Help with Zorki 4k/rangefinders.

toadstool said:
Thanks ped. This is an asda special :lol:

That's what made the majority of this roll not quite so enjoyable.. I'd spend a few seconds faffing with my meter trying to get a reading matching as close to what I could get to on the camera then another good while messing with the focusing, trying to make it visible and figuring out what belongs where and then lining it up :lol:

What do you mean by looser with framing? Including more in the scene than I want in the "printed" frame?

Thank you, I appreciate it :)

As you can see from these next 3 shots, I really peaked with my first shot of the roll! The rest of the shots had complete lack of focus or really dodgy framing!

This one is a bit confusing in general. The framing is obviously off... not sure whether to crop it in tight on the right to match the left.. or if I like it! Can't decide :rolleyes: I was directly above him, a foot on each side of his chest and camera pointing straight down - he was directly center in the viewfinder.. So I think that could have been better if I'd framed it tighter on my right. Knocking him off center in the viewfinder = centered in the frame in this instance? I used my digital camera to meter it and took a (digital) photo at the same time.. so the exposure of this one surprised me.
11015483923_a237b8acd8_z.jpg


Again with the framing!
11015486173_e2222ec0ee_z.jpg


And not quite there with the focus.
11015443874_290457d643_z.jpg



T, I kind of do haha. It was a bit of a headache... but that first photo of Colin makes me want to stick at it and get used to it :lol:
Click to expand...


Actually reading yours and everyone elses comments i can see it is/was a headache, i have no idea on rangefinders and totally at a loss as to what half of you are on about so i think i need to go read up about them lol
 
Oh, looks like the viewfinder is 50mm field of view, too, so if the lens isn't 50mm the framing doesn't work. Maybe that's the dohickey you mention - to change the FoV? Which lens do you have on it?
 
Oh yeah, I forgot the viewfinder is 50mm haha... the lens is the 50mm Jupiter 8 f2


Does any (@Barrysprout ?) know how easy the frame counter should be moved? I can't seem to move mine at all - I shot that roll with not a clue how many frames I had left... ended up "dumping" the last 16 or 17 shots because I was annoyed :rolleyes:

edit - sorry T, I missed your comment! I can see myself really enjoying using this camera once I've got over the jitters!
 
Last edited:
toadstool said:
Oh yeah, I forgot the viewfinder is 50mm haha... the lens is the 50mm Jupiter 8 f2


Does any (@Barrysprout ?) know how easy the frame counter should be moved? I can't seem to move mine at all - I shot that roll with not a clue how many frames I had left... ended up "dumping" the last 16 or 17 shots because I was annoyed :rolleyes:

edit - sorry T, I missed your comment! I can see myself really enjoying using this camera once I've got over the jitters!
Click to expand...
That's one of the reasons I prefer slightly wider lenses on rangefinders. Though my Epson RF has parallax correction (frame lines move as you focus) it's still an approximation. It takes some getting used to but you'll get the feel for it. I don't often shoot with symmetry in mind so I haven't really found it a difficulty.
 
Just came across this whilst googling something else... someone on flickr mentioning what he sees in his viewfinder isn't what he gets in his photos - this was a reply:

"Hi, there is hardly something that can go wrong with the viewfinder itself (guess you don't mean the rangefinder patch since this has nothing to do with good framing). You can put some translucent matte tape over the film gate and see how much the viewfinder deviates from the pictures that is shown on the tape."

Does he mean that, when looking through the viewfinder, you'll see the tape and that is where your frame is?
 
He means opening the back, putting the tape over where the film would normally be, and opening the shutter and comparing what you can see on the tape and through the VF. (I think)
 
Ahhhh okay... I'm getting a bit of deja vu when reading that now... was it mentioned in this thread earlier? Apologies if it was, I'm absolutely shattered :coat:
 
This wasn't produced to demonstrate the effect of parallax, but it will serve.

This is a photo of a small clock placed in front of a paperweight, with both resting on a packet of photocopier paper.

View attachment 1310

The camera was fitted with a shift lens, and if you think about it, leaving the camera body in the same place and using the shift movement on the lens pretty well mirrors the different view you get with a lens and separate viewfinder. I lined up the photo above to have the edge of the paper packet in the left hand edge of the image. Shifting the lens gives us the view from an inch or so further over, and you can see that the edge of the box no longer lines up with the edge of the frame. There's also a change in the relative positions of the clock and paperweight (which can serve as an example of how a small change in camera position can affect things a great deal).

View attachment 1312

Assuming that this was the full image, you should be able to see that if it was important to have the right hand edge of the packet in the frame, you'd have to allow a little more space on the right hand side when framing to include it. (That's assuming that we're viewing these pics as representing lens and viewfinder views).

The camera was a Mamiya RZ67 fitted with the 75mm shift lens.

Edit to add - subject distance about 2-3 feet from memory. The paper was A4, the paperweight is about 3 inches high.
 
Last edited:
toadstool said:
Ahhhh okay... I'm getting a bit of deja vu when reading that now... was it mentioned in this thread earlier? Apologies if it was, I'm absolutely shattered :coat:
Click to expand...

Post 24 :)
 
Thanks Stephen, that helps!

I knew I'd already been told that after I posted it :bonk: Teaches me not to stay up until silly hours and get up early thus spend the rest of the day with brain fuzz :lol:
 
Just checked mine Toni, the frame counter advances just as you would expect. Adds one frame count for every wind.
 
Mine advances Colin, I just can't turn it to 0 at the start of the film.. it won't budge for love nor money! Shot all that roll with not a clue what frame number I was on :lol:
 
toadstool said:
Mine advances Colin, I just can't turn it to 0 at the start of the film.. it won't budge for love nor money! Shot all that roll with not a clue what frame number I was on :lol:
Click to expand...

Are you pressing-and-turning?
 
Tried that and still nothing :\ I did read somewhere that it only works with a film loaded though so will need to try again when I run another roll through it
 
Does anyone know what "three dots on release unit must be in line before winding shutter" refers to?
 
The shutter plunger, it has a dot on top of it and it can rotate.
Turn it clockwise to line it up with the dot on the top plate.
All three dots have to be in line for the camera to be in film advance mode.

I'll have a quick look at mine to make sure I remembered correctly!
 
Yep, there's a dot on the shutter, a dot on the collar and a dot on the top plate.
 
Ahhh - thanks guys - seems whoever owned it before did that! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top