Many of us get sticker shock when we see a simple loupe for checking out
slides can cost $100 to $150 US and up!
Granted, if you are a professional photographer or art director, you can
easily justify a fistful of slide loupes, even at $150+ US each! But for
most of us, putting that kind of money into an item like a loupe is
hard to explain to our spouses.
There are infrequent reviews of the under $100 US commercially available
loupes in various photography magazines. The lower-cost loupes often
suffer from poor color correction and distortion. Even a "best-buy" loupe
often costs $75 US and up. Most of the lower cost plastic lens models get
a thumbs-down in these comparison tests.
The higher priced loupes have multiple element and color corrected optics.
They also have many features such as adjustable diopter correction (for
eyesight) and multiple base options (solid and clear bases supplied).
The common 4X to 6X slide viewers permit full size views of your slide or
image at the respective 4X to 6X power. So a 24x36mm slide looks like it
is four times larger, or 4 inches by 6 inches print size. Now you can see
why this is such a popular size!
Using a 15X loupe, a 24x36mm slide looks 15 times bigger or circa 15
inches by 22 inches print size equivalent. This high power loupe provides
a good feeling for how your slide or negative quality will hold up under
high degrees of enlargement.
As you might expect, medium format slide loupes can be even harder to
find and more pricey than 35mm versions.
I am referring to the waist-level viewfinder found on most medium format
cameras.
My Bronica S2A and Hasselblad waist level finders also make nice
slide and negative loupes, with high quality optics and precise mechanics.
Since I already have them, the cost is right! Many folks take these
waist level viewfinders off and use a prism instead. Is yours
gathering dust, while you wish you had an equally handy loupe? Maybe
you already do?
Even better, I have found my Hasselblad chimney finder (5X
with
adjustable diopter) makes a great substitute for those pricey adjustable
loupes. You just pop it over the slide or film on a light table, and enjoy!
One advantage of these medium format finder based loupes is the quality
of their optics. The lenses are glass (not plastic) optics, usually
multi-element designs, often highly color corrected too.
The posting below by Jaisen Nailen suggests another "found" slide viewer,
using a "bug-viewer" from Wal-mart. While the quality may not rival the
Schneider versions that cost thirty times more money, it may do for your
needs too. And your kids can use it to look at bugs and stuff, unless
you would rather they tried to use your macro-lenses instead?
We simply use the lens to look at the slide instead of taking it. The
lens is dismounted from the camera and put into a holder at the right
distance. The slide or film on a light table goes under the lens. Look
through the lens and adjust your setup for optimal coverage and
sharpness. Enjoy!
If you have some closeup plus diopter lenses, you may have the optics you
need to make a simple low power loupe (+1, +2, +4). A few lens kits are
made out of multi-element glass (usually 2 elements), for color
correction and other optical benefits. A higher power lens (+4) will work
better and reduce working distance to your slides too. But unless you
have high quality achromatic closeup lenses (pricey), you probably
will be better off with the normal (50mm) lens designs below.
Warren Young's
How to Make a $30 Schneider Loupe Page shows a good view of how you
can convert a good surplus lens into a nice slide viewing loupe and save
some significant dollars. In Warren's design, he used a slightly
chipped Schneider enlarger lens.
Enlarger lenses are actually a really good choice, because they have a
flat-field design optimized for enlarging negatives. Moreover, many
enlarger lenses use a standard screw-thread, which can be used to make an
adjustable focusing mount. You also probably
aren't using your enlarger at the same time you are culling through your
slides. Why not let one lens do two duties?
Other photo tip sources recommend using the camera's normal lens for a
slide loupe too. Again, the normal lens is very sharp, often fast
(bright), a highly color-corrected multi-element design, and
light-weight. Now you have a use for that screw-mount normal lens
gathering dust in your closet too.
I should mention that very wide lenses and longer telephotos don't work
as well as the usual range of lenses in the normal lens range (50mm on
35mm SLR, 75-80mm on 6x6cm SLR). Short telephotos work a bit better, and
are often worth trying too.
Most of these normal lens based loupes work as modest magnification loupes.
The 35mm SLR normal lenses work out around 2X to 2.5X, while the 80mm
lenses seem to be closer to 4X loupes (on 35mm slides).
Okay, here are some tricks you can use.
Look into recycling those all-glass, multi-element, color-corrected
lenses that were used on that obsolete 8mm and 16mm movie camera. You
know, those cameras gathering dust since Camcorders got invented. You can
often find these lenses for $2 and up at camera shows or garage sales.
The non-fancy movie lenses with simple fixed apertures work fine.
These lenses can be used, in reverse, as high power loupes to examine
parts of the film at much higher magnification. The 16mm film version is
obviously aimed at 16mm sized film images, but may cover a bit more area.
Similarly, the 8mm lenses cover a smaller area, and provide a higher
magnification. Your specific magnification will obviously vary with your
lens, particularly its focal length. Again, normal formula lenses for
each format seem to work best, and these are usually the lowest in cost too.
For very high magnification, you can use the eyepieces from telescopes
and microscopes. I especially like the variable or zoom eyepieces as they
give a variable magnification ratio. Again, these lenses are high
quality, multi-element color corrected designs. If anything, they are
probably superior optically to many of the 2 element lenses used in
standard loupes. But there is a tradeoff in the amount of area covered.
These eyepieces cover only a relatively small area of the slide or image.
Similarly, if you have a rock-hound or coin dealer close-up magnifying
lens, it may also be used to examine slides at higher magnification.
These lenses are usually multi-element, air-spaced glass lenses.
You may also have one of those low-cost shirt pocket microscope/telescope
pen-sized tools. The microscope end can be used to check out film grain
and the rest, but you have to be very careful not to damage the slides.
For really high power, look into some of the low-power rock or biology
microscopes sometimes found in science kits or on surplus sales from
labs. The optics are very good, but these items are pretty pricey. If you
already have one, they can provide very high power views of your slides
too.
Unfortunately, enlargers may not have the right light temperature for
daylight slides, as well as being cumbersome to use with mounted slides!
While you can get unmounted slides, in sleeves, you may be understandably
wary of scratches from the average enlarger setup. So enlargers aren't
a replacement for a good loupe and daylight balanced slide table.
Slide viewers should be great substitutes for loupes. So why aren't they
more used?
First, the larger lens is often made out of plastic or a
single glass element. The cost of larger multi-element lenses is quite
high for obvious reasons.
Second, many slide viewers use a tungsten bulb design for light sources.
That may be convenient, especially in a battery powered design. But you
really want to use a better quality of light, such as a daylight balanced
light source.
How about a slide projector? Surely that gives you the largest degree of
enlargement, right?
Wrong! Slide projectors actually project an image that is rarely larger
than a 5x7 inch print held at proper viewing distance. That is one reason
so many slides look great, and movies look grand when projected on the
big screen. Unless you sit really up front to a large screen image, you
aren't really seeing a large degree of enlargement - even if the image is
wall-sized. Don't believe it? Try holding up a sheet of 8 1/2 x 11 inch
paper at normal print viewing distance the next time you are in a movie
theatre. Notice how it covers up most of the screen? Convinced?
Moreover, many slide projector optics aren't the best, since the low
degree of enlargement doesn't justify a really top quality and cost
optic.
That brings up back to the reason why you really need a loupe - even if
it is home-made. Neither the average slide viewer or even a slide
projector can be used in place of a loupe. To evaluate that slide or
negative, you really need a high quality optic that gives you a good
enlarged image using the right light source (e.g., daylight slide table).
Only now, thanks to the ideas on these pages, you have some alternatives
for loupes you may not have thought of before!
Notes:
The May, 1983 issue of Modern Photography magazine (p. 128) shows a simple
lighted plastic wedge for viewing slide pages in a binder. In addition to two edge
triangular pieces and a sheet of frosted plastic, you need a radio shack mini-fluorescent
light for lighting...
In a pinch, your normal focal length camera lens at full aperture will do (with a bit
of cutoff). If you want even more magnification, try a wide angle lens... Source:
Modern Photography, Nov. 1984, p. 51, Keppler, SLR
O
From Bronica Related Postings and Notes
Pages
[Ed. note: It is generally well known that you can build a great loupe
out of an older normal lens (reversed) in an off-the-slide mount. Here is
a less expensive
commercial option and a high-quality Schneider loupe made using an
enlarger lens... Enjoy ;-)]
Medium Format Digest Posting:
From: Jaisen Nailen jnailen@netdoor.com
Subject: Medium Format Loupe
Date: 1997-11-25
For quite some time I had searched for a loupe large enough for full
viewing my 6x6 chromes. Rodenstock makes one, but it is very expensive.
For a cheap solution,
go to your nearest "Wal-Mart" or similar department store. Look in the
toy section around the telescopes and stuff. Tasco makes a toy loupe for
kids to look at
insects with. The base is 3.5" square while the diameter of the lens is
2.25". While the optics are not the quality of a Rodenstock, I believe
that the $5.00 price tag
makes it worth buying anyway. I use it for inspecting my slides, then if
I need to, I will use my 8x loupe. Go pick one up and let me know what
you think! Hope this
helps someone.
From: tangent@cyberport.com (Warren Young)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment,rec.photo.misc
Subject: How to make a $30 Schneider Loupe
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998
I've just written an article detailing how I made a fine loupe from an
old Schneider-Kreuznach enlarger lens. The text is applicable to many
other types of lenses,
including that old 50mm standard lens you have laying around gathering
dust. The article is at:
http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent/photo/pseudoschneider.html
= Warren -- http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent
rec.photo.equipment.misc
From: Ken Schneider krs56@sjm.infi.net
[1] Loupes
Date: Fri Jan 15 1999
I have seen the Kenko 8X loupe for sale at B&H; for $130. Do I need 8X
or can I get away with 4X or 6X instead. The Schneider loupes are
suppose to be great but are they worth the extra dollars?
Thanks,
-= Ken =-
rec.photo.equipment.misc
From: rmonagha@news.smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
[2] $30 schneider loup URL and free loupe how-to info Re: Loupes
Date: Sat Jan 16 1999
see http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent/photo/pseudoschneider.html
How to make a $30 Schneider loupe - basic idea and design
I have several commercial loupes up to 15x, but being a poor grad
student, I find it is much cheaper to use a standard lens (e.g., 50mm
normal lens for 35mm loupe, etc.) in a cardboard box cutaway on a light-table
esp. true for medium format size loupes etc.
the standard lens optics are incredibly sharp and well-color corrected,
but essentially free (it is already on your camera)
try taking your normal lens off, put a slide on a light table, point rear
of lens towards slide as if its film in your camera, and you'll see what I
mean
for higher power loupes, you can easily use a 16mm movie projector lens,
or for higher power still, an 8mm movie lens - the glass (not plastic)
ones - again - very low cost ($2 up at camera shows) and yet very well
corrected.
If you have the $$ for a $100 or $130 US loupe - ignore the above. The
photo industry needs the money and the markups ;-) Otherwise, why not
try what you already have - it is probably superior optically to many of
the loupes out there I've seen ;-)
regards to all - bobm
rec.photo.equipment.misc
From: "Owen P. Evans" opevans@istar.ca
[1] Re: Loupes
Date: Fri Jan 15 1999
The sharper the optics the better the judgement of the slide or negative!
The Schneiders have a wonderful reputation.
4x to 6x is fine for 35 mm.
May I suggest you try the Pentax 5.5 x lupe; I think it's great.
Owen
rec.photo.equipment.misc
From: galacticat@my-dejanews.com
[1] Re: Loupes
Date: Sun Jan 17 1999
Ken Schneider krs56@sjm.infi.net wrote:
> I have seen the Kenko 8X loupe for sale at B&H; for $130. Do I need 8X > or can I get away with 4X or 6X instead. The Schneider loupes are > suppose to be great but are they worth the extra dollars? > > Thanks, > > -= Ken =-
Ken,
I'm assuming you're going to use the loupe for 35mm photography. A 4x loupe
allows you to view the whole slide at once while an 8x allows you to isolate
one particular portion of the image for a highly critical determination of
sharpness and grain. Using both loupes is definately a common practice for
many advanced photographers, but I personally use only one loupe--a Contax
(Carl Zeiss) 5x. The 5x gives a little better magnification by which to
examine the sharpness and grain but still lets you view the whole slide. The
optical quality is flawless. It sells at B&H; photo for 180 bucks. Maybe a
little more than you wanted to spend, but it's a fantastic optic that for me
is the right compromise between 4x and 8x. The NPC Pro 5.5x loupe is also
very nice and sells for only $120. It is extremely sharp and has outstanding
construction. If you're not intersted in either of these recommendations,
you can't go wrong with the Schneider 4x.
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Owen P. Evans" opevans@istar.ca
[1] Re: Loupe
Date: Wed Feb 10 1999
I recommend a Pentax SMC 5.5X loupe. It is excellent and not stupid $. If
you want an even cheaper one; try a PEAK 8X.
Owen
Chris wrote
>Please suggest a decent quality loupe for inspecting contact sheets. >Nothing terribly expensive but good enough for amateur use. > >Thanks.
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999
From: Mark Rabiner mrabiner@concentric.net
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Off Topic - Please Excuse
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
snip
> On the other hand, just because you bought a medium wide to medium Tele > zoom lens doesn't mean your Nikkor 50mm lens is obsoleted. It should be > lighter, faster and sharper than the zoom and thus remains one of my most > used lenses. > > Godfrey
I use mine in the darkroom reversed as a loop. I put a hole in the back
cap for my or my clients eye. I hear it's the best thing. Last week I
shot with it. I wouldn't sell it. It's a historically Primo piece of
glass winning countless Pulitzers and almost bringing down Leica. You
could easily tire of the slow, heavy awkwardness and too many elements
of a zoom. Zooms are the key to mediocrity. Zoom with your feet. Take
little steps like your shoelaces are tied together. Focus with a bright
snappy image.
Mark :-) Rabiner
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999
From: Dan Post dwpost@email.msn.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Of Loupes and enlarging with the camera lens!
Mark!
Glad to know someone else uses a 50mm for a loupe! My favorite is a
Summitar, though while they are being CLA'd, I use the Elmar.
Incidentally, I tried to mount the 5cm Elmar on a friend's new Saunders 4x5
VC enlarge (slaver, drool!) but the collapsible lens will take a special
board - one with a fairly deep indentation. Will keep trying!
Dan
From: "Bob Salomon" bobsalomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 6x7 lupe
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999
The 3x Rodenstock Aspheric loupe covers all but the extreme corners of a 67
slide.
--
bobsalomon@mindspring.com hpmarketingcorp.com
HP Marketing Corp. Amazon, Braun, Gepe, Giottos, Heliopan, HP Combi-Plan-T,
Kaiser, KoPho, Linhof, Pro Release, Rimowa, Rodenstock, Sirostar 2000
From: bcasselb@orednet.org (Bill D. Casselberry)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.misc
Subject: Re: suggestion for decent, but inexpensive lightbox and loupe
Date: 23 Mar 1999
Ben asks ...
Any recommendations for an inexpensive but decent lightbox and loupe for
viewing my 35mm slides?
unless *exact* color referencing that can't be judged
separately by direct observation against sunlight of
the slide, generally, is paramount -- try this, it works for me
go to the local WalMart/Fred Meyers place & get an short
"under cabinet" kitchen flourescent light fixture w/ a white
frosty plastic cover. Lay out a row of slides & use your
50mm lens as a magnifier -- cost is ~$20 for the light
Bill
Bill D. Casselberry
From: kopitnil@my-dejanews.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Best Loup and portable lightbox
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999
sanyuan@aol.com (San yuan) wrote:
> Anyone has suggestion regarding the right power of loup for viewing 35 mm > slides on a lightbox? is X4 or X8 better? What is a good brand, Schneider vs. > Peak vs Rodenstock? What is the best 4"x5" portable lightbox, Cabin vs other > cheaper brands? > Your comments are deeply appreciated. > sanyuan@aol.com
With loupes, I've used the Schneider 6x Aspheric, Peak 7x Anastigmat, Emo
Macromax (a 5x which is basically the same as the new Leica loupe) and Canon
8x (their newer high-end 8x loupe, not older cheap one).
If you can afford it, the Schneider 6x Aspheric is the best of that group.
You can see the entire slide at once (though if you wear eyeglasses you'll
need to shift your eyes somewhat) and the magnification makes viewing
significantly better than with the 5x Emo Macromax, which I'd rank second in
quality. The Emo, besides lower magnification, has more pincushion distortion
than the Schneider.
The Peak 7x Anastigmat would be my next choice of the group. You can see the
entire slide with greater magnification than with the Schneider, eye relief
for eyeglass wearers is significantly better, and distortion control on the
Peak is as good as the Schneider. But it's neither as sharp nor as contrasty
as either the Schneider or the Emo Macromax. Still, if cost is an issue, I'd
consider this Peak a good loupe and the best value among these loupes.
The Canon 8x was a disapointment. On the plus side it was sharper and more
contrasty than the Peak (though it shows slightly less contrast than the
Schneider and Emo). Also, its greater magnification made a noticeable
difference when viewing a slide, and it had the best eye relief. But it
suffered from horrible pincushion distortion which bothered me greatly and
made the loupe unuseable for me. Also, it's the only one of the group which
does not show the entire slide, though it does show a significant portion.
Larry
From: Morgan Jones mwj@interlog.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: 50mm lens as loupe
Date: 04 Apr 1999
> What magnification can I get if I use a 50mm/1.8 lens as a loupe for > viewing slides?
Since 50s tend to give about a 1:4 reproduction, I would guess you'd
get about a 4:1 magnification when using as a loupe. This is
consistent w/ my experience. My 50/1.4 does such a good job as a
loupe that I'm trying to figure out how to mount it a fixed distance
from the light box - I wonder if the lens hood (ES-71) would be the
right distance. Anyone know?
Morgan.
From: rcx@tiac.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: 50mm lens as loupe
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999
I use a rubber hood as a "skirt" for my old Zeiss 50 cum loupe. It gets the
lens the right distance away for use on my light box.
KC
From: ckross@enteract.com (Chuck Ross)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: 50mm lens as loupe
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999
Without actually being at all scientific about it, it looks like 3-4x to
me, but it sure is good quality!! (Canon 50mm 1.8-I)
augustus@aol.com (Augustus) wrote:
>Hello, >I am building a 24X18 light table. My plan is to buy 2 20watt 5000k 90cri >bulbs. 1/4" acrylic top built on a wood frame. Should I paint the interior >white? Any suggestions on the height? Any recommendations would be very >helpful. >Thanks In Advance, >John
I built mine about 12 x 36. It holds four slides pages side by side. I
used Chroma 90 bulbs from the BulbMan in Reno NV (they have an 800
number). A regular 2-bulb fixture from the hardware store fits inside
the box. It's 7" deep, and painted with white primer inside (this is
important--you do not want a plywood-colored tint to your light). The
top is 1/4" "light white" acrylic from Tap Plastics.
I think your 18" dimension might be too deep. When I sit at mine I
don't want to lean over to look at stuff farther back than a foot. You
would also need two fixtures to cover that depth--bulbs in the center
won't do it.
My mistake was screwing the plastic top on. It has collected dust on
the underside and I don't feel like unscrewing it to clean. Some kind
of clips would be better. Obviously you don't want anything sticking
up to scratch your film.
---
David Meiland
Oakland, CA
From Nikon Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999
From: Eertmans Nicolas ne@spirou.eatchip.eurocontrol.be
Subject: Re: finder as loupe?
The cheapest -and best?- loupe I've found is a 50mm lens.This gives a
very good full frame loupe for 35mm films. Just reverse the lens on the
slide (front facing the slide) and open the aperture to the maximum.
I have found that with the 50mm 1.8 AF Nikkor and the dirt cheap Ricoh
screw mount lens I dedicated to that use, the lens elements are ideally
recessed so that accomodation is easily performed, with the lens laid on
the slide. With thinner lenses (such as the late AIs or E 50mm lenses),
it might be more difficult to obtain good focus.
The lenses may not be otpimised for such a use, but I have found their
optical quality to be lightyears ahead of the Nikon loupe I initially
bought. A wider aperture may help for viewing, although I find f1.8
sufficient.
Hope this helps,
Nicholas
From Nikon Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999
From: Gopi Sundaram gopalan@cs.sc.edu
Subject: [NIKON] Re: OT: Making loupes from 50mm lenses
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Sam Doshi wrote:
> I heard from someone / some magazine that you can use 50mm lenses > as loupes, and it works. Just place the lens, front element down > on the slide and peer through the rear element.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ . ^^^^^^^^^^^^ . > Unfortunately Nikon 50mm tend to have built in lens hoods which > makes the slide seem slightly out-of-focus.
The reason they appear slightly out-of-focus is because you are
viewing the slide incorrectly. To use the 50mm lens as a loupe, you
have to reverse it. Place the REAR element near the slide (not on it)
and peer through the FRONT element.
HTH
From Nikon Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999
From: William Boyle wmboyle@iwinet.com
Subject: [NIKON] Re: Re: OT: Making loupes from 50mm lenses
Gopi Sindaram wrote:
The reason they appear slightly out-of-focus is because you are
viewing the slide incorrectly. To use the 50mm lens as a loupe, you
have to reverse it. Place the REAR element near the slide (not on it)
and peer through the FRONT element
I use an old Pentax manual focus 50f/2 for a loupe cost me $15 - super
sharp, clear, distortion-free image - I have to look through the rear
element, holding the lens with the front element facing the light box.
My Nikkor 50mm 1.4 AIS also makes a good loupe, but a bit more expensive
and, like the Pentax 50/2 it has to rest face down, directly on the
film, in order to focus.
So I guess it depends on exactly what 50mm lens you are using.
Bill Boyle
From: Richard Davis scanman@atlantic.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: $3-Viewer Slide/Neg-Copies Nikon 950
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999
I have put up photos in the Nikon 950 album at Photopoint showing
how to modify a $3 Slide/Negative viewer into a slide/negative copy
device for use with the Nikon 950 & 900 cameras. The photos give
information on the modifications to the viewer and the quality of the
results from several 35mm slides & negatives along with exposure
information. The results obtained are compared side by side to the
results obtained with the Photosmart Scanner.
This album also has portrait lighting with $20 slave flashes and other
subjects photographed with the Nikon 950 camera.
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=10081
Thank you for your interest,
Rick
From: Don Marcotte djm@inforamp.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Want to build a light table
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999
I just built a 15" x 15" viewer for about $30US. It is made of wood with a
white opaque plexiglas top surface. The light source is a circular 75 watt
flourescent bulb. I would suggest you consider the heat generated by the
lamps. That is why I chose a flourescent light source. I'm not familiar
with the type of lamp you mentioned so don't know how hot it would get. My
viewer works fine for my purposes. It is certainly not elegant but it is
effective. It stands about 12" high and was designed to go on a table top.
The top surface is attached by a hinge so it flips up to allow access to
the light source. I used a regular electrical box, el cheapo light base
and the cord from a cheap extension cable ( I cut the receptacle end off).
The wood is good 3/4" pine. Hope this helps.
Mike Larceny wrote:
> Hi all, > > I have been looking at light table prices on the internet and in magazines > and they are all WAY too expensive. I think I can build one for much > cheaper but seek the wisdom of others who may have done likewise. What kind > of material is used for the table top? Is it a special material other than > simple plastic? I am going to use 5000 degree Kelvin lamps and probably > make the table 24" x 24". Given those dimensions, how many lamps would I > need? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. > > Mike
From: chip5fall@aol.com (CHIP5FALL)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: Light box loupe recommendations
Date: 18 Aug 1999
Keith,
A dirty little secret for a lot of us in the stock biz is that we use
reasonably-priced Peak loupes like the 8X you use (there are a few minor
model variations on the same creature; I prefer the ones without the pegs
for the cord shown in your linked photo). The rectangular base is just
right to cover a 35mm slide. We cover the clear plastic on the base with
black, opaque tape to limit the light to that transmitted through the
film. These things float around all over the light tables and counters
here--we must have eight or nine of them.
A lot of photo agents and editors, and especially those who deal
extensively with medium and large format transparencies use a Schneider 4X
loupe. A greater area is observed, quality is high, blah, blah. But I do
not find the Schneider magnification to be high enough to make critical
judgements on 35mm slides. Only one Schneider 4X here. We don't go up to
15X in our daily activities but do have a Schneider 10X in a drawer
somewhere. For judging film and getting into extreme detail, we will
rarely use a small microscope up to 100X.
Carl May
From: philfflash@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Advice on loupes and lightboxes
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999
Charles McDowell speer@soli.inav.net wrote:
> I'm just switching over to slides and would like to get a loupe and > light box to view the things. B&H; has a mind boggling assortment of > both. Can someone give me just the brief intro? I don't like to buy > cheap equipment, but I don't want to waste money either. I've seen > loupes from $6 to $250. What is appropriate for viewing slides? Same > question on light boxes: is a $50 8x10 box sufficient? > > Thanks for any advice. > > Charles McDowell > aviat@bigfoot.com
The part that makes a lightbox work is a 5000 degree bulb. I made my
own out of milky plexiglass (I know it's a brand name but you know what
I mean) and plywood. I was then able to mount it on a camera stand so I
don't have to bend at a bad angle to use it. If the $50 box comes with
a bulb it is wort the money for someone who isn't into building.
I used to use one of those very expensive loupes - a Schneider with
an adjustable eyepiece - for viewing slides. However I did not buy it
for viewing slides and that is not what it was made for (except to high
paid art directors and Richard Avedon). These loupes are for focusing
on the groundglass of a view camera. I would bet that a $30-40 loupe is
as much as you will need for slides. I am currently using a "bug" loupe
for that purpose. It was $10 at a one hour processor, is branded
Carson, is over two and a hlaf inches in diameter and is 5x. The edges
are way off sharp but the sweet spot is as big as a 35mm slide. I also
do my REAL examination with my computer monitor after scanning. If you
have a film scanner the computer makes a great slide viewer, better
than any loupe for these old tired eyes.
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Ulrich" ulrich@naturfoto.ch
[1] Re: Home made light table
Date: Sun Dec 19 1999
There are some plans and suggestions in german:
http://spot.fho-emden.de/gast/foto/faq/leucht.htm
http://spot.fho-emden.de/gast/foto/faq/leucht2.htm
hope that helps
--
ulrich@naturfoto.ch
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: Gene Rhodes gfrhodes@home.com
[1] Re: Home made light table
Date: Sun Dec 19 1999
I built my own. Since I use it only to sort slides, its a simple
affair. If interested click "Misc" at"
Gene http://www.photoprojects.net
From Nikon Manual Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999
From: Rodrigo Gimenez rge@adinet.com.uy
Subject: 6x magnification finders
About magnification finders, I would like to know
if any of you tried to adapt any loupe with greater
magnification than the 6x ones available as accessories
for the Nikon F series, like the DW-4 for the Nikon F3.
I read that some astrophotographers adapted 8x or 10x
loupes, but I would like to know if the 100% finder
coverage is lost with loupes with greater magnification.
I think that all 35mm camera makers that I'm aware off
made the high magnification finders with 6x
magnification because of finder coverage, and that for
medium format cameras, bigger high magnification finders
can be made.
Rodrigo Gimenez
From Nikon Manual Mailing List
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999
From: Larry Kopitnik kopitnil@marketingcomm.com
Subject: re: Loupes
I know this one has been asked before, but any recommendations on a
reasonably priced loupe for home/hobby use. Thanks
I've tried a bunch of loupes, and I can say definitevely that they are one
photographic item where you get what you pay for.
The loupes I've used between home and work (I work as production manager of
a large ad agency, so I review slides to determine reproduction quality
reguarly) include:
* Hoya 4x - A copy of the Schneider 4x loupe with excellent sharpness and
contrast and little distortion. You can see an entire slide at once
(including eyegelass wearers). Expensive, but a little less expensive than
the Schneider 4x. I'm not sure if this is still made; I've not seen it
listed by any dealers for awhile.
* Emo Macromax 5x - Excellent quality, very sharp and contrasty image with
minimal distortion. Even an eyeglass wearer can see the entire slide with
one look. But it's no longer available as the Macromax. I believe this has
become the very expensive Leica loupe.
* Schneider 6x Aspheric - Excellent optical quality, sharp with good
contrast and little distortion. A non-eyeglass wearer can see the entire
image with this loupe, but someone who wears glasses will need to shift
their eye. This is one of two loupes I currently use, though if I had to do
it again (because of the other loupe below I now also use), I'd probably go
with the less expensive Schneider 4x loupe (or Rodenstock 4x, which I've
not used but have heard from photographers whose opinions I value is as
good as the Schneider). This loupe is expensive.
* Peak 7x Anastigmat - A highly underrated loupe. Sharp, though very
slightly less so than the Schneider and Emo above, with minimal distortion,
and a little less contrast as the other loupes. Still, it's the highest
magnification loupe on this list where an entire slide can be seen at once,
even by an eyegalss wearer. It comes with a clear skirt only, so I wrapped
black tape around it to minimize reflections from the light table when
viewing slides. While not the price of cheap (and lower quality) loupes,
this one is the best value on this list and the one I'd recommend to
someone on more of a budget, if they can afford it.
* Canon 8x loupe - Sharp with good contrast, but horrible distortion which
made it unuseable for me. It does not show an entire slide at once.
* Schneider 10x loupe - This is the other loupe I currently use. It shows
maybe 2/3 of a slide at once, but with as much sharpness and contrast, and
as little distortion, as any of the best loupes I've tried. And the higher
magnification makes a big difference when evaluating the quality of a slide
(I can see details and faults through this loupe which I cannot with the
others). But it is expensive.
When choosing a loupe, don't look just for the highest magnification. For
instance, Peak makes an inexpensive 8x loupe which allows viewing an entire
slide. But it shows fewer details than even the 4x Hoya above because of
its inferior optical quality (I know because I compared them side-by-side).
The more expensive loupes really are that much better. You're best off with
the best loupe you can afford.
Larry
From Nikon Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999
From: "David Bain" dcbain@cwcom.net
Subject: Loupes
Joe Brugger, you took the words right out of my keyboard!
I use the 50mm f1.8 Zuiko off my better half's OM10 - before you ask, she
had an EM but didn't like it and thinks the F301 is too heavy! If she finds
out about the Zuiko I'll use the 50mm f1.9 Pentacon off my old Practika.
I'd even use my 50mm Nikkor, but I certainly wouldn't pay money for a lens
which won't fit either a camera or an enlarger.
Keep doing it by hand . . .
BFN
David
From Nikon Manual Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999
From: "imagineero ." imagineero@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: re: Loupes
...
Have you ever seen the zooming loupe made by Pentax? It is suitable for
full frame viewing of medium format, and zooms from 4x-8x. Focus is
adjustable. There is a very minimal distortion at the 8x end, but overall
an excellent piece of glass and certainly comparable to the sharpie. The
only thing holding me back from buying one? The AU$350 price tag they
carry.
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999
From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" peterk@lucent.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Rollei and a loupe
Bill Maxwell made a special loupe for use in the WLF. I have one and I
think it was $50. You might try calling him at 404-244-0095 and see if he
still have some. They have a felt surface on the bottom so they won't
scratch the screen and a string so you can wear them around your neck and
drop it in as needed for viewing/focusing.
Peter K
....
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
From: Susan & Mike Long hartcs@bellsouth.net
Subject: Re: loupe recommendations?
The Calumet 7x is a sleeper of good quality and reasonably priced. As I
recall, they are $80 or $90 and on sale at Christmas each year. I also
have a 4x Calumet which is a Rodenstock. Price was about $89 and I like it
a lot.
Even for medium format for the 7x is handy to see if a 16x20 is in the
cards.
Mike
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999
From: "PSsquare" pschmitt@stny.lrun.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Loupe for slide or negative
Lots of good recommendations that I can't better, but I did learn one
thing
recently that might be of value. I learned that my loupe was designed for
viewing negatives. The sidewall of the housing is clear and as a result it
admits light on to the face of a slide. I lose contrast as a result for
slides. So, I masked off the clear sidewalls and gained better viewing of
slides. You might want to consider this in selecting your loupe.
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999
From: larrybill9000@my-dejanews.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.misc
Subject: Re: suggestion for decent, but inexpensive lightbox and
loupe
Try what I did: Build or acquire a box about 5 inches or so deep. Paint
the inside flat white. But a inexpensive "under the counter" flourescent
fixture. Mount it inside a long side of box. (get the light first, so you
know how big to build the box) Get either a piece of white plastic from a
sign shop, big enough to cover the top of the box. Alternatively, a piece
of glass spray painted flat white lightly will work. Cheap and dirty, but
it works! Good luck.
"ben grosser"
grosser@uiuc.edu wrote:
> Any recommendations for an inexpensive but decent lightbox and loupe for > viewing my 35mm slides? I don't want junk, but my use isn't heavy enough > to justify a huge expense. > > Do these things show up used anywhere, or does B&H; ever sell things like > this used? > > Thanks,
Date: 06 Aug 1999
From: thrainking@aol.com (ThRainKing)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Lupes/LightBoxes...
>Another, and super cheap option, is the slide viewer. You can get battery >powered backlit ones, or ones that you just holdup to the light.
A client brought one of these by for picking film (battery powered). It
distorted the image fairly badly, and the color temp was orangey-warm. I
cut her a light blue gel & put it between the lamp and the diffuser; at
least she could tell what color the clothes were. But the models still
looked fat.
BTW, a really nice loupe can be found in the Edmund Scientific catalog. I
think it's a "retoucher's Loupe". The magnification isn't marked on
mineseems about 8x, but it'll view about a full 645 frame (it's pretty
big). Nice optics, adjustable focus, and an open area for (I suppose)
slipping in a paintbrush. I think around $100, but I prefer it to my
Schneider (not even sure where the Schneider is these days... hmmm...)
Date: 30 Aug 2000
From: mceowen@aol.com (McEowen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Light Box+Loupe or Projector
>I guess I don't know either. >Could you provide a short explanation ?
A projected slide is a non-critical way to view an image because the
viewing distance is so great. Even a soft slide will look OK on the
screen. The loupe doesn't lie. Also, it's much easier to compare one
slide to another when they're laid out next to each other on a light table
and you can just move from one to the other with your loupe. But in the
end, it's just a more convenient way to work -- at a desk or workstation
with a good light table and loupe. Once you start working this way you'll
see. It' just "how it's done" -- I don't know any other way to explain it.
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000
From: Bob Salomon robertsalomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Slide Viewer
We will introduce an under 100.00 2 1/4 / 35mm 5000K, 2x viewer shortly.
It accepts strips of film as well as mounted 35mm, 645, 66 or 67 mounted
slides. Max. slide size is 6x17cm.
It will be available from camera stores after Photokina --
www.hpmarketingcorp.com for links to our suppliers
HP Marketing Corp. U.S. distributor for Braun, Gepe, Giottos, Heliopan,
HP
From Medium Format Digest:
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000
From: "Mitch Winkle" mwinkle@jonatas.com
Subject: Loupes
Folks,
Many of you I know wear glasses as I do, so this type of loupe may be
interesting to you.
I haven't tried it, but the price, eye relief and large coverage peaked my
interest.
http://www.edmundoptics.com/IOD/DisplayProduct.cfm?productid=1813
Mitch Winkle
mwinkle@jonatas.com
AC4IY
[Ed. note: Possible mini-light table portable setup?]
From Speleonics Mailing List (cave diving..)
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000
From: "Christopher J. Phoenix" cphoenix@best.com
To: speleonics@altadena.net
Subject: Nice fluorescent source
Eveready is making a ~$20 4-AA flashlight called the ArcWhite, that comes
with a krypton bulb and a fluorescent tube. I found it at WalMart. The
flashlight can be pulled apart fairly easily to extract the fluorescent
(and then glued back together for a backup light). The tube will run
about 7 hours on four AAs, and it (with the electronics attached) plus a
switch fit neatly into a 4.5" by 1/2" (inside diameter) plastic cylinder
for waterproofing. The packaging claims that the tube is "twice the
intensity of standard 4 watt tube" and will last 10,000 hours.
I found that the light was much better than a Petzl Duo on low setting.
I put the flashlight and the Duo on my helmet and caved in Lilburn for
about 12 hours. I kept turning on my Duo, seeing no difference, and
turning it off again. I now have the waterproofed tube spliced into the
Duo's battery pack (I'm keeping the Duo for the rare times when I want a
focusable light).
Chris
--
Chris Phoenix cphoenix@best.com http://www.best.com/~cphoenix
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000
From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" peterk@avaya.com
Subject: [Rollei] Need a new lightbox
If you are looking for a great lightbox, buy the Hakuba KLV-5700. I
believe B&H; sells this one too. It is the best lightbox I have come
across in some time and worth the money. I only wish I found this one
sooner and saved the money I spent going through 2 average lightboxes.
Peter K
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: jake188@Hotmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 01
[1] Loupes Link
Quite a few threads on loupes lately so I though I would post this link to
the e valuation section on photo net. In the comments are quite a few
comments about various loupes.
http://www.photo.net/photo/evaluation
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000
From: Fred Greenspan greenspan@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT:Loupes
If you don't mind not seeing all the way to the corners, the Kenko
Excelupe EC5X gives you a 5X image to the center edges of a 6x6. I use it
to get an overall view along with a small Peak 10X for closer examination
of detail. Both of these can be used with transparencies and contact
prints - they have a clear skirt. Of course, you could spend a lot more,
but I didn't find exactly what I wanted in the coverage and magnification
combination, with a clear skirt, in any of the other brands that I looked
at. I do keep a standard Schneider Krueshnach Lupe in my darkroom.
HTH!-Fred
Bob Shell wrote:
> You want an 8X which shows the whole 6 X 6 slide? > > I don't think there are any. My favorite loupe for looking at medium > format transparencies and negatives is the 3X aspheric from Rodenstock. > I use it for checking the overall image, and switch to a more powerful > loupe to check small areas of the image. > > Bob
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000
From: bigler@ens2m.fr
Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT:Loupes for Rollei 6x6 viewing
> from Sam Anson : > I have countless Rollei 6x6 slides, but no projector. Does anyone know of a > handheld viewer for 6x6 slides? I've looked, but no luck. Any suggestions?
Reflecta, Germany has someting that looks very interesting. It is a
small light box combined with a 2X loupe able to view 35 mm strips or
120 rollfilm strips or mounted 35 mm or MF slides. Here is what their
website says :
http://www.reflecta.de/eng/b250.htm
B-250 Viewer
Technical Data:
- for slides or film strips 24 x 36mm or format 120
- battery or AC-adapter operable (accessory Art.10330)
- batteries 6 x 1,5V Mignon
- AC-DC adapter 9V 600mA (accessory Art. 10330)
- with detachable magnifier, magnifies 2 times
- color temperature 5000 K +- 270 K
- ON/OFF switch
- dimensions 260 x 144 x 20mm
- weight 630g
Art.-No. 10305
--
Emmanuel BIGLER
bigler@ens2m.fr
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000
From: Bob Salomon robertsalomon@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rollei Users list digest V8 #217
Gepe will introduce one next month that will take up to a 9" strip of film
or 4 6x6 mounted slides at one time and has a sliding loupe that moves
from L to R.
It has a 5000K Ý300K light source and comes with a case. It will retail
for under $100.00. --
HP Marketing Corp. U.S. distributor for Braun, Ergorest, Gepe, Giottos,
Heliopan, HP Combi Plan T, Kaiser fototechnik, KoPho cases, Linhof, Pro
Release, Rimowa, Rodenstock, Sirostar 2000, Tetenal Ink Jet Papers, Wista
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000
From: Robert Marvin marvbej@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT:Loupes
Rollei Users list digest at
owner-rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us wrote:
> [Rollei] OT:Loupes
The Horizon 4X loupe works well, comes with both black & clear skirts, and
and is cheap--about $40.
--
Bob Marvin
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000
From: Bob Salomon robertsalomon@mindspring.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rollei Users list digest V8 #219
No but Wista has a 7x
--
www.hpmarketingcorp.com for links to our suppliers
From Contax Mailing List;
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000
From: muchan muchan@promikra.si
Subject: Re: [CONTAX] Planar as loupe
Mikhail Konovalov wrote:
> > Now, I have two loupes in front of me, 5x and 7x. Let's see. > > [Approximate] focal length for the 5x is 50mm (+20 D). > [Approximate] focal length for the 7x is 30mm (+33.3 D).
Almost without thinking about Math formula you gave, seeing these
two lines, and I assume my Planar 85mm acts as if loupe somewhere
under 4x and somewhere over x3, and I'm happy. :) So, if I buy
dedicated 4x loupe, I won't get that much, compared with current
"A Planar for everything" approach. :)
muchan
From: pburian@aol.com (PBurian)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Date: 22 Nov 2000
Subject: How to check slides for sharpness?
A friend asked me what loupe and light table to buy to check his slides.
He is now using a 3x loupe and a tiny 3"x3" light table. My response:
A bigger light table is not that expensive at http://www.bhphotovideo.com
Mine is about 18"x24". A 12"x17" model is about $92. (Tables with color
corrected lamps can be far more; not necessary for hobby use.)
With most 4x loupes, you should be able to see the entire slide. I use the
Schneider, about $100. but excellent optics. Actually, I find 4x not
adequately powerful except for quick viewing; so, I would suggest a
cheaper 4x - or stick with your 3x. Spend money on a really good 8x loupe
for a critical examination of sharpness, etc.
I use a Schneider 8x and occasionally an old 10x loupe. See the B&H; site
or any on-line store. The Schneider is $174. unfortunately and a
Rodenstock is even more $$$; these are superb.
Peak makes some cheapies and some good ones but not a really good 8x.
Their WPH 8x is $40. I have one too and it's very sharp in the center; if
you do not check hundreds of slides, I guess you could get by with this.
Kenko has a 9x Achromatic that a friend bought; says it's great; $70. The
Kenko Excel 8x -- designed for 35mm slide viewing -- is $130. but I have
never seen one.
There is no cheap way to do this really well, but for occasional use, the
$92. light table, a 3x or 4x loupe, plus the Peak 8x, would be adequate.
Peter Burian
rec.photo.equipment.large-format
From: richardhelzer@my-deja.com
[1] Re: How to evaluate lens sharpness
Date: Sun Dec 10 2000
> using a 4x loupe
Make sure your loupe is actually focused on the ground glass. If you
are using glasses or reading glasses the loupe may be focusing off the
plane of the ground glass ,this started happening to me and degraded my
negs. If you can fit a piece of plane glass onto the back of your
camera you can see the actual resolution of your lens without the
interference of the grain of the ground glass . I think you will be
surprised how sharp your lens actually is.
Richard Helzer
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Paul Skelcher" skelch@erols.com
[1] Re: Lightboxes/Light Panels/Light Tables
Date: Wed Dec 20 2000
> I am looking into buying a light box to view my slides. my budget is > <$300. but I will try to spend as less as possible. Can you tell what > light box/panel has work best for mainly viewing slide.
If you have any access to medical supplies, look for an Xray viewing
screen.
Mine is 12" x 24", cost about $120. Built like a tank and even
illumination across the whole area.
Paul
[Ed. note: thanks to Mac for these notes and pointers...]
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: "Mac Breck" macbreck@access995.com
[1] Re: Lightboxes/Light Panels/Light Tables
Date: Wed Dec 20 2000
Depends on how big you want, and if you want battery operation. I just
bought:
Visual-Plus Professional, Slim Portable Viewer 4-1/8" x 5-1/2" (B&H; #
VIVP45) for $49.95, and a Hakuba Lightviewer 5700 (5"x7") for $89.95 (B&H;
#HALV5700).
The former takes 4 AAA batteries and has an AC Adapter.
The latter takes 4 AA batteries, and has an adapter.
Both are 5000 degrees K, and come with protective pouches.
I plan to keep the 5x7 one on my PC desk for use when I'm scanning slides,
and it's plenty big enough. I picked the size because that's the biggest
size one that can comfortable fit in the space I have available for it.
It measures 10.5" x 7" overall, by 0.7" thick. The smaller one is 6.5"
square by 1/2" thick. The 4x5 one is to take with me.
Mac
From Leica Topica Mailing List:
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000
From: apbbeijing apbbeijing@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Leica 5x loupe
David,
I have had quite a lot of lupes and here briefly are my conclusions:
1/ Nikon 8x - good for occasional checking of focus but squinty and not
suited to extended sessions. Useful for checking focus of 35mm cameras
with ground glass at the film plane.
2/ Contax 5x. Nice, compact but gets tiring after 20-30mins
3/ Maxwell 6x. Excellent, light, solid but no dioptre correction and must
be right on the neg to see clearly but excellent for checking image
quality and usable for extended editing (in fact I am just taking a break
from a 3 hour edit with it right now)
4/ Canham 3x: for 6x7. A bargain and my choice for 6x6, 6x7 and Xpan also
for view camera ground glass
5/ Schneider 4x: the very best for editing large numbers of slides. Clear
view, lightweight, cleanable and compact
6/ Leica 5x. Heavy (not an asset), clear view, very useful diffuser/slide
and film strip holder. Rubberised bottom rim a good idea to reduce
scratching. My travel loupe, simply because of the diffuser.
HTH
Adrian
from Medium Format Mailing List;
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001
From: East Coast Photography ecphoto@one.net.au
To: medium-format@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [medium-format] Light Box Question
Andre
I own a 'lightbox' model grande made in Japan and measures about 7" x 11"
(it was the smallest the company made). Runs on either 6 x C batteries or
240v (i live in Oz).
As far as melting / warping negatives / trannies - not a hope in haddies.
Light boxes utilise colour corrected flouro tubes usually very low wattage
(15 - 40w) under a translucent perspex cover to diffuse light and supply a
even support for the negs.
Craig Mason
East Coast Photography
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001
From: Jeff Schraeder cestjeffici@yahoo.com
To: medium-format@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [medium-format] Light Box Question
Andre,
I use a Visual Plus light box. It is very small but i
can view negs up to 4 x 5 inches. I think it comes in
larger sizes if you need it. Mine cost $49.95. It runs
from 9 volt battery or a transformer and produces a
cold ( no heat ) white light. The model number is
VP-6050V. I really like it.
Jeff
...
From Leica Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001
From: Jim Brick jim_brick@agilent.com
Subject: [Leica] Re: viewing contact sheets
I've found the Schneider 6x ASPH loupe to be the best for viewing slides
and contacts. Use the clear skirt with contact sheets and get a good light
source very close so that the light shines through the skirt on to the
image being viewed. My second loupe is an NPC 5.5x loupe with built-in
retracting opaque skirt to expose the clear skirt. Really good loupe as
well. I end up using this loupe most of the time as my 6x ASPH is usually
packed with my 4x5 for focusing on the GG.
http://www.npcphoto.com/html/prolupe.htm .
Jim
[Ed. note: neat tip thanks to Mark on using lens cap with hole with
loupe!]
From Hasselblad Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001
From: Mark Rabiner mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com
Subject: Re: SV: Idyll curiousity
ULF SJ+GREN wrote:
> And when you don't use your 80mm Planar as an enlarging lens I have found >that it is a wonderful loupe. Use it backwards, with the front lens nearest to >your eye. > Ulf
My Loup is a 50mm 1.4 AI Nikkor. I put a hole in the real cap for my
eyeball. Can't find anything to match this.
mark rabiner
From Minolta Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001
From: jtanner@rjfs.com
Subject: re loupe
there is a nice discussion on loupes in this article
on evealuating photos
http://www.photo.net/photo/evaluation
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000
From: ajacobs2 ajacobs2@tampabay.rr.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Building Light Box, Need Help
Couple of tips: Build it well, it will last a lifetime...
1- Glass 1/4 plate
2- Diffusion most plastic supply houses have white frosted, again 1/4
inch or more as less will sag or warp
3- Stick to common dimmensions such as 2x4+ feet so standard parts and
sizes apply in the Construction
4- Use single bulb ballasted bulbs separated by 3inches from the side so
they go: 000-B-000-B-000-B-000-B-000 "0" being an inch, this gives
you conformity of light.
5- Use the 5000 kelvin daylights.
6- Start with a rectangle of 8 inches in height, lower will result in
uneven lighting, slightly over 2x4 to accomodate the flouresent bulbs
and bases. I used 1/2 inch plywood, fine finish one side for the base.
Drilled holes for circulation and have added 110 volt computer fans for
cooling on a separate switch.
7- Simple ends, flush and sanded or if you have a taste for the exotic,
I used 2x2 stock in the corner, glued and screwed and did the outside
edge's with polished aluminum.
8- The plastic and glass can the be measured and LAID on top. or put lip
on inner surface to hold.
9- Aluminum "L" mitered around top adds finished look and holds glass in
place.
10- Stain or paint wood
Good Luck......
Alan
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000
From: Tony Polson tony.polson@btinternet.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Building Light Box, Need Help
ajacobs2 ajacobs2@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
> Couple of tips: Build it well, it will last a lifetime... > > 1- Glass 1/4 plate
[excellent specification snipped]
I suggest that toughened glass should be used; it's surprisingly easy to
break glass that's horizontal and only supported around the edges; even
dropping something fairly light on to the glass will cause it to
shatter. If toughened glass is not used, the shards of broken glass
will be extremely sharp and will present a significant safety hazard.
--
Tony Polson, North Yorkshire, UK
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
From: hmsdoc@aol.com (HMSDOC)
Date: Mon Jul 16 2001
Subject: Schneider Loupes
B & H has Schneider 4x loupes for $109 and Adorama has "Schneider New
Style 4x M/c Magnifier" for $89.....they look different in the pictures
(since presuambly one is new style). Does anyone know if these are
optically of similar quality??
Likewise , B&H; has a Schneider 8x loupe for I think it was $169 and
Adorama for $129 but there was no picture to compare them. Are these the
same? I called B&H; to ask but the person didn't seem to know what I was
talking about.
Howard
HMSDOC@aol.com
From: keysal@aol.com (KEYSAL)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Date: 22 Nov 2000
Subject: Re: How to check slides for sharpness?
A handy little 8mm movie projector lens, I rescued from a hapless unit on
its way to the trash heap, is my tool for checking sharpness.
While using it as a loupe looking at slides it shows me such a high
magnification that I can even determine grain and visible detail before
making any enlargements.
Granted i can only see a small portion of the slide at a time but when I
want see the whole thing any normal loupe will do.
Keysal
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000
From: "Alan Justice" a.justice@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: How to check slides for sharpness?
I tried a reversed 50 mm f1.4 which was fair. Better magnification with a
17-35 f2.8 at 17. And the winner? The 8 mm projector lens. I'm guessing
it's about 20x. Thanks for the suggestion.
-Alan Justice
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000
From: Charles Pezeshki pezeshki@moscow.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: How to check slides for sharpness?
Hi Peter,
I have the 4x Toyo loupe - $48 - (which I also use on my 4x5), and a $50
light box with color-balanced tubes (an 8x10 Porta-Trace). That only
totals $100, and it works great. Of course, it's not as nice as a
full-frame 8x loupe, but it is revelatory for the beginner.
Chuck
Chuck Pezeshki
http://users.moscow.com/pezeshki
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000
From: "Roger N. Clark" rnclark@uswest.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.technique.nature
Subject: Re: How to check slides for sharpness?
As someone who tries to maximize sharpness on both 35mm and 4x5, I have a
strong opinion on how to check sharpness. 3x, 4x, or even 8x sinply is
not good enough, unless you only expect to do 3x, 4x, or 8x enlargements.
If you want sharp 8x10 and larger enlargements from 35mm, you must examine
at much higher magnification. I use my eye for simple composition and an
8x loupe for looking to see if the slide is basically sharp. If I only
have a few that I like, I'll do a 4000 dpi scan. When I went back to some
of my older slides and scanned them at 4000 dpi many weren't as sharp as I
thought--but since moving to a bogen 3021 (with 329 head) even for wide
angle 35mm, tripod shake and loss of sharpness is no longer an issue.
If I have a lot of slides to examine for sharpness it would take a long
time to scan, so I examine them with a 30x magnifier (a portable
microscope--fits in a shirt pocket). From edmund scientific.
When focusing the 4x5 in the field, I use an 8x loupe and occasionally
use the 30x as a final check.
you can buy low cost (under $30 - 40) 8x loupes that work very well.
(Try Edmund Scientific). If you have a pair of binoculars, unscrew
the eyepiece and use it (guessing--around 4-6x). buy broken
binoculars at a swap meet and remove the eyepieces. Low power
loupes can be expensive, but higher power one are not--if you are
paying a lot you are being ripped off. (temper this with I haven't
bought a high power loupe for several years--but in general, the
optics are simpler and should be half the price of a low power
loupe even today).
Roger Clark
http://www.users.qwest.net/~rnclark (home page photography--qwest is down
as I write this but promisses the web site back up in a couple of hours)
PBurian wrote:
> A friend asked me what loupe and light table to buy to check his slides. He is > now using a 3x loupe and a tiny 3"x3" light table. My response: > > A bigger light table is not that expensive at > http://www.bhphotovideo.com Mine > is about 18"x24". A 12"x17" model is about $92. (Tables with color corrected > lamps can be far more; not necessary for hobby use.) > > With most 4x loupes, you should be able to see the entire slide. I use the > Schneider, about $100. but excellent optics. Actually, I find 4x not adequately > powerful except for quick viewing; so, I would suggest a cheaper 4x - or stick > with your 3x. Spend money on a really good 8x loupe for a critical examination > of sharpness, etc. > > I use a Schneider 8x and occasionally an old 10x loupe. See the B&H; site or any > on-line store. The Schneider is $174. unfortunately and a Rodenstock is even > more $$$; these are superb. > > Peak makes some cheapies and some good ones but not a really good 8x. Their WPH > 8x is $40. I have one too and it's very sharp in the center; if you do not > check hundreds of slides, I guess you could get by with this. > > Kenko has a 9x Achromatic that a friend bought; says it's great; $70. The Kenko > Excel 8x -- designed for 35mm slide viewing -- is $130. but I have never seen > one. > > There is no cheap way to do this really well, but for occasional use, the $92. > light table, a 3x or 4x loupe, plus the Peak 8x, would be adequate. > > Peter Burian
Date: 11 May 2001
From: wiltw@aol.com (Wilt W)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Loupe for 645 format
I found the Patterson 6x6 magnifier to be an excellent alternative to the
prospect of spending $250 on a loupe, street priced at about $100 in the
early 90's. I did in-store side by side comparisons of all the loupes in
the store and could not readily perceive a visible difference in the
quality of image of the Patterson vs. Schneider or Rodenstock selling at
higher prices. The changeable 'skirt' of the Patterson makes it equally
suitable for reflective as well as transmitted light viewing.
--Wilt
From: bigler@ens2m.fr
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Power of TLR Hood Magnifier
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001
> Hi folks, I'm curious to know the actual power of the pop-up
> magnifier in the removable Rolleiflex TLR hood. Is there a simple,
> down and dirty way to visually determine 'about' mag numbers?
> Thanks! Rich Lahrson Berkeley, California tripspud@transbay.net
Rich. you can easily determine the focal length of the main magnifier
by flipping it down again when in the "sports" position with the front
square aperture open. Then try to form the image of a distant light
source : from where the image of the light source is formed sharp you
easily find the focal length as the distance between the image and the
single element lens. Really no problem here.
Now there is a conventional "commercial" relationship between the
magnifying power of loupes and the focal length ; it is simply :
(mag_power) = 1/(4*f)
f = 1/(4*mag_power)
where f is the focal length in metres ; however this is valid for
stand-alone loupes with "4X", "8X" etc engraved. So a "10X" loupe has
a focal length equal to 2.5cm, about one inch, making the
correspondence even simpler in inches : (10X -> f=1"), (5X -> f=2"),
etc..
I am not sure however that R-TLR magnifying loupes obey this rule : I
mean, when Prochnow mentions 2.5X (so it should be f=10cm ~ 4") for
the main loupe and 4x for the additional eye-level magnifier (should
be f=6.25cm, about 2"-1/2). From memory the main loupe is located much
closer to the ground glass than the supposed focal length 10cm. Very
probably this allows to cast the ground glass image not to infinity
but to a closer distance so that more people have a chance to see it
sharp (if you are short-sighted like me).
and (ahem....) I have compiled those magnifications there with other
main R-TLR features here:
http://www.stutterheim.nl/rollei/text_pages/rolleiflex_compare.htm
--
Emmanuel BIGLER bigler@ens2m.fr>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Is this a Rollei-made focusing device?
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com>
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Looks like an old Mamiya chimney finder to me. I've seen those grafted onto
other cameras before. If you want to hassle with adapting it you could
probably pick up the Kiev one pretty cheap. It's an exact copy of the older
Hasselblad one, and also makes a good loupe for viewing 6 X 6 transparencies
and negatives.
Bob
> From: Jim Hemenway jim@hemenway.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001
> To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Rollei] Is this a Rollei-made focusing device?
>
>
> I'd love to have one of these for my Vb. Does anyone have any information?
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item;=1277780522
> --
>
> Jim
>
> You only live once, and usually not even then - Michael O'Donoghue
>
> http://www.hemenway.com
>
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001
From: William Nettles nettles@wgn.net>
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Focusing Loupe
Nicest focusing loupe I've had is a Russian made "Horizon 10x by KMZ" I
bought at Belair Cameras in Westwood (Los Angeles, CA)
Cost less than US$50 Sharper than any name brand (Schneider) for more than
twice the price.
It is too good. I don't like to let my clients look at 4x5s with it because
they get fixated on the grain. An 8x is actually tbe best general
magnification for focusing and 4x5 trans viewing.
Only drawback I had was that the string tended to come off the barrel
clips. In fixing this problem I realized that my loupe and my stop-watch
were always getting tangled. So I converted each to a single line hanging
off my vest (Spot Meter hangs off another lanyard on the other side). Now
they'll wind around each other but no more knots.
Two things the Old Soviet Union was noted for were optics and metalurgy.
I've seen incredible Russian binoculars here and in China for $10-$30.
(BTW Salut Robert! J'ai habitT Montreal pour deux ans en 1979-80. Shared a
photo studio on St Sacrement. )
Will
---William Nettles
nettles@wgn.net
Nettles Photo / Imaging Site http://www.wgn.net/~nettles
From rangefinder mailing list:
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001
From: Joachim Hein jhein@mail.lns.cornell.edu>
Subject: RE: Loupe Recommendations
Every 50/1.7 or 50/1.4 gives a nice 5x loupe. Most of us have at least
one of those lenses. You have to spend a lot of money to beat one of
these. I always use mine with the rear element towards the slide.
Although the AGFA is 8x, it is optically way poorer and I get a better
idea of my neg from the standard lens.
By fiddeling with the distances, one should be able to achieve the same
magnification whether one holds the rear of the lens or the front
towards the negative.
With respect to the enlarging lens, this is usually slower and will give
you a smaller field of view.
A wide should give more magnification, but I never liked it when trying
my 28mm (retrofocus). The field of view was way to small.
John Pendley wrote:
> The best loupe I've ever had is my Olympus 50/1.8. With the rear
> element
> to the slide, it gives a very nice overall view; with the front element
> towards the slide, it is more magnified. I don't know if other such
> lenses
> would work, but it would be worth a try.
> John
>
> you wrote:
> >Up to now, I have used a $5 plastic loupe for examining negatives and
> >slides. Needless to say, it isn't the finest in optics. What sorts of
> >loupes are you all using, and what price do they command?
From nikon mf mailing list:
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002
From: "dwmarcuzzi" dmarcuzzi@sympatico.ca
Subject: Re: Lucky "lupe"
--- In NikonMF@y..., Scott Perkins 2scott@b... wrote:
> Are there any other lupe combinations possible ? I have a
> 28, 50, 55 and 35-70 to work with. I doubt if my 35-130 Tokina
> would be any good for lupe use. ? ? ?
>
> I hate my $15 dollar lupe. If I move my eye around I can see
> clear and fuzzy spots in the glass.
The arrangement I use consists of the following:
1. Me
2. HN-3 hood
3. 50/1.4 lens, with front element facing up.
4. BR-3 ring
5. K4 ring
6. HN-2 hhod
7. Lightbox
The HN-3 provides some shading, and keeps your lashes from touching
the front element. The HN-2 and the two rings provide just the right
height for the lens to allow for critical focus using the lens's
focusing ring. The quality of the image is amazing.
A 35/1.4 gives bigger magnification, but you can't see the whole
frame. An 85mm lens will give a larger FOV with less mag. Also, the
faster the lens, the larger the FOV, so a 50/1.4 is preferable to a
50/1.8.
Dan
From: Peter Williams tigerphoto@rmi.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Need a lupe for 6x6?
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002
I really don't like the idea of spending over $200 on a lupe. Heck, it
was bad enough for me to part with $100 on a 4x Rodenstock for 35mm...
but it was the only decent lupe at a somewhat reasonable price. Needless
to say, I never got a 6x6 lupe because the cheap ones (if you ever find
them) are complete junk, and the good ones cost at least $250. That
being said, my search for a 6x6 lupe ended last week. And the cost was
less than $65!!!
I work at a camera store, and we ordered in a Horizon 4x lupe for 6x6 on
a whim. It was cheap, and we have a bunch of MF shooters that come
through the store, so we decided to get one and check it out. Needless
to say, I'm quite impressed, and the one we ordered walked out the door
with me the day it arrived.
The optics are glass and appear to be coated (not sure if single or
multi). Color correction seems to be quite good, and it doesn't distort.
The case is plastic and I won't give them the highest mark on
construction quality (it's no Schneider or Rodenstock), but it's very
good overall. About the same construction quality as the peak 8x lupes
that you see sell for about $35, but with MUCH better optics and
coverage for 6x6.
There were a few things I don't like about it. First, the clear plastic
attachment to use the lupe without a lightbox is small and doesn't let
in much light. I'd definitely recommend a light box with it at all
times. Second, it isn't 100% coverage on 6x6. You can see a full 6x6 neg
under it, but it does vignette at the corners a little bit. Finally, it
boldly states "Made in Russia". So if you've completely sworn off buying
anything medium format that's Russian (as I did), you'll have to swallow
your pride a bit. ;-) So it isn't perfect, but it's definitely a good
lupe (especially for the price).
Overall, I'd highly recommend this lupe. It's cheap, the optics are
pretty darn good, and the great news about it is that the lupe is
distributed by Dot Line, so virtually any good camera store could order
one for you. I've also seen them listed for sale by B&H; for about $45.
Cheers!
-Pete Williams
http://www.williamsphotographic.com
PS. No, I won't order one for you. If you'd like to get one, contact
your local photo store or call B&H.; Thanks. :-)
From: ralf@free-photons.de (Ralf R. Radermacher)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Need a lupe for 6x6?
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002
Peter Williams tigerphoto@rmi.net wrote:
> I work at a camera store, and we ordered in a Horizon 4x lupe for 6x6 on
> a whim.
I've been using this one and the Horizon 35 mm 8x loupe for a good while
and I couldn't agree more. 90 percent of the quality of a Rodenstock at
a fraction of their price.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
private homepage: http://www.free-photons.de
manual cameras and picture galleries - updated 26 Sept. 2001
Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses
From: Paul Chefurka paul@chefurka.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Low Priced Loupes?
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002
philtobias@aol.com (Phil Tobias) wrote:
>>>I could have sworn there was a thread about Loupes on this newsgroup
>- but I had just been to DejaNews and did a search there and only
>
> The Bestwell Maxiloupe does an excellent job for the money. I've got a
couple
>of them.
> See http://www.skyport.com/smithj/bestwell/
>
I have an Iston APO 4x that I'm very happy with. It's better than the
Pentax 5.5 (less distortion, better contrast and better detail), and the
only way a Rodenstock beats it is in eye relief. Considering that it cost
me the equivalent of $50 USD, it's a major bargain.
Paul
From: "Roland" roland.rashleigh-berry@virgin.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Need a lupe for 6x6?
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002
Just checked some of my 6x6 slides with an eye lupe that cost me $3 (from Ed
Romney). I can see the railings at the top of the leaning tower of Pisa
clear as day.
"Peter Williams" tigerphoto@rmi.net wrote
> Well... Checking sharpness is only part of the deal. While 6x6 negs are
> sizable and can be viewed without a lupe, there are times when you want
> to get a closer look at an image. An 8x lupe is great for checking
> sharpness on a neg, but is too powerful to both view the full neg and
> check overall sharpness. Also, because MF negs are larger, you don't
> need 8x to check sharpness - something in the range of 3-4x is fine.
> There's also the issue that an 8x or more lupe wouldn't let you see the
> entire neg at once, and part of judging a neg is seeing the entire thing
> at once.
>
> As far as the eye lupe goes... They aren't that good. They magnify, but
> aren't well corrected (either for color or distortion). As a result, it
> can be hard to get a good look and judge things accurately. Been there,
> tried it, ended up spending $100 on the less expensive Rodenstock 4x.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> -PBW
>
> Roland wrote:
> >
> > Surely, the only reason they would need a lupe to look at 6x6 slides and
> > negatives would be to check for sharpness. In that case they would need an
> > 8x lupe or higher magnification. And they wouldn't need to see the whole
> > thing at once. And an 8x lupe isn't 8x8 it is more like 3x3 so maybe they
> > would be better off with an eye lupe that has higher magnification and they
> > could hold the slide or negative up to the light and check it. And the eye
> > lupe would cost them only a few dollars.
From: Alan Browne alan.browne@videotron.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Loupe Recommendations
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002
I just ordered the Nikon 8x after trying it in the store.
Cons: 8x: too close, have to move the loupe over the slide. Difraction
coloration off axis.
Pros: 8x: can really see the detail
It is actually manufactured by Peak (according to the guy at the store),
so initially we went to order the Peak at a lower price ... then found
out the Peak had risen in price. In any case about CAD$50.00.
The clear skirts are so light can get in to look at print or other
material detail.
Cheers,
Alan
From: Tony_Polson tp@nospam.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Loupe Recommendations
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002
Bryan Kung bryan_kung@yahoo.com wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I am still relatively new to slide film. I am purchasing a lightbox
>and a loupe soon. Unfortunatley, I do not have the budget for an
>expensive loupe like a Rodenstock, or Leica, etc.... What I'm am
>thinking about is Horizon or Peak for now.
>
>My questions are
>1) What are some useful magnifications (4x, 6x, 8x)
I shot many slides (and very few negatives) over the last 30 years,
and use a loupe and lightbox for nearly all my viewing. For 35mm, I
would recommend buying two loupes, one that will enable you see the
whole slide, and another to look at the detail. However, buying two
loupes does not mean having to spend a lot of money.
A 4X will give you a wide view without significant prejudice to
optical quality, and an 8X will home on on the detail. Compromising
with one 6X loupe is not something I would recommend, but that doesn't
mean you have to spend a fortune.
The most important of the two loupes is the 4X, because you want a
full view of the slide without noticeable edge distortion or colour
fringing. The Peak loupe Al Jacobson recommended in his reply is
certainly OK for this; even the Horizon loupe if you get a good one.
Like most former Soviet gear the quality control is not especially
consistent, but if you get a good one, they can be *very* good.
For the 8X you can afford to buy a much cheaper loupe. This is
because you will be looking at detail through the centre of the loupe,
and edge distortion and colour fringing are much less important.
In the longer term, you may wish to upgrade to higher quality loupes,
and here my advice (from experience) is to buy two from the same range
within the same brand. That's because different brands (and different
ranges within one brand) can often have very different color
rendition. I have two loupes of different brands that are optically
excellent, but their color rendition differs noticeably. I find this
a real irritation, especially as they cost a lot of money. With the
benefit of hindsight, next time (if there is one) I'll buy two from
the same range.
I hope you find this useful.
From: pepe@mcn.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Re: Loupe recommendation?
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002
If you just wanna pay the bucks for a comfortable view on your light table
check out this site:
http://www.rdrop.com/~dbp/equipment/loupes.html
I personally use the Rodenstock aspheric 6x for full 35mm coverage with
total satisfaction and the aspheric 3x (6x6) for medium format. Really nice
views but the diopter adjustment is a bit under-range for my eyesight
correction but is fine for more normal correctons. Grinding the skirts
1/16" shorter would correct this. Optics are world class, however.
Pepe
From: pepe@mcn.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Re: Loupe recommendation?
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002
For auxiliary high power inspection, the Horizon 10 power loupe from Verlis
Optics (San Francisco, CA 94107) is a great bargain for about $30. It is
very well made with smooth focusing action and very comfortable viewing with
a 12mm eyepiece opening. Last I checked B&H; stocked these.
Pepe
From: ralf@free-photons.de (Ralf R. Radermacher)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: First rolls of MF: Results and questions
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002
Mxsmanic mxsmanic@hotmail.com wrote:
> 8. A loupe for MF costs a fortune (¤185 for some mystery-brand loupe--a
> good loupe, it seems, but still awfully expensive).
Not necessarily. Chasseur d'Images distribute a Horizon 4x 6x6 loupe.
It's their reference H006 in the catalogue of 'Boutique Photim'. The
price is a very reasonable 79 Euro TTC. Maybe only 90 percent of the
quality of a Schneider or Rodenstock but most decent and I'm quite happy
with mine.
Not listed in the current issue, for a change, but here's the direct
link to the relevant page on their website:
http://www.photim.com/Cmd4/Article.asp?R=H006
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher
rec.photo.equipment.large-format
From: Tony Galt galta@uwgb.edu
[1] Re: good cable releases/loupes
Date: Tue May 07 2002
I don't know about those products, but I'd certain recommend the
Silvestri loupe. It is inexpensive as loupes go and the tilting
feature is a real boon for focusing around the corners, especially
with a 90 mm f/8.
....
From: p2macgahan@compuserve.com (P. MacGahan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Silvestri loupe
Date: 10 Jun 2002
"Geoff Murray" geoffmurray@iprimus.com.au wrote
> I would like to her people's opinions of the Silvestri tilting loupe, is it
> really a vast improvement over a conventional loupe? Any other
> recommendations would be appreciated as well.
>
> Geoff
> www.geoffmurray.com
I'm sure you'll get a lot of helpful advice. I suspect that some
is personal preference, and some is about dealing with particular
difficulties. I use a dark cloth to see and a loupe of about 4x
to focus. Frankly what I use most often is a $3 loupe from micro-
tools. I don't usually consider the composition with the loupe.
The microtools loupe works fine for focussing. I bought a $25
Horizon loupe and it was a little more satisfying, but then it
fell in the canal and although I know right where it is, I can't
get it.
It just wasn't worth the extra cost to replace it. I've looked at
a lot of the others. The Silvestri is nice, but they're mostly a
lot more than $5, and when I drop it, the $3 microtools loupe seems
better and better.
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002
From: Tony Galt galta@uwgb.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Silvestri loupe
I have one and use it constantly. The tilting feature is most useful
with my 90 mm Super Angulon, especially stopped down. The most
annoying thing I find with this loupe is that the lanyard is attached
to a ring which is on the focusing part of the instrument. When you
focus the loupe the lanyard tends to wind up around it. Otherwise is
is excellent optically and a good deal financially. Some might prefer
a loupe that is a little less powerful, however. I compose and
approximate focus using 3.25 diopter drugstore reading glasses and
then fine tune things with the loupe.
Tony Galt
From: David Nebenzahl nobody@but.us.chickens
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: $21 perspective control lens from photokina
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002
Robert Monaghan spake thus:
> just thought this might be interesting to those of us looking for low
> cost perspective control shift lenses - here's one for $21 from hong kong
>
> http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/loreo_pccap_spec.html
>
> and
> http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/loreo_pccap_photo.html
>
> a shift lens cheaper than some lens caps? ;-) grins bobm
Their 10x loupe (http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/loreo_lubot.html)
looks pretty kewl, too. (Can be used as a macro attachment to their
"lens-cap" lenses.)
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
From: Jim Brick jbrick@elesys.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Lupes!!!
Daniel Lee wrote:
>Well I'm hoping for something I could use for both 6 x 6 and 35...and around
>150ish...
As I said... the Calumet 6x6 "IS" a Schneider. $149. How can you beat that?
You cannot. A new Schneider 6x6 loupe for $149.
This loupe has NO distortion and is SHARP corner-to-corner.
Jim
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
From: Jim Brick jbrick@elesys.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net, hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: RE: [HUG] Lupes!!!!!!!!
Austin Franklin wrote:
>I don't believe they are "identical". Does the Calumet one say "Schneider"?
>If not, then it's obviously not going to get the same "WOW" factor...I mean,
>who's impressed by a loupe that says "Calumet"... At least you can proudly
>display the Schneider box on your shelf, and not fear someone will mistake
>it for baking powder.
There are those folks that really r-e-a-l-l-y R-E-A-L-L-Y want to spend
more money for the same product. Name recognition I guess.
I bought the Calumet on sale for $129. Took it to KSP and compared it to
the Schneider at 2+x times the price... identical loupes, except for the
brand name painted on it.
But hey... whatever floats folks' boat.
:-)
Jim
uDate: Thu, 30 Jan 2003
From: "Taras R. Hnatyshyn" tarashnat@earthlink.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Lupes!!!
Hi!
I will also be getting a loupe soon to examine my slides. But to
examine minute detail (I take wide-field astrophotos) I bought myself
a pocket microscope. I found it at Edmund Industrial Optics web site.
They have a x25 and x50 model each for under twenty dollars each. For
that price, you can't go wrong.
http://www.edmundoptics.com/IOD/DisplayProduct.cfm?productid=1746
Taras
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
From: Jim Brick jbrick@elesys.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: RE: [HUG] Lupes!!!
Austin Franklin wrote:
>Schneider 6x6 #08-39816
>
>Superb is the only word I can say about it. Well, OK, two more...not cheap.
>
>Austin
The Calumet branded 6x6 loupe "IS" the 6x6 Schneider loupe at half the
price. I just bought one and compared it with the Schneider loupe at KSP.
They are identical!
http://www.calumetphoto.com
Search for loupe, scroll down to Calumet 6x6.
Jim
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
From: Eric Maquiling eric@maquiling.org
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Lupes!!!
Daniel Lee wrote:
> I"m in the market for a lupe...any recommendations?
I just tried out, a few weeks ago while getting prints, the shop I did
them had a Pentax 5x5 loupe. It was really nice. For $74.00 from
B&H.;
Fits up to 6x7
--
Eric
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
From: Manu Schnetzler marsu@earthling.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Lupes!!!
I've been using a Horizon for a while. One word: cheap! Certainly not a
Leica but decent at $39.
manu
Simon Lamb wrote:
> Leica loupe is good too. And also not cheap.
>
> Simon
...
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
From: Stuart Phillips stuart.phillips@rcn.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Lupes!!!
Get a FREE loupe from Epson. Call 562 981 3840 or 800 420 2470 and ask for
information about the Expression 1680 scanner.
...
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003
From: Tom Christiansen tomchr@softhome.net
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Lupes!!!
Folks,
After going through countless 'el-cheapo' loupes, I finally bought the
Zeiss Triotar 5x. That is an awesome piece of hardware!! Nice color
rendering and sharp corner to corner (on a 35mm slide) - as long as you
keep your eye centered over the loupe. I use it on 645 and 6x6 images to
check sharpness and smaller details. Works like a charm.
I paid $180 at Adorama.
Tom
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003
From: DaveHodge@aol.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: [HUG] Re: hasselblad V1 #1837
hasselblad@kelvin.net writes:
> I"m in the market for a lupe...any
> recommendations?
I have two magnifyers that I use all the time. One is actually a loupe, made
by Agfa and is 8X. The other is a 10X Hastings Triplet that came from Edmund
Scientific. I've had these for many years. The Agfa loupe probably cost
around $10, but the Hastings Triplet was about $50. Probably double that
now.
Best regards, David Hodge, Churchville, MD
From: "Eugene A. Pallat" eapallat@apk.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Loupes for MF film viewing?
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003
Drew Saunders wrote:
> Short and sweet: I'm looking to get a loupe that covers 6x4.5 trannies,
> but one that covers 6x7 might be more practical in the long run. The
> Schneider and Kenko are both under $150 from B&H;, and there are plenty
> that cost a lot more. What do folks like?
I make my own from lenses from places like Edmund's including eyepieces
for astronomical telescopes. Once you understand the principles of
complex ray tracing, you can design what you need using pencil and graph
paper.
Gene Pallat
Orion Forensics
From: Lassi lahippel@ieee.org
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Loupes for MF film viewing?
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003
"David J. Littleboy" wrote:
...
> I'd think the cheapest "bargain" grade 50mm/1.4 lens from KEH would make a
> nice loupe.
Now that you mention bargain... my "loupe" is a slide projector lens.
The basic type that all quality-conscious owners immediately replace
with something better. The local importer of German stuff (Leica and all
that) had a few dozen Kindermann 80mm/2.8 lenses to get rid of in a
garage sale, and I got two for less than a dollar apiece. No diaphragm,
no focussing, no shutter, just the glassware (or plastic) in a barrel.
Since the eye isn't a relly good optical instrument, a slide projector
lens is usually good enough. I've been thinking of installing the other
one on my Diana, just for the sake of the blasphemy...
-- Lassi
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Loupe Recommendation?
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003
Shawn Hedvat wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> I am looking for a quality ground glass loupe that can do double duty for
> proof sheet viewing price around a $100. Any recommendation is appreciated.
For the ground glass I like something in the range X4 to X5. I find
that greater magnification doesn't lead to improved focus because of the
grain of the ground glass and the image gets dimmer.
For ground glass, I use a simple X5 magnifier from Edmund:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/IOD/DisplayProduct.cfm?productid=1789
You have to know how to use it: focus on the grain of the ground glass,
then look at the image. An advantage is that you can tilt it to look at
the corners.
For fixed base loupe, x4 models from Edmund, Schneider or Rodenstock
work well.
For viewing proof sheets or negs, the X5.5 loupe from Pentax is very
nice, but it is rather heavy for field use.
--Michael
End of Page