There is a frame I shot in flat shade light and the negative is way too dense. This was before my pool-side realization that 1/90th at f16 makes zero sense when shooting at a Palm Desert sky.
The frames I shot thereafter with exposure comp at -1.5 to -2 look great.
Some observations:
- my new copy also has the new baffle behind the lens
- the serial number also begins with "BF" so the F seems to indicate the newer production batch
Still a bit torn regarding the overexposure issue. On the one hand, I do not want to let them get away with selling faulty products at that price point. On the other hand, I realized it's pretty easy to "fix" as the MC-A allows setting ISO manually between 12-3200 ISO, so it would only ever be an issue if I want to shoot at 1600 (would have to use the Exposure Compensation dial then)..
Guess I'll wait to see how happy I'm with the results from the roll and how good the frame spacing is. If there are still any issues it definitely goes back to Vienna..
I also got a second copy for review. The new one has the baffle, the advance stroke is half as long as the one on the original (about 90 degrees now, instead of almost 180) and much smoother, and the rewind is also much smoother.
However, with both rolls I've loaded it failed to read the DX code. The first roll I didn't notice and shot at 100 instead of 400 (Ultramax, whatever). I'll have a closer look at that once I finish the current roll.
Overall, it feels more polished this go-around.
Metering also seems good now that I'm shooting at box speed.
deadwolfbones wrote:
I also got a second copy for review. The new one has the baffle, the advance stroke is half as long as the one on the original (about 90 degrees now, instead of almost 180) and much smoother, and the rewind is also much smoother.
However, with both rolls I've loaded it failed to read the DX code. The first roll I didn't notice and shot at 100 instead of 400 (Ultramax, whatever). I'll have a closer look at that once I finish the current roll.
Overall, it feels more polished this go-around.
Metering also seems good now that I'm shooting at box speed....Show more →
@madNbad was the DX coding working in your camera that overexposed?
deadwolfbones wrote:
I also got a second copy for review. The new one has the baffle, the advance stroke is half as long as the one on the original (about 90 degrees now, instead of almost 180) and much smoother, and the rewind is also much smoother.
However, with both rolls I've loaded it failed to read the DX code. The first roll I didn't notice and shot at 100 instead of 400 (Ultramax, whatever). I'll have a closer look at that once I finish the current roll.
Overall, it feels more polished this go-around.
Metering also seems good now that I'm shooting at box speed....Show more →
I just loaded a roll of Ultramax and it recognized the DX code and - at least indoors in low light - the meter reading mostly matches my light meter app.
I’m wondering if the overexposure issue is related to
a) manual ISO settings (the roll I had the issues with was a Rollei ISO 640 film shot at 1600) or
b) light level as I had the feeling metering was plausible when I tried it indoors in low light before, but it was clearly overexposing in daylight
My camera has been empty for a week now and so I test it manually setting ISO. Here is a test at F8 against my Z5 also at F8. As you can see on the screen in the Z5 the wall is a continuous beige wall even lit.
RshawnG wrote:
So, over exposure by 2 stops. Now is this with all ISO or just the 400? Anyone send it back to see if they would fix it?
ISO is locked at 100 in this test. You can see on the Z5 screen. You can't see it on the MC-A but it would have had to been set to ISO 25 to get that reading.
I had ISO 200 in when I first noticed it on my last trip so I set it to 800 to compensate for 2 stops over exposure.
ottokbre wrote:
ISO is locked at 100 in this test. You can see on the Z5 screen. You can't see it on the MC-A but it would have had to been set to ISO 25 to get that reading.
I had ISO 200 in when I first noticed it on my last trip so I set it to 800 to compensate for 2 stops over exposure.
Ugh this camera. Just scanned the B&W roll I shot recently:
- film spacing is "better" but still not great, including two frames overlapping
- the new baffle seems to be causing hard vignetting in the corners of the frame
- metering seems to work well sometimes and severely overexposes other times
I don't think I can justify the 500€ for it and will ask for a refund. Really a shame though..
I like Chris and his more personal reviews (see the F4 vid) but he's kind of glazing over a lot of the camera's flaws here. Also the samples don't look great.
Still like this camera but I'm hoping for a quick V2 to be released.
