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 .
