paul,

Thanks for the extensive test.  From your results, I'm guessing that
Mid-roll change will work with data imprinting because the body would
know how many frames it skipped.  If you used the old method -fire
until the right frame (kept dark of course), would probably double
imprint the first portion of the roll.

I, too, love the MZ-S.  It is a joy to use!


Bruce Dayton



Thursday, December 13, 2001, 7:17:04 AM, you wrote:

pxwac> To anyone that's still interested!

pxwac> Thank you to all the people who responded to this question - very useful.

pxwac> Experiment:
pxwac> I thought I'd give a quick update based on the test I finally got round to
pxwac> performing:
pxwac> 1. Set the MZ-S NOT to fully pull a completed film back into the canister
pxwac> 2. Take a manufacturer-rolled Delta400 (DX-coded) film and shoot 10 shots
pxwac> 3.  Rewind the film
pxwac> 4.  Using a dark bag, pull these shots out into a tank and expose -  leave
pxwac> some leader on the unexposed part of the film
pxwac> 5.  Shoot the rest of the film - but DON'T rewind it
pxwac> 6.  Using a dark bag pull these shots straight out of the back of the
pxwac> camera into a tank and expose
pxwac> 7.  Check the difference

pxwac> Rationale:
pxwac> The reason for running the test in this way is that it eliminates
pxwac> everything that I've had suggested as a possible cause of the imprinting
pxwac> problem i.e. DX/non-DX coding, film-type, film-batch etc.  If the first
pxwac> part imprints and and the other doesn't you KNOW that it's being printed on
pxwac> the rewind - there are no more variables (except the shape of the leader -
pxwac> I can't think that this has anything to do with anything - particularly as
pxwac> others a bulk loading without error).

pxwac> Results:
pxwac> Sure enough, all those people who stated that the data imprinting is done
pxwac> on the rewind were bang on the money.  It was the failed rewind that was
pxwac> the problem NOT the failed imprint.

pxwac> Conclusion:
pxwac> Dodgy canisters?  Not sure - was using plastic Jessops cannisters and
pxwac> someone did say they'd seen problems with them sticking.  Have now run a
pxwac> dozen or so steel canisters from bulk without a problem.  I will run some
pxwac> more tests on this as it may just be that I am being much more careful now
pxwac> with rolling and loading  ;-)

pxwac> Footnote:
pxwac> I am a bit disappointed that Pentax misguided me (I deliberately prodded
pxwac> around the topic with their UK 'expert' and he ASSURED me that they
pxwac> imprinting was done on shot - not rewind.)  However, I would like to stop
pxwac> sounding  moaning for 2 seconds to say how much I LOVE the MZ-S - it is an
pxwac> absolute joy to use (although I am still learning to get the best out of
pxwac> it) - a friend of mine has recently got a Dynax7 (too many menus!!!) so
pxwac> I'll be intrigued to do some comparison.  I know it's one loads of awards
pxwac> but I like the ergonomics of the MZ-S - SOMEONE HAS CLEARLY THOUGHT ABOUT
pxwac> SOMEONE QUITE IMPORTANT - THE USER!!!!!  This may sound obvious but it is
pxwac> all too rare.

pxwac> Cheers
pxwac> P.





pxwac> Paul Wilkinson
pxwac> ELA Digital Content Service Centre of Excellence
pxwac> 1 Kingsway, London

pxwac> DDI: +44 (0) 207 844 7935
pxwac> Mob: +44 (0) 7973 489 353


pxwac> This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
pxwac> privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  If you have
pxwac> received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the
pxwac> original.  Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.
pxwac> -
pxwac> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
pxwac> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
pxwac> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .

Reply via email to