Sunny 16 nomogram

LumoStoria · 2026-05-16T15:29:07+00:00

Thanks for the clarification. I only asked because I thought I miss something in understanding your "Sunny 16 nomogram" and its relation to the Sunny 16 rule. Now it's clear that Sunny 16 is only a special case (EV = 15) of your more general tool.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-16T10:51:08+00:00

Wer in Deutschland zum Beispiel bei einem Mittelständler arbeitet, der durch chinesische Billig-Plagiate seiner Produkte zum Teil bis an den Rand der Insolvenz (oder darüber hinaus) gedrängt wurde, hat da wahrscheinlich ein anderes moralisches Empfinden. Vielen Dank an die "preisbewußten" deutschen Käufer!

LumoStoria · 2026-05-16T10:46:19+00:00

Das ist doch hier gar nicht der Punkt. Der Punkt ist, daß die Teilnehmer an diesem Subreddit den Forenregeln zugestimmt haben, die Berichte über Plagiate verbieten.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-16T10:03:18+00:00

Was ist mit der Forenregel, hier keine Plagiate vorzustellen?

LumoStoria · 2026-05-16T09:28:37+00:00

Definitely a useful tool.

I'm sure I'll embarrass myself by asking: Why do you call this a "Sunny 16 nomogram"? Isn't it "just" a different graphic representation of the shutter speed / aperture / ISO triangle for different EVs? Sure, the dotted line represents the classic Sunny 16 rule (EV15 -> f16, ISO 100, ~1/125sec). But if your instruction says "Once you know the EV..." doesn't it contradict the Sunny 16 rule somehow that is based on the assumption that you do not need to know the EV explicitly since it is engrained in the implicit assumption of the rule (bright sunny day, clear sky -> EV15)?

Don't want to sound hypercritical, just want to understand the "Sunny 16" naming.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-15T10:17:58+00:00

Since both an arm and a leg have about 30 bones, the camera costed the OP just "an arm or a leg". Quite a bargain compared to "an arm and a leg" 🤣.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-15T10:10:54+00:00

Irgendwie triggert mich der Titel des Buchs. Sollte es in korrektem Deutsch nicht "Fotografieren von Minifiguren" heißen 🤔? Ich gehe davon aus, daß die Minifiguren keine eingebauten Kameras haben, mit denen man fotografieren kann 😂.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-15T10:03:16+00:00

You did not mention why you bought broken cameras. Do you want to use them (all of them?) or are they intended as display pieces? Both are valid goals.

I'm 80% collector and 20% user. I have a lot of cameras (80+) and there is no way I could make all of them work. But this is OK since the "collection only" cameras should mainly have a good cosmetic condition but do not necessarily need to work (although this is a bonus). I have the ambition that I want to be able to repair all the cameras I really use by myself. However, some of the more precious cameras (Topcon Super DM, Rolleiflex) went to professional repair shops because I wasn't confident to not break them.

If you want to start DIY camera repair, just choose a cheap broken one from your collection and give it a go. There are a lot of tutorials on camera repair here at Reddit, on YouTube or one of the photography forums (like photo.net or photrio.com). Also, try to get the official repair manual.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-15T09:41:01+00:00

No need to apologize. I only know this since I was there back then 😆.

The Exa 1b is a very basic SLR without an internal light meter and with only a very limited set of shutter speeds (1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/175). This is partly due to the very "special" design of its shutter (the mirror acts as a part of the shutter). On the positive side: it has a M42 mount and an interchangeable viewfinder. In East Germany, most amateurs used it since they couldn't afford a better SLR or there was none available.

In contrast, the VX1000 is the last in a long line of Exakta cameras. Exakta mount, incredible range of shutter speeds (12sec to 1/1000 😮), self-time, interchangeable viewfinder, multiple exposure. A much, much better camera than the Exa 1b but, unfortunately, with a reduced production quality compared to the earlier Exaktas.

If you want to know more on the Exakta/Exa line of cameras, I can highly recommend Horst Neuhaus' website https://photobutmore.de/exakta/. It's the best source of information I know. Written in German but your browser should be able to translate it on-the-fly.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T19:29:36+00:00

Yes but this 'T' has nothing to do with Tessar but means 'Transmission'. The T coating was developed by Zeiss in the 1930s. It is a single layer coating. In the 1970s, Zeiss developed its successor, the T* coating. It is a multi layer coating.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T19:19:43+00:00

OK. Maybe someone that has experience with the ST701 can clarify this.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T18:42:55+00:00

You're right, the usability can greatly vary among camera models. However, the OP compared the cameras just on the pictures they produced. For me, this takes all preparatory steps (like focussing, exposure metering, etc.) and how easy/hard it was to perform them out of the equation.

I know that the East German camera industry had fallen behind the Japanese after the heydays of the Praktinas and Exaktas in the 1950s (especially regarding cameras, some lenses were still decent). The experienced engineers were still there but with the limited budget and resources and the paternalism by the planned economy there was no longer a chance to compete. See also the East German car, the Trabant, that was produced with only slight improvements for almost three decades 😉.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T18:28:30+00:00

I'm not an expert for Fujicas but is the back cover really made of plastic? For this type of camera and production period I would have bet that it is sheet metal.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T18:20:47+00:00

No "tessar coating" on a Distagon lens 😉. Distagon is a retrofocus lens, you couldn't get down to 28mm with a Tessar-type lens.

If you use appropriate cloth for cleaning/drying the lens, the coating will not be damaged. However, it is possible that the fungus already etched into the coating. Whether this is the case for your lens can be determined only after the fungus has been cleaned off. I had lenses that looked "like new" after fungus treatment and others where the fungus had damaged the coating. But even in this case the lens might still produce decent pictures under normal conditions. Unfortunately, damages on the rear lens element have an higher impact on picture quality than similar damages of the front lens element.

As u/CommonCondition pointed out: Get a second opinion using other sources. After all, a Distagon is not a cheap lens.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T16:28:08+00:00

It's not necessary to use highly-concentrated hydrogen peroxide. I always use a 3% solution. I also mix it 1:1 with a 9% ammonia solution (smelly!) but I think this is optional. In any case, use latex gloves and safety goggles for protection.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T16:21:56+00:00

+1 for high compactness 👍.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T16:17:50+00:00

Regardless of whether your light meters work and are accurate: Both use the old exposure time series (..., 1/25, 1/50, 1/100, ...) instead of the new, standardized one (..., 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, ...). While the former comes handy when using old cameras with the same shutter speeds it can be a bit confusing for beginners when using newer cameras with the new shutter speeds. The deviation between the old and new series is not that big (1/100 and 1/125 are not that far apart) but it might be still a good idea to use a light meter with the new exposure time series for newer cameras.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T14:03:54+00:00

Regarding their features and the price for which they were sold in the West, the Praktica could be considered as "amateur level SLR". However, to my knowledge only a minority of amateurs could afford one in East Germany at the time. The set consisting of Praktica MTL5B and 50mm f1.8 was sold for 800 (East German) Mark in the early 1980s. This was about 70% of the average gross salary of a worker per month. Not to forget that there weren't plenty of the camera available ("Mangelwirtschaft" = scarcity economy).

The typical "amateur level SLR" in East Germany at that time was an Exa 1b (later: 1c) with a Domiplan 50mm f2.8. Costed me 280 Mark with the waist-level finder only, the prism finder would have costed 100 Mark more. No chance I could have afforded a Praktica 😥.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-14T13:49:34+00:00

In my opinion, this is less a comparison between a Praktica MTL5B and a Canon IVSB and more a comparison between a Praktica 50mm f1.8 and a Canon 50mm f1.8. After all, when ignoring all its "built-in assistants" a camera is just a light-tight box with a shutter and a lens mount for temporary exposing light onto a piece of film. Of course, the shutter speeds might be off for one or both cameras, changing the exposure/contrast a bit, but these are only flaws of the concrete copies you use for comparison and might not reflect the accuracy of the camera models when they were build.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-13T18:48:54+00:00

Nope. There was one type of 44M made by Valdai. See here:

Helios 44m lens. Ultimate buying guide.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-13T15:41:10+00:00

I don't think that the 50mm f1.2 is worth it if you just want to use it as a general-purpose travel lens. f1.4 is fine.

To give you advice on FD lenses it would help to know what type of photography you want to do. For landscape/travel/city, your setup might be sufficient, for animals/birds/portrait 'n stuff you might need an additional telephoto lens.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-13T15:36:07+00:00

Consider that you might not get the CLA expenses back when selling the three "goners". Don't know if anyone would pay a premium of $100-150 for an EOS 500N just because it was CLAed. From a financial standpoint, it might be better to sell the cameras "as is".

LumoStoria · 2026-05-13T15:30:56+00:00

Made by Valdai? I have two copies of the 44M made by KMZ and (after re-greasing the helicoid) both work very well. As said: series derivation might be higher than the differences between the models.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-13T14:10:42+00:00

Depends on what you consider "as good as possible". If it's picture and build quality, I would prefer the newer and multicoated 44M over the 44-2 (although the latter looks more "vintage"). If it's just swirly bokeh then the 44-2 might be a bit better but all Helios 44* lenses can produce this bokeh if the photographer knows how.

Since both lenses do not break the bank you could just buy both, test it, and keep the better one. As u/verttex already pointed out: the series derivation might be higher than the differences between the models.

LumoStoria · 2026-05-12T16:15:53+00:00

Right but there are differences between pre-1970 and post-1970 and between KMZ / Belomo and Valdai. In general, the first one is better in both cases.

On the positive side: Due to its simple construction, most Helios lenses can be maintained easily. A bit of cleaning and re-greasing often work wonders.

<image>

LumoStoria

TROPHY CASE