Love my Nikon F3HP... but weird exposures??

dugrant153 said:

Perhaps I'm inverting too fast and letting the develop slosh like crazy.

Click to expand...

If you're inverting too fast not all developer is allowed to clear the film at one single moment. This simulates using too small a tank and reproduces the associated problem.

Then again, if you agitate too little/too slowly the extra turbulence at the top and bottom ends of the reel may become an issue.

So far my pseudo science

Everybody seems to have their own unique inversion technique, and most of them work equally well- you just to have to find your own.

sandermarijn said:

If you're inverting too fast not all developer is allowed to clear the film at one single moment. This simulates using too small a tank and reproduces the associated problem.

Then again, if you agitate too little/too slowly the extra turbulence at the top and bottom ends of the reel may become an issue.

So far my pseudo science

Everybody seems to have their own unique inversion technique, and most of them work equally well- you just to have to find your own.

Click to expand...

I was taught and try to go by the rule of a 5 second inversion from start to finish. I'm not sure if that is proper across the board, but that was taught to me by several profs.

mikecnichols said:

I was taught and try to go by the rule of a 5 second inversion from start to finish. I'm not sure if that is proper across the board, but that was taught to me by several profs.

Click to expand...

5 seconds per minute sounds fine to me. I do two inversions in about ten seconds at the start of each minute (first 30-45 seconds continuously). There seems to be not just one right and the rest wrong.

My point regarding the OP's samples was not so much about the duration of the agitation but more about the frequency or how you agitate.

Sorry for diverging so far from the original post.

Thanks all. I do 4 rotations every minute (about 5 seconds each). Seem to get good results - guess I better run it slower!

On a different note, I was browsing APUG and read a thread about the F3's reliability vs age. What I got from it was that while the F3 is tough and more or less reliable, since it is aging I can expect to have problems.

Seeing as how I plan to shoot some important photographs for clients, would like your opinion on this: should I relegate my Nikon F3 to a backup camera only and run with newer more modern film cameras? Should I not expect the F3 to be reliable enough anymore due to age concerns?

(I have an F90x that's been rock solid and thinking of getting another so I can run with two camera setup.

I do 2 slow twisting rotations once a min. Takes about 5 seconds total Faster or more I get evidence of streaking and edge effects.

Just finished up developing some rolls from the F3. Haven't scanned yet but based on looking at the negatives it looks like my F3 is okay for the most part.

For the shots I handheld metered, except for user error, my images came out exposed properly. However, the images where I used the cameras meter were mostly good but some were way off. My guess is that Im still not used to the spot meter of the F3 and will need to consider using the exposure compensation more for complex scenes. I consistently used the "exposure lock" button and it helped but only somewhat. When I use this camera again, it will probably be with a hand meter.

Also I slowed down my developing I that I was a lot gentler and slower when doing the rotations during development. I think this helped quite a bit but he scans will show if I'm right

Today I was shooting with a borrowed F3HP. I'm somewhat unfamiliar with the F3, as I'm more inclined toward mechanical Nikons. I was shooting in manual mode but I kept thinking the meter was giving me odd readings. Not every frame, but every once in a while. Finally, I was shooting a buliding from the outside, in direct sunlight. The meter kept giving me the plus sign even at 1/2000 and f/16 at ASA 50!

After swearing and fiddling around for a minute, I realized that the AI tab was flipped up so the aperture ring on the lens wasn't communicating with the body. If the tab is flipped up and you don't stop down to meter, you will underexpose the frame. However, if you shoot at or near the maximum aperture, the reading will be correct and you won't know there's a problem.

Probably not the OP's problem, and I would hope he's straightened his issues out by now, but I thought I'd put it out there.