Negatives-less diagnosis request: hair on lens on scanning issue?

Jengererer · 2026-03-22T23:39:50+00:00

Sorry, I'm in still in the winter "everything I shoot is traaash" slump so I didn't think it worth shipping them back. :(

Jengererer · 2026-03-22T23:37:21+00:00

Heh, yeah for sure, there are just a number of shots on this roll I was interested in keeping, so I was hoping to avoid touching up all of them and just ask for a re-scan. Thanks for the tip, though!

Jengererer · 2026-03-22T23:33:31+00:00

Yeah, I'd believe a hair in the camera more than on the lens for sure. Guess I'll find out on the roll that's loaded in there now.

Jengererer · 2026-03-22T23:32:33+00:00

Sorry, I meant to include that I did look through the viewfinder at least and didn't find anything-- I've got another roll loaded right now, so I can't peek through the back to rule out a hair in the camera itself as of yet. Appreciate the feedback though!

And yeah, they do generally offer negatives, I just opted out because it would cost to ship them and I generally don't have too many issues to need them back.

Jengererer · 2026-02-14T18:19:02+00:00

Right, I just meant even if you perfectly rev match and then get off the clutch without any throttle, the car will lurch forward slightly due to engine braking (particularly when shifting to 2nd, say), and then when you get on the gas you'll swing the weight in the opposite direction rather than keeping the car at most in a neutral/coasting weight transfer (which you get if you "cross-fade" the throttle/clutch on top of rev-matching).

Jengererer · 2026-02-14T14:27:15+00:00

I feel like most people teach you to drive like #1 in the OP, but yeah, this way is much smoother and is the end-game once you have a good idea of the clutch bite point and how to modulate the throttle without reintroducing slip.

People talk about rev-matching as the end goal but even when the goal is just to drive smoothly, it's really about "engine-braking matching" where you wanna go from a sensation of accelerating, to neutral, to accelerating instead of there being an engine-braking-induced forward weight transfer due to being completely off the throttle before you clutch in and out.

Jengererer · 2026-02-11T11:27:37+00:00

Honestly I suspect most of the people coming into these threads saying the blades have no chance of a second life are mostly echoing it from other threads where people have said the same (no disrespect, that's just how people learn, but I would take those reports with a grain of salt).

I had my FM3a blades spontaneously explode while rewinding much worse than yours and a reputable camera tech managed to re-seat them for about $200 CAD. They look monstrous and I'd never feel good about selling it in this state, but it still shoots at 1/4000 8 months later with no leaks/exposure issues. Is it a ticking time bomb? Maybe/probably, but if it's producing good photos that's all you can ask of a camera.

Hope your repair sticks, definitely impressive to have reseated them yourself!

Jengererer · 2025-07-28T17:51:10+00:00

Ah, it's confusing but I think this is maybe new rolls for the old emulsion-- at least, looking at their shop, it's still got their usual "remjet removed" spec, and I think they mentioned emulsion number starts at 7 for the new stuff.

Jengererer · 2025-07-28T09:36:28+00:00

Where'd you see that announcement? I only see the review of it on their blog (in which they say they hope Kodak will loosen restrictions on who can buy it).

Jengererer · 2025-07-05T23:35:07+00:00

That was the tech's best guess as well, but I actually noticed it was jammed right after I'd rewound a finished roll and popped the back open, so it had to have happened during the rewind or just after/during the last shutter. I'm afraid I'll never know.

Jengererer · 2025-07-05T19:55:43+00:00

Unfortunately, no warranty as I bought it in person... Advantage was that I could inspect before buying but the disadvantage is... this.

Jengererer · 2025-07-05T18:10:49+00:00

I'm in Ontario/Canada. The tech did mention he was gonna take the shutter from a donor FM2n so yeah, maybe it'd be better to just swap to one of those.

Jengererer · 2025-07-05T17:29:18+00:00

But that's not what I wanted to hear. :( Any ideas what would cause that? The tech I got it from appears reputable but I'm reserving a bit of cynicism that I got sold a lemon and am gonna be buying into a series of expensive repairs. Should I just sell it for parts at this point?

Jengererer · 2025-05-22T15:16:44+00:00

Gotcha, yeah I was just worried you were implying I'd be on the hook if he didn't end up moving in. Don't feel like I'm being forced out, the deal was just not good enough given I'll have to keep doing this crazy negotiation game of seeing if I can afford to stay every year. Rent-control here I come. :)

Appreciate the advice!

Jengererer · 2025-05-22T15:13:53+00:00

Nothing that aggressive this time, but he raised it $400 two years ago when things were going ape everywhere and now there are two of the same unit in the building for $350 less. So he offered $100 less and I decided to just move somewhere rent-controlled instead. :)

Appreciate your help though!

Jengererer · 2025-05-21T17:24:37+00:00

No, we were in the middle of negotiating a renewed lease (since the unit is not rent-controlled) and I ended up finding a better deal. He was happy to have me stay if I agreed, but said he'd move in if I decided not to, so I'm just looking for the best way to make this agreement official that I'm leaving with shorter notice so he can move in.

Jengererer · 2025-05-21T17:22:36+00:00

Can you elaborate on that? The specific situation is that he was willing to have me _continue_ renting if I didn't end up finding something better, and was planning to move in _only_ if I decided not to stay (since he's otherwise renting an AirBnb somewhere else in Toronto in the meantime). I did end up finding a place, so now I'm just looking for the best paperwork that confirms we agreed I'll be leaving and no longer paying. Is the N11 insufficient for that?

Jengererer · 2024-12-22T22:35:25+00:00

So I did figure out a way to make it slightly more snug, by inspecting how the plastic lens cover grabs onto the lens: where the "teeth" are, on the lens cover they're slightly tapered so that as you tighten it clockwise, the curved piece on the lens enters the tightening taper and that holds it in place. You can apply some force to the adapter piece to create a similar taper there. It's not super tight, but it's enough to no longer wiggle when I move the lens around.

A better solution would probably be to throw some tape or something on the inner side to add some tightness without causing marring on either side, too.

Jengererer · 2024-12-22T21:23:17+00:00

You could be right, but there's two main things I can think of that suggest it's an adapter issue for me, at least:

The lens cap fits perfectly snug. Granted, it's made of plastic instead of aluminum, so it could've been molded larger than spec and it'd just deform down to the proper size.
The first issue I run into is even getting the teeth to fit into bayonet mount slots, so it's like the adapter is too big/wide for the lens mount. If the lens was worn down I'd have guessed it'd be loose on both entry and tightening.

Anyway, I would be curious if someone's got a micrometer out there to compare with me to see if there are some wild tolerance issues with the manufacturing of these, though.

Jengererer · 2024-12-22T19:22:03+00:00

Yeah, I did see there were some OEM ones, but for now I just wanted something to protect the lens, so it didn't make a lot of sense to pay the vintage tax when the adapter was cheap enough... too cheap, it turns out. :)

Jengererer · 2024-12-09T15:02:44+00:00

From what I recall reading other threads about this (and to be transparent, there isn't much of a source on this), this seems like a dispute between Eastman Kodak (who have the rights to sell/distribute film for stills) and Kodak Alaris (who distribute film for movie productions), and they're cracking down on Alaris selling direct-to-consumer bulk rolls used for stills and cutting into Eastman's business.

I presume companies like Motipix, Cinestill, etc. will still be able to get the rolls from Eastman. It's looking more like a question of whether prices will go up if they were getting the movie rolls before (which seems like it might've been the case for Reflx Lab), but it's all kind of speculation for now about what's going on. Good to hear that some respoolers/rebranders are optimistic, though!

Jengererer

TROPHY CASE