It's good to hear so much talk about the Chinese camera, and the fact
that production can't keep up with demand shows there's an increased
interest in MF3D.

There's been a few questions and observations as of late regarding
this camera which I'd like to respond to:

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE EARLY CAMERAS AND THE CURRENT VERSION

There have been some excellent modifications from the first "Beta"
camera and the lastest version. Here's a list I've compliled;

1. The shutter button was revised to prevent accidental exposure
2. The grip has changed. Early models could not be held safely by the
right hand, so a new design was added for a firm grip
3. The viewfinder eyepiece optic was revised. The original was
incorrectly matched. The new one allows for plus or minus correction
for eyeglass wearers.
4. Foam was added to the lens board around the inside of the taking
lenses to prevent light leaks
5. A scratch-proof metal mounting plate was added to the bottom. This
eliminates insightly scratches at the bottom from putting the camera
on a tripod.
6. Metal Rings were added around the takeup and loading knobs under
the camera. These also prevent scratches on the bottom plate.
7. Rubber hood around eyepiece
8. Changed the flash sync from 1/125th to 1/30th on the dial.
9. Improved light meter. Although there are 4 "ports" on the new
model, only 3 light up, as with the first model
10. Three contacts between the prism and the viewfinder. Am not sure
what these are for.
11. Instruction manual now included. The one that comes with the
camera is NOT the same as the one on the website, as most of the
mislabelling or improper English has corrected.
12. Most importantly, a much more effective Quality Control
department. I can't guarantee this, but based on the early reports,
there definately seems to be a lot more attention to quality issues.


Regarding lens flare:

Simply put, this type of lens work most efficiently with lens shades.
After 6 months of use, I have only got lens flare on one pair. It was
a backlit shot I set up quickly and didn't use shades. I do not know
why the camera was not issued with shades, but it should have been.

I currently use older square shades made by Tiffen. I do however have
two pairs on order: 46mm round shades from Photo Express ($4.99 each),
and a pair of Flower Petal type hoods from a Hong Kong company. As
soon as I receive them I will report to the group as to their
effectiveness. Internal flocking of the lenses will never completely
elliminate reflections, so I would highly recommend looking into the
more sensible option of lens shades.

Stereo Window:

Someone erroneously reported (perhaps on this list) that the camera
does not have a built in window. Of course it does, as does every
stereo camera. The TL120 window is set close, around 3 feet. If you
want it farther away, merely put a strip of flocking paper on the far
left and far right wall of the film chamber.

Camera Quality:

Without a doubt this is one of the best true stereo cameras EVER made.
It certainly beats the Sputnik and Rolleidoscop in terms of lens
quality, easy of use, viewfinder and shutter speed options. The speeds
are accurate, as is the light meter. The lenses are well coated. A 2.8
taking lens is very bright and easy to focus with. The camera
can easily obtain orthostereo conditions, something most stereo
cameras of ANY format cannot. A good RBT could certainly be argued as
a contender, however the expense of a complete system needs to be
considered.

Drawbacks:

It is bulky. That won't change. Using a Hasselblad waistlevel finder
will help. I actually use a 45 degree Hasselblad prism instead of the
one included, as it is far brighter. The new eyepiece is effective,
however the diameter of the lenspiece is small (13mm), versus 22mm on
a Blad one. I find it hard to see the whole image on the TL-120 prism.
As a system, it definately has its problems. Most of the attention has
been on the camera, but perhaps more attention to the viewers and jig
will be addressed now that most of the camera issues are behind us.

So whether to embrace the system or not is really a personal choice. I
would not expect much more. I'm just thankful we have a choice at all
this late in the film game.

Sam

Sam Smith wrote a nice review of the TL-120.

The internal lens surfaces do look a little reflective, but I don't know
if that is unusual or not. Someone else reported fixing their lens
flair with flocking the inner lens rings, although Dave K. doesn't think
it is necessary. An example posted was of an off center lit streetlight
and positioning a reading light in the same general position, I was able
to get a spot of high glare only from the side of the inner lens ring.
So I think flocking can still help. Overall, I think Sam is right about
using lens shades. I wonder what DrT meant by saying they were aware of
the lens flare. Flocking the inner ring is a trivial matter while
changing the interior of the lens itself is probably another thing as
they are probably not the manufacturer of those. I big source of flair
that I saw is a small center portion of the ledge just in front of the
shutter blades. It flairs with strong lights center and above the camera.

If only more companies were so responsive to customer feedback.

Dale Yingst

My observation is that the surface between the optics actually is
slightly ribbed and pianted flat black. This is standard
anti-reflection procedure, although it does not cut out all
reflection. In comparing with my Mamiya 80mm lenses, I still see some
reflection on one barrel ring. The TL-120 has more spaced optics, so
it's not too much of a surprise more surfaces reflect. Neither is even
close to the amount of flare I get on my 55mm lenses.

Sam

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, Dale Yingst wrote:
>
> Sam Smith wrote a nice review of the TL-120.
>
> The internal lens surfaces do look a little reflective, but I don't
know
> if that is unusual or not. Someone else reported fixing their lens
> flair with flocking the inner lens rings, although Dave K. doesn't
think
> it is necessary. An example posted was of an off center lit
streetlight
> and positioning a reading light in the same general position, I was
able
> to get a spot of high glare only from the side of the inner lens ring.
> So I think flocking can still help. Overall, I think Sam is right
about
> using lens shades. I wonder what DrT meant by saying they were
aware of
> the lens flare. Flocking the inner ring is a trivial matter while
> changing the interior of the lens itself is probably another thing as
> they are probably not the manufacturer of those. I big source of flair
> that I saw is a small center portion of the ledge just in front of the
> shutter blades. It flairs with strong lights center and above the
camera.
>
> If only more companies were so responsive to customer feedback.
>
> Dale Yingst
>

I took off my lens panel again to flock the lens ring. With the lens
panel off, I reproduced the strong lighting again. Where I was getting
the glare was not from the inner ring, where I could get no glare to
appear and don't think could appear on film as Dave mentioned, but from
the lens ring containing the last lens element which is shiny black but
inaccessible. SO I would now concur with DAve that flocking would not work

Dale Yingst

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, Dale Yingst wrote:

>
> I took off my lens panel again to flock the lens ring. With the

lens

> panel off, I reproduced the strong lighting again. Where I was

getting

> the glare was not from the inner ring, where I could get no glare to
> appear and don't think could appear on film as Dave mentioned, but

from

> the lens ring containing the last lens element which is shiny black

but

> inaccessible. SO I would now concur with DAve that flocking would

not work

>
> Dale Yingst
>

As I appear to be the only one who has actually flocked the inner lens
ring, I can only report the fact that on the 3 rolls of film I have
put through since the flocking, I have had no flare problems at all.
It is possible that in trying to artificially reproduce the flare with
strong lighting, you are actually not producing the conditions that
cause it to appear on film. Most of the bad flare I had suffered was
on shots taken on bright sunny days where I framed the shot to only
have the sky showing on the top quarter of the image. The flare in my
case was coming from a large area of bright sky right across the top
of the image but was only appearing as flare in the bottom right and
bottom left on the shot. The fact that it has never appeared in the
very bottom of the shot confirms what David Kesner mentioned about not
seeing the top or bottom of the lens ring while looking through the
back of the camera.

Scott Youmans sent me some examples of shots with flare that highlight
the problem. Both shots showed a bright sky across the top of the
image. The flare appeared in two crescent shapes bottom right and
left but not exending right across the bottom. There was no single
bright point of light - just the sky. Even John Thurston's sample
flare shots were similar, with a bright band of sky above a dark lower
part of the image.

Is it just coincidence that I no longer suffer flare problems since
flocking the lens ring? I don't know. Maybe a lot more film will
tell but in the three rolls I have mentioned taking since the
flocking, I had many similar shots with the bright sky across the top
of the shot and have had no flare at all in the spots where previously
there would have been a small crescent of flare on each side of the
lower half of the image.

It's up to you whether or not you flock the lens rings or not, but in
my case, it appears to have worked. Considering the tiny cost in
flocking material and the little amount of time (maybe ten or fifteen
minutes), it seems worth the effort just to see what happens.

regards,

Harry Calderbank

Harry Calderbank writes:

> It's up to you whether or not you flock the lens rings or not, but in my
> case, it appears to have worked. Considering the tiny cost in flocking
> material and the little amount of time (maybe ten or fifteen minutes), it
> seems worth the effort just to see what happens.

I am not saying do not flock your lens. Every little bit helps.

I do believe that Sam's choice of using lens shades is a better over-all
cure as it will help block light that can get to the surfaces that
flocking just the last lens ring surface would miss.

However, no matter how much flocking, lens shading, etc. is done there
will still be shots that will cause flare. You just need to be very aware
of your shooting conditions and adjust as needed or live with what flare
you will get.

Harry, is there any way you can post some shots of your flocking job?

Thanks,

David W. Kesner

I should mention that on the camera I just sent to Gary Cullen (which
I expect a full report on !!), I did flock that shiney ring. As I did
not do a roll prior, I could not compare. I did however shoot right
into a hazy sun on a field shot on one of my test shots and did not
see any flare. I shot with monochrome film (the dreaded Acros film
reversed), and I suspect the flare shows up more with color. This was
however my first monochrome roll with the TL-120, as all others were
color slide film.

As for flocking, if you are all thumbs I wouldn't recommend it. The
chances of putting fingerprints on the lenses are high, and it is
difficult to accomplish with gloves on!

Sam

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "David W. Kesner" wrote:
>
> Harry Calderbank writes:
>
> > It's up to you whether or not you flock the lens rings or not, but
in my
> > case, it appears to have worked. Considering the tiny cost in
flocking
> > material and the little amount of time (maybe ten or fifteen
minutes), it
> > seems worth the effort just to see what happens.
>
> I am not saying do not flock your lens. Every little bit helps.
>
> I do believe that Sam's choice of using lens shades is a better
over-all
> cure as it will help block light that can get to the surfaces that
> flocking just the last lens ring surface would miss.
>
> However, no matter how much flocking, lens shading, etc. is done there
> will still be shots that will cause flare. You just need to be very
aware
> of your shooting conditions and adjust as needed or live with what
flare
> you will get.
>
> Harry, is there any way you can post some shots of your flocking job?
>
> Thanks,
>
> David W. Kesner
>

Check th
link:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3A
MEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=7511689860&rd=1&rd=1

It is for 46mm lens shades (look square) and filters. I
offered $3.50 per shade which was accepted and only one freight
charge for about $12 total. For that little, they were worth
trying out. Many more available.

DAle Yingst

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "David W. Kesner" wrote:

> However, no matter how much flocking, lens shading, etc. is done

there

> will still be shots that will cause flare. You just need to be very

aware

> of your shooting conditions and adjust as needed or live with what

flare

> you will get.
>
> Harry, is there any way you can post some shots of your flocking job?
>
> Thanks,
>
> David W. Kesner
>

Hi David,

I hear what you are all saying about lens shades, (I use them myself
although not on this camera - haven't bought them yet) but I think
that the rear lens ring with its very shiny surface will still cause
problems. Being aware of shooting conditions and adjusting as needed
will not solve my problem. The flare occurs on shots that you would
not normally expect flare on. This is not a case of having trouble
when shooting toward the sun or another bright light source. This is
a problem that occurs even with the sun behind the camera.

I have just tried and failed to post some shots of the flocking and
the flare in the photos section. I keep getting a network error
message. If any of you would like me to send you some shots of the
flare and the flocking, please contact me off list and I will be happy
to send you some. I must apologise for the quality of the shots.
They are taken with my only venture into the digital world - a cheap
nasty Kodak that doesn't focus very close. I will endevour to scan a
few more examples of the flare on some of the shots I mentioned. It
must be said that I didn't notice the flare at first. Now that I know
where to look, I am surprised to find it on more and more of my early
shots with this camera.

regards

Harry
hcalderbank@bigpond.com

Harry Calderbank writes:

> The flare occurs on shots that you would not normally expect
> flare on. This is not a case of having trouble when shooting toward the
> sun or another bright light source. This is a problem that occurs even
> with the sun behind the camera.

That is not very good news. I was naturally assuming that the problem was
from a direct light source and not from indirect or ambient light.

I went down on my lunch hour (or two) today and bought three UV filters
and two lens hoods. As long as I was there I also got a roll of recently
out dated ProviaF and walked around town shooting up the roll. I dropped
it off before heading back to work and will pick it up tomorrow. I tried
different lighting conditions so it will be interesting to see what I
get.

This weekend when I have more time I will try to recreate the lighting
that caused your flares and see what I can see.

PS - please send me any/all of your images.

PPS - which model do you have, or what "upgrades" does it have?

Thanks,

David W. Kesner

It was announced at the NSA by a well known vendor that the 3DWorld
revised model of the TL-120 would only be available as a fixed prism.
This caused a lot of concern for those(like me) who prefer using the
Hasselblad waistlevel or 45 degree prism instead. The official quote is:

"We were thinking making the prism fixed to avoid some unstable
damagess. However, since most customers don't like the prism to be
fixed. We have worked out another way to settle this problem. In other
words, now we don't need to fix the prism. So don't worry about this
point. "


We can now rest easy.

Sam

This sounded quite confusing when I re-read it. What I meant to say is
that what was announced at the convention was not correct. 3DWorld has
confirmed the new design WILL still have the removable prism. The
quote was from 3DWorld in response to the NSA announcement.

Thanks, Sam

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Sam Smith" wrote:
>
> It was announced at the NSA by a well known vendor that the 3DWorld
> revised model of the TL-120 would only be available as a fixed prism.
> This caused a lot of concern for those(like me) who prefer using the
> Hasselblad waistlevel or 45 degree prism instead. The official
quote is:
>
> "We were thinking making the prism fixed to avoid some unstable
> damagess. However, since most customers don't like the prism to be
> fixed. We have worked out another way to settle this problem. In other
> words, now we don't need to fix the prism. So don't worry about this
> point. "
>
>
> We can now rest easy.
>
> Sam
>