Hi,
With function 15 set to 1, there is no discernable imprint on
Kodachrome 25, although it prints perfectly clearly on 64.
And WR is right - it does sound like a hamster sneezing.
mike
Hi,
Having difficulty with mail here, so resent; apologies if this
is a repeat.
Hi,
With function 15 set to 1, there is no discernable imprint on
Kodachrome 25, although it prints perfectly clearly on 64.
And WR is right - it does sound like a hamster sneezing.
mike
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 08:10:30PM +0100, Kristian Walsh wrote:
Thanks for the answers.
Mine has that halo, but only on negative film; on transparency film
it's perfectly sharp.
So it seems mine isn't the only one that does this.
With PF15 set to 1 I've got this smudge on Fuji Superia 100
Tim Preston a écrit:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 08:10:30PM +0100, Kristian Walsh wrote:
Thanks for the answers.
.
On a slightly different tack, does anyone know if the IR remote for the
BG-10 actually exists. This was a surprise feature to me and seems like
a good idea, but I've never
Michel Carrère-Gée a écrit:
Tim Preston a écrit:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 08:10:30PM +0100, Kristian Walsh wrote:
Thanks for the answers.
.
On a slightly different tack, does anyone know if the IR remote for the
BG-10 actually exists. This was a surprise feature to me and seems
Shouldn't you set this PF to 1, so that the camera automatically adjusts
for the film speed? That's what I do, and I get no ghosting problems
that I know of.
-Original Message-
From: John Coyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
For your problem, set the data imprinting intensity, function
First of all, being new here, I'd Just like to say hello =)
I've been using an SF-7 for a number of years that I bought secondhand as
a camera that could do a reasonable job of point shoot yet would let
me twiddle with everything. It did the job I asked it to do.
Now I've bought myself an
Hi Tim,
on 23 Sep 02 you wrote in pentax.list:
First of all, being new here, I'd Just like to say hello =)
Welcome!
The imnprinting seems to be surrounded by a sort of 'halo' or smudge which
tends to make it very difficult to read. Is this normal, or has my
camera got some sort of fault in
Tim wrote:
The imnprinting seems to be surrounded by a sort of 'halo' or smudge which
tends to make it very difficult to read. Is this normal, or has my
camera got some sort of fault in the imprinting device?
Mine does not have a halo. It's very easy to read. Try a different film to make
Mine has that halo, but only on negative film; on transparency film
it's perfectly sharp.
--
Kristian
On Monday, Sep 23, 2002, at 19:11 Europe/Dublin, Pål Jensen wrote:
Tim wrote:
The imnprinting seems to be surrounded by a sort of 'halo' or smudge
which
tends to make it very difficult
without it
and especially without good light.
Brad Dobo
- Original Message -
From: Tim Preston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 1:25 PM
Subject: Introduction and MZ-S data imprinting question
First of all, being new here, I'd Just like to say hello
Welcome Tim - this can be a really good group, if a little intense at
times!
For your problem, set the data imprinting intensity, function 15, at a
lower level - I have mine set to 3 at the moment, and for 400ASA film
this is too high. Basically, the data imprinting led's are creating
flare
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bill Owens
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MZ-S Data imprinting
There was a thread recently about MZ-S data imprinting and whether it was
done at time of exposure or during rewind. I can
On 22 Dec 2001 at 22:42, Pål Jensen wrote: Sorry, but this has been tested by
others proving that when the film is NOT
rewounded theres no data printed. In addition, other test also prove that the
film is printed on rewind. Pentax litterature says where the emitter is and it
is positioned in
So Pål's explanation seems to correlate with the physical lay-out of the
camera
and Bill's results are a total mystery?
Cheers,
Rob Studdert
Could some of you rewinders please explain how film that has been removed
from the camera and processed without being rewound can still show the
Bill wrote:
Could some of you rewinders please explain how film that has been removed
from the camera and processed without being rewound can still show the
exposure data imprint please explain it to me. I have done this and seen
the results.
I honestly don't know Bill but some have done
el: domingo, 23 de diciembre de 2001 16:30
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: MZ-S Data imprinting
Bill wrote:
Could some of you rewinders please explain how film that has been
removed
from the camera and processed without being rewound can still show the
exposure data imprint please explain
, 2001 11:24 AM
Subject: RE: MZ-S Data imprinting
Ok, let it go untill tomorrow, when I will do the test. I´m gonna place
the camera in the dark box, cut the film, and put it on the processor, I
think this is the way for doing the test.
-Mensaje original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto
own one, it seems that imprinting at
rewind would
be problemmatic and needlessly complicated.
Tom C.
- Original Message -
From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 7:25 PM
Subject: MZ-S Data imprinting
There was a thread recently
Frits,
That was my opinion too. However, since many of the folks here are much
more knowledgeable I wanted to verify and have a basis for backing up my
claim before I opened my mouth.
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have never seen a MZ-S real life, but it would make sense to me the
Tom wrote:
Though I likely will never own one, it seems that imprinting at rewind would
be problemmatic and needlessly complicated.
Can anyone explain this myth? To mee it seem ten times more problematic to imprint
data during wind than rewind.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss
Frits wrote:
I have never seen a MZ-S real life, but it would make sense to me the
writing is done during the film transport immediately after taking the
exposure.
Waiting to print during rewind would require the storage of the
data in memory for all shots, and think about the additional
Bill wrote:
There was a thread recently about MZ-S data imprinting and whether it was
done at time of exposure or during rewind. I can now answer the question.
At work tonight, I put the MZ-S in our dark box, opened the back and removed
about half a roll. Stuck it in the film processor
Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Regardless, the dataimprinting emitter is located where the film comes
out of its casette. This means that the area of the film being exposed
has already moved past the sensor. Hence, the only way to pair up the
data and the frame exposed is during rewind
This make no sense. It is imprinting on rewind that make mid roll change
and roll number count totally hassle free. Think of what happens: every time
you open the back door of your camera the memory is getting cleared. This
mean that you can reload a film 36 times if you like and the camera will
Bill, KG4LOV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill wrote:
There was a thread recently about MZ-S data imprinting and whether it
was
done at time of exposure or during rewind. I can now answer the
question.
At work tonight, I put the MZ-S in our dark box, opened the back and
removed
about half
Tom wrote:
Though I likely will never own one, it seems that imprinting at rewind
would
be problemmatic and needlessly complicated.
Can anyone explain this myth? To mee it seem ten times more problematic to
imprint data during wind than rewind.
Pål
There are 11 sensors at the bottom of
says it imprints on
rewind.
Ciao,
graywolf
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:25 PM
Subject: MZ-S Data imprinting
There was a thread recently about MZ-S data imprinting and whether
Paul Wilkinson explained he re-winded the film before removing the film out
of the camera, so it could be very well Pål is correct. I assumed printing
was done after rewinding the full film, but it would make more sense to do
it after the rewind of a partially exposed film and not wait. Although
I think one of the MZ-S owners need to do this: remove the film in a dark
bag at frame 35, rewind it outside the camera manually into the canister
before processing it. And then let us know what happened.
Frits Wüthrich
This is precisely what I did, although with a partial roll. The data
Bill wrote:
It was rewound from the take-up spool. The MZ-S DEFINITELY IMPRINTS
EXPOSURE DATA AT THE TIME OF EXPOSURE
Sorry, but this has been tested by others proving that when the film is NOT rewounded
theres no data printed. In addition, other test also prove that the film is
Bill wrote:
There are 11 sensors at the bottom of the MZ-S, just below the guide rails.
Evidently these sensors are what imprints the exposure data between the
sprocket holes.
The eleven sensors are not sensor but electrical contacts for the databack. They are
also outside the film path so
Mark wrote:
I just checked my MZ-S and the data imprinting emitter is not where the film
comes out of the cassette, it's on the other side right next to the take-up
spool.
This is NOT the dtataimprinting emmitter but the sprocket hole sensor. The data is
imprinted on the top of the film.
Frits wrote:
I assumed printing
was done after rewinding the full film, but it would make more sense to do
it after the rewind of a partially exposed film and not wait.
Yes, that's exactly what happens. It prints the data for the frames exposed after the
film was loaded. If you expose
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
En nombre de Pål Jensen
Enviado el: sábado, 22 de diciembre de 2001 22:53
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: MZ-S Data imprinting
Frits wrote:
I assumed printing
was done after rewinding the full film, but it would make more sense
to do
it after the rewind
I think one of the MZ-S owners need to do this: remove the film in a
dark
bag at frame 35, rewind it outside the camera manually into the canister
before processing it. And then let us know what happened.
It has been done and it didn't print on those frames.
Pål
It did on my MZ-S.
-
Bill,
Sounds like a pretty fool proof experiment!
Thanks for clearing that up.
Regards, Bob S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I placed the MZ-S and a 126 holder in a dark box. I opened the back of the
MZ-S, cut the film at the cassette and pulled the film off the take-up
spool. I then rewound
Bill wrote:
It did on my MZ-S.
-
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 .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
Bill wrote:
It did on my MZ-S.
But not on others who tested it. Sombody must have done some mistake in their testing
procedure or Pentax have changed the design of the MZ-S. Theres no way my MZ-S could
imprint data except on rewind.
Again there is the posibility that your MZ-S is
There was a thread recently about MZ-S data imprinting and whether it was
done at time of exposure or during rewind. I can now answer the question.
At work tonight, I put the MZ-S in our dark box, opened the back and removed
about half a roll. Stuck it in the film processor and when it exited
Subject: MZ-S Data imprinting
There was a thread recently about MZ-S data imprinting and whether it was
done at time of exposure or during rewind. I can now answer the question.
At work tonight, I put the MZ-S in our dark box, opened the back and
removed
about half a roll. Stuck it in the film
Bill wrote:
What are those 11 brass colored discs in my MZ-S if not data emitters?
Electrical contacts to the data back.
Pål
-
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'
To anyone that's still interested!
Thank you to all the people who responded to this question - very useful.
Experiment:
I thought I'd give a quick update based on the test I finally got round to
performing:
1. Set the MZ-S NOT to fully pull a completed film back into the canister
2. Take a
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
This is why the MZ-S has the dial-in the first frame number feature. If it
didn't and you used the conventional lens-cap-on, 1/6000th at f/22
technique, the original imprinting would be overwritten with the above data.
Regards
Jim
Christien Bunting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for
Great!!. Another good reason to get the MZ-S :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is why the MZ-S has the dial-in the first frame number feature.
If it didn't and you used the conventional lens-cap-on, 1/6000th at
f/22 technique, the original imprinting would be overwritten with the
above
Someone had asked once about the appearance of data imprinting with
the MZ-S. The only examples I have seen on the internet and in print were
with slide film. This makes it easy to read. I figured I would put up a
few using negative film.
A slow loading page, but check out
Michel wrote:
REWINDING ? On the 645N ?
Sorry. I mix up. I believe printing is done while rewinding on the MZ-S.
What I meant was: Is the data imprinting done
as one large array of pixel, or like an old-style dot matrix printer, where there is
only a column of dots that moves across and
On 7 Jun 2001, at 8:31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll bet you within a year every SLR manufacturer will be copying the MZ-s's
data imprinting feature. It just absolutely rocks. Might be a problem for people
who shoot reversal film and don't do their own slide mounting though. (I can see
a
Speaking of data imprinting, can someone who uses this feature
with the 645N clarify the following point:
How is the 'bulb' exposure data printed, as 'B' or with
the ACTUAL time ?
Thanks
Michel
I developed some tri-x from this weekend. As I was filing it, I saw some
funny exposure blotches
Hello!
That's me again.
What other Pentax 35mm cameras have an option of imprinting exposition
details somewhere on the film?
- Original Message -
From: tom
Subject: MZ-S Data Imprinting
[...]
Hey, that there's data imprinting!
[...]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I'll bet you within a year every SLR manufacturer will be copying the MZ-s's
data imprinting feature. It just absolutely rocks.
Might be a problem for people who shoot reversal film and don't do their
own slide mounting though. (I can see a market for some kind of gizmo that
pries open your
None.
DG
At 10:23 AM 6/7/01 +0200, you wrote:
Hello!
That's me again.
What other Pentax 35mm cameras have an option of imprinting exposition
details somewhere on the film?
- Original Message -
From: tom
Subject: MZ-S Data Imprinting
[...]
Hey, that there's data imprinting
AHA! That would be different than the way the MZ-S reportedly
does it (imprinting only 'B').
Does the 645N imprint WHILE the film is advancing to the next
frame, one row/column of dots at a time, or is it done all at once?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michel wrote:
AHA! That would be different than the way the MZ-S reportedly
does it (imprinting only 'B').
Are you sure? Thats bad news
Does the 645N imprint WHILE the film is advancing to the next
frame, one row/column of dots at a time, or is it done all at once?
I believe its
Does the 645N imprint WHILE the film is advancing to the next
frame, one row/column of dots at a time, or is it done all at once?
I believe its done one dots at a time while rewinding the film. Not sure though
Pål
REWINDING ? On the 645N ? What I meant was: Is the data
I developed some tri-x from this weekend. As I was filing it, I saw some
funny exposure blotches along the edges.
Hey, that there's data imprinting!
So, here's a scan:
http://bigdayphoto.com/tom/images/mzs-data.jpg
That's Doug...Jeepgirl and Jessie are in the background. There will be
more to
Nice bokeh.
William Robb
- Original Message -
From: tom
Subject: MZ-S Data Imprinting
I developed some tri-x from this weekend. As I was filing it,
I saw some
funny exposure blotches along the edges.
Hey, that there's data imprinting!
So, here's a scan:
http://bigdayphoto.com
58 matches
Mail list logo