Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 10, 2017 14:26:15 GMT
Last Edit: May 22, 2017 12:22:22 GMT by bp_reid
OK, so having accidentally hijacked this thread with my purchase of this camera I am now happy to say that it has arrived and in good shape. I will add some photographs later, but wanted to address a couple of basics right away. I've read a bit about 'mugshot' cameras since buying it and this fits quite a bit of what is out there. It's a basic FX-3 Super 2000 with the following mods; - Shutter Speed Fixed to 1/125
- Mask in the film chamber - this appears to be glued in place and is quite thin, it has therefor bent a little in use.
- The viewfinder is also masked
- There is no meter display in the finder (because of the mask?) which probably wasn't a problem in it's intended use as I imagine it was intended to be locked down on to some sort of static use.
- The wind on appears to be re-geared to suit the half frame use.
So, the main down sides of the camera are the fixed shutter speed and the lack of metering, which would be understandable in a fixed studio situation. The positives are as below;
- The Aperture on the mounted lens actuates, so I will have some exposure control.
- The lens is not fixed to the body, which is a huge relief.
- The self timer mechanism is in place and working - not something I care about but a nice to have.
- everything works properly and the cosmetic condition is great
- The included ML 50/2 is in very good shape and free from fungus - my first clean one in 3 attempts.
When i get home from work I will make a few shots of it and upload them. Hopefully I will get the chance to pop a roll of film in and try it out in the next few days. All in all it looks to have been a worthwhile £15 but gut feeling is I may stick with my Konica Eye for half frame fun - it's auto metering means it's much easier to work with.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 214 (23 liked)
Join date: October 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 10, 2017 22:05:39 GMT
Posted: Jan 10, 2017 22:05:39 GMT
Does the normal FX-3 2000 also have a lightmeter button next to the viewfinder? If so, it's also gone.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 10, 2017 22:11:35 GMT
Posted: Jan 10, 2017 22:11:35 GMT
I don't believe there is normally a separate metering button on this camera.
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 10, 2017 22:16:37 GMT
Posted: Jan 10, 2017 22:16:37 GMT
I have popped a film in and can confirm it appears to wind on half a frame at a time, however the frame counter moves on at the rate of 2 per three frames so six exposures gets you up to 4 on the counter. I suspect this may vary in use.
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Jan 10, 2017 22:53:37 GMT
Posted: Jan 10, 2017 22:53:37 GMT
Not half bad (to stick with the metaphor)!
Thanks for reporting back, Barry. Is it conceivable that the shutter speeds might be restored? (Of course, you would still get no meter readings because of the mask in the viewfinder but, using a hand-held meter or going by guesstimate, you would have a fully functional camera.)
Michael
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 1:47:58 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 1:47:58 GMT
Good to hear the lens is fully functional, in case you decide to get a fully functioning body. I bought a Micro Nikkor that someone had modified for scientific work, and they not only attached a strange bracket to it (not for a flash unit, but to lock the aperture ring), they also glued the focus ring to lock it in place.
While attempting to remove the bracket, I found that the glue had gotten into one of the set screws, and I couldn't get it to budge, so I had to hack it off the lens. The rest of the glue, that was dabbed around the focus ring in six places, luckily was easy to crack loose.
Due to all that, a lens that retails new for over $450, and used for around $275 I was able to get for under $70. And with a D80 (minus battery) attached. Sometimes it's a good thing to go after the odd gear.
PF
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 6:43:04 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 6:43:04 GMT
Not half bad (to stick with the metaphor)! Thanks for reporting back, Barry. Is it conceivable that the shutter speeds might be restored? (Of course, you would still get no meter readings because of the mask in the viewfinder but, using a hand-held meter or going by guesstimate, you would have a fully functional camera.) Michael The same thought occurred to me regarding the shutter speed but I don't think Its viable for me. I'm really not technical enough to pull the camera apart so I'd have to pay a repair shop to have a go at it.
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 10:43:22 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 11, 2017 13:06:15 GMT by Deleted
Not half bad (to stick with the metaphor)! Thanks for reporting back, Barry. Is it conceivable that the shutter speeds might be restored? (Of course, you would still get no meter readings because of the mask in the viewfinder but, using a hand-held meter or going by guesstimate, you would have a fully functional camera.) Michael The same thought occurred to me regarding the shutter speed but I don't think Its viable for me. I'm really not technical enough to pull the camera apart so I'd have to pay a repair shop to have a go at it. You may not need any engineering skills for this, Barry. As PF already suggested, the easiest way of locking the speed dial would be to simply glue or solder it to its base, so I guess this is what they actually did. It should hence be possible to unlock it. As to the mask in the finder--I would assume it is actually two black patches on the focusing screen--I would try to remove it and replace it with two thin vertical lines drawn on the screen, which would be enough to mark the edges of your frame and still leave the exposure information on the right-hand side visible. Michael Edit: Come to think of it--why not look at things from a different angle, in other words, what does it take to convert an FX-3 into a half-frame SLR (without otherwise crippling its functions)? The masks in the film compartment and on the screen shouldn't pose any problems, the crucial issue to my mind would be adjusting the winding mechanism. Any suggestions?
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 13:03:10 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 13:03:10 GMT
I am adding a couple of images of the finder here First view of the focusing screen - the mask sits between the screen and the prism the shading can be seen on each side of the screen; This is the view through the finder window just a vertical slot in a sea of black with a split image in the middle;
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 13:05:37 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 11, 2017 13:10:18 GMT by bp_reid
Another couple of images showing the wear to the mask in the film chamber and the base plate - this is a well used bit of kit! The signs of use + the modifications could explain why the wind on mechanism seems a bit flimsy - or is a bit of flimsiness just an FX-3 thing? Only wondering as I know the FX3/2000 is a Cosina and it's relative the Canon T60 has a terrible rep for reliability...
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 13:13:38 GMT
Last Edit: Jan 11, 2017 14:02:25 GMT by Deleted
Thanks, Barry! It doesn't appear they simply replaced the original winder spool with a thinner one, so there must be a different solution to the problem of adjusting film spacing.
As our postings overlapped, I shall repeat the addendum to my latest message here:
P.S. I have to correct myself in that masking the focusing screen would, of course, not make the LEDs in the viewfinder invisible, so I guess they simply disabled the light meter in your mug-shot camera.
Michael
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 20:32:47 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 20:32:47 GMT
Barry, sorry to bother you again! I took a closer look at the inside view of your FX-3, hoping to find a clue as to how they might have solved the problem of film spacing and transportation. Is it possible that they simply filed off every other tooth on that roller on the right of the shutter unit??
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 272 (39 liked)
Join date: July 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 20:44:20 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 20:44:20 GMT
Michael, no there is one tab for every sprocket hole so it's not as simple as just filing alternate ones off. It's definitely mechanical alteration inside the body. The shutter speed dial is definitely fixed in a manner which would require disassembly too. As the ISO setting is made by lifting a collar around the shutter speed dial. I imagine it may still just be glued but there's no obvious way for a non-techs person like me to go about it.
|
|
Deleted
Group: Member
Post: 0 ( liked)
Join date: January 1970
Status:
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 20:56:41 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 20:56:41 GMT
Thanks again, Barry.
Well ... sometimes you win, sometimes you lose...
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Jan 11, 2017 23:20:48 GMT
Posted: Jan 11, 2017 23:20:48 GMT
For what it's worth, I have a FX-3 Repair Manual somewhere and when I can find some time to locate it, I'll check the schematics to look at the most obvious ways of rendering a proper half-frame conversion and report back. Fascinating stuff; next time I see one for sale I'll grab it just for the opportunity for disassembly and the knowledge it will bring.
Such fun Barry...again - well done on the acquisition.
|
|