IR film and IR sprocket counter

Hi all,

Just like some other camera makes, my Minolta Dynax 7 has an IR sprocket counter for accurate film advancement. Now, the manual states it's unsuited for IR film because of this, and I did see a nice example of film fogging here (scroll down to see the negatives):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minolta

BUT... that image is for the discontinued Kodak HIE film (you can just make out the brand name in the blurred image), and all presently available IR films (Rollei R3, Efke 820c and Efke 820c Aura) are both far less sensitive to IR, and sensitized to a lower maximum wavelength. I thus began to wonder if fogging by an IR sprocket counter is still a problem :confused: If the film is far less sensitive, and sensitized to a shorter IR wavelengths, the short exposure to IR of the sprocket counter during film transport may not be a problem.

And I found this page that more or less confirms this, see the remarks about "Fogging problems affect only high-speed infrared film."

Dead Link Removed

But can anyone give his experience shooting Rollei R3 or one of the IR Efke films currently on the market (also the new Aura version that doesn't have an anti-halation backing and may thus be more vulnerable) and the effects of IR sprocket counters on these?

Do we still have a problem :confused:, or can it be ignored because the fogging is insignificant with the remaining IR sensitive films on the market?

Any specific experiences with Minolta cameras featuring IR sprocket counters are of course highly welcome too!

Marco

Marco,

By putting up this question which is only related to the films in question, you assume that the emissions of those counter devices are all the same concerning spectrum, magnitude and light spread.

I'd run a few shots through your camera using each of the films, clip off the shots, develop them, and let us know what happens! I am curious myself.

As AgX said, different cameras may give different results.

By the way, the Aura version will soon be available in 120 format, according to the B&H Website! Maybe if it is popular enough, they will give it to us in sheets again. I remember seeing some 11x14 sheets of it on E-Bay once and drooling buckets.

AgX said:

Marco,

By putting up this question which is only related to the films in question, you assume that the emissions of those counter devices are all the same concerning spectrum, magnitude and light spread.

Click to expand...

I don't, it is specifically why I ask it here, and ask for any comments regarding Minolta cameras as well, as you are right that different makes and models of cameras may have different emmisions. In fact, if you read the EOS link I referenced in my first post in this thread, it seems to indicate that even within one line of camera model, there are camera-to-camera differences in the severity of the potential problem.

But most articles assume or concern the discontinued Kodak HIE, which is not much relevant in the current market.

Ok, I now found this link on the Dyxum forum, stating my Dynax 7 camera doesn't really pose a problem. If you scroll down on this page, a user called 800si reports using his Dynax / Maxxum 7 with HIE and only having fogged sprocket holes, but unaffected image area.

If even HIE survives in the 7, I guess it is fair to assume I can safely use Rollei R3 and Efke IR film in my camera... but of course, only a test roll will give the definite answer.

http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/bw-film-selection_topic23226_page2.html

In addition this link for my Dynax / Maxxum 7:

http://www.efikim.co.uk/macoir.shtml

Somewhere half down the page, it is mentioned he used a Maxxum 7. I don't know if he cropped the scans, but these scans of Rollei IR film do not show fogging along the borders...

HIE only gets fogged around the sprocket holes and never in the picture area when I use it in the XPAN ll. There are some rolls still existing in the back of fridges.

Cheers
TEX