2. Thanks so much. There's a lot to be known for a conscious choice. However simply, maybe simplistically posed: would there be a remarkable difference, a rough gap in image quality between a Kinetal and an Ivotal ? "Quality" also in a broad meaning: sharpness of the figure; depth of field; contrast; the warm color shift that's typical of the professional Cooke series...

  3. Hello everyone.

    I own three Cooke Kinetal C mount. Finding it difficult to complete the set for their rarity, I am wandering how do the Kinetal's image "cut" with other models' one of the same Taylor-Hobson firm: Ivotal, Telekinic, Serital, and so on. Could anybody explain the evolution of Cooke lenses, if and how their resulting image could be compared side by side (take by take) with each other?

     Thanks for your answers.

  4. I eventually asked a lathe shop. The man - quizzed about that most strange a thread - measured the Schneider-Kreuznach front as follows:

    diameter: M49.7

    step: 0.718

    Although it is not point-perfect, the newly made adapter goes two good turns inside, and stays steadily blocked on the lens. It works for 10mm and 16mm Cinegon; 25mm and 50mm (and hopefully 75mm) Cine-Xenon.

  5. Hi, happy Easter and thanks a lot for your help. I don't know if it'll work - I am worried about the right STEP of the thread - but I found a 49.5 to S VII AND a S VII to 62 adapters, sold by the same shop in Germany. I will try them out.

    The clamp-on solution is urbane, but it is expensive and a little cumbersome, when in need to change lens quickly. I actually have a clamp-on thing for the Schneiders. It is quick as there are no screws - just to be pushed in - but it's made of plastic and only takes one 2x2 filter a time, without frontal thread. But it is a possibility indeed.

  6. Thanks everyone for the answers. Yes, I contacted ICE Film telling them the serial number (which, by the way, is C2227). Still received non answers from them, though. It's a pity as it (that is: the pictured one) was a beautiful camera indeed.

    Bye and thanks again.

  7. Hello everyone,

    the question is about an unusual selling practice and a possible "scam", I don't know if this is the right place to pose it. I happened to see an Aaton XTR on sale on Ebay, with this unusual picture: a cardboard telling you could only purchase the camera on Buy it now price. You have to contact them, then they put the thing back on sale for you to click the magical button. After one day the advert disappeared.

    I actually had a contact by email (info <info@sjsal.com>). They answered, delivering a dozen of pictures of the camera, which appears to come from ICE Film (London rental house?).

    Has anybody had a similar experience? Does anybody know this email address?

    Thanks.

  8. The question is a routine one on this forum. Nevertheless I've found no straight answers to my case, so I submit it here.

    I've exposed S8 carts of Kahl UT18, namely expired back in 2013 (9 years now). I metered them at normal speed (50 ASA) in a mixed sun/shadow open-air situation (the main subject - the humans - were in shadow, mostly). Slightly overexposed, maybe (the camera meter pointer on the "+" side of the right-exposure interval). 

    Should I develop them normally, or I better ask the lab for a +1 push process?

    Is there a general rule on developing old stock by pushing it?

    Thanks for suggestions.

  9. Hi,

    to whom it may interest: I bought the lens eventually, and the focusing ring is mobile (i.e. as recent cinegons, not as kinetals), being just a bit stiff on its first rounds.

    Now I've one more question about this lens: does anybody know what's its filter size? It measure AROUND 44 mm, but I've not tried a proper 44 ring yet, and I wonder if it might be a strange/old thread, instead.

  10. Hi everybody,

    I have an occasion on buying an old Kinoptik 12.5 Grand-Angle Special. It is in Arri Std mount and I'd like to adapt it to a Leicina Special via the original Leitz adapter for these lenses. This adapter is the three-screws type, screws which hold on the barrel slot; but it has not the pin to block the back of the objective. So it is not good, for example, for Kinetals and any other lens which has the back barrel rotating when focusing.

    Does anybody knows if the lens in question has the focus barrel independent from the back cylinder, or not?

    Thank you.

  11. Hi, and thanks for replies.

    Yes I've seen that ebay insertion already, but I subscribe the "OMG that price just for a small piece of bakelite or whatever" opinion. There are two more selling on ebay, both are broken and glued together. 

    The question could then shift on which is the right glue for bakelite, or any other solution, keeping in mind the cover is mostly intact. What is broken is the very end of the piece, the curve tab fitting under the horizontal metal stick: it must be a most efficient glue, then.

  12. Hello, as a general question (from a non-experienced guy, as I am), which one is the camera that need technical assistance more often?

    Something I read about Aatons, that they need a proper vacuum lubricance, keeps me thinking an Arri would be cheaper to mantain over the time - save it has more available spare parts.

    But, since both need CLA from time to time, which is the actual need of it, between the two, or even among older, more affordable alternatives?

  13. A doubler on a 16mm Schneider for example would only make a rather slow 32mm, certainly worse than a comparable focal length prime and I would hazard to guess no better than most zooms.

     

    The seller assured he tried with a Xenon 16mm and it fits, the deepness being aroud 35 mm.

    My aim is to have a discrete variety of focal lenghts, to cut with old Schneider primes' look. For keeping it cheap, I thougt to double some of them with the extender. Frankly, do you think is this latter the better solution, or to use some - adapted - Minolta Rokkor lenses instead?

    (please excuse me for bouncing into the main discussion!)

×
×
  • Create New...