Nimslo, 3-D Wizard, etc

[SCHUB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

     Well, I've finally caught up with reading photo-3d, and can't resist
putting in my 2 cents about the Nimslo and the 3-D Wizard.

Merle Tuntland writes:

> I want lenticular prints.  Is the Wizard or 3-D 1000 as good as the Nimslo 
> cameras?  I like the quality of Realist 3.5 slides.

I don't know about the 3-D 1000, but I have a 3-D Wizard.  I haven't used it
all that much, but in my limited experience, I would say that the lenses seem
to be just as good as the Nimslo.  In other respects, though, it doesn't seem
as well made as a Nimslo, and it doesn't seem anywhere near as
robust mechanically.  The Nimslo has auto-exposure, while the Wizard has a
fixed-speed shutter and a 3-position aperture lever which you set by hand (or
with a separate light meter, if you have one.  It ought to be possible to
calculate and mark intermediate settings of the aperture lever, to get some
more flexibility in setting exposure, but I haven't got around to it.  Also,
the Nimslo has a lever film-advance, while the Wizard has a (surprisingly
stiff and slow) thumbwheel advance.  The viewfinder on my Wizard has striations
in it that I find annoying, but I'm told that all Wizards have them and that
most people hardly notice.  Also, I'm told that the wind mechanism can be
stripped beyond repair if you try to rewind without pushing in the rewind
button.  This strikes me as poor design/contruction, though the Wizard is
certainly not the only camera that can be damaged in this way.  On the plus
side, I find that the built-in flash is quite convenient, and for flash
pictures the Wizard handles much less awkwardly than a Nimslo plus Opti-Lite
flash.  Of course, unlike the Nimslo, the flash is completely un-automated, so
you have to guess at distances and adjust the aperture lever accordingly.
Anyway, I bought the thing in part so that I could have a decent-quality
camera to use for 3-lens lenticular pictures, now that it's hard to get the
4-lens ones processed.
    On the Nimslo--I have a TECO-Nimslo, that is, one that was modified by
Technical Enterprises to advance the film two half-frames at a time, so that
if you use only the outer two lenses, the frames are interleaved in the same
way as the Realist does, and you get a single stereo pair with each exposure,
with no wasted film.  Anyway, I think Joel hit the nail on the head--the Nimslo
is an undistinguished camera for normal-distance stereo pairs, but it gives
you a lot of macro capability for the money.  I have used my Nimslo to take
normal-distance shots, but somehow I always find myself wishing for the wider
frame of the Realist.  I think a lot of the negative opinions about the Nimslo
lenses come from looking at shots with a lot of stuff at infinity in them;
the focus of the Nimslo lenses is fixed in such a way that infinity isn't
sharp.  Using ASA400 film helps by giving you more depth-of-field, but the
real solution is available from the Stereo-Type company--auxilliary negative
lenses that you hang on the front (with electrical tape--yuck!, but you can
probably make a better frame for them).  Stereo-Type also sells auxilliary
close-up lenses, and so does TECO; TECO's actually attach without electrical
tape (although one can still wish for a more solid-feeling attachment method
than TECO's).  TECO also provides little ribbed plastic sheets with their
close-up lenses for correcting the viewfinder parallax; these help a lot, but
I'm always afraid I'm going to drop one because it's only the slight stickiness
of the vinyl they're made of that keeps them stuck to the viewfinder lens.
With the highest-power lens from TECO, you can shoot objects within about 6"
of the camera.  I made up some stings with knots in them to mark the near and
far limits of depth of field in bright sunlight for each of the close-up lenses,
and I use them to position the camera at the correct distance.
     Miscellaneous other comments: The autoexposure on the Nimslo will
underexpose the foreground if you have too much sky in the picture; StereoType
sells some neutral-density filters you can electrical-tape over the photocell
to force it to expose more in these situations.
     I was very impressed with some photos taken in India by an Australian
gentlemen which were shown at the Atlanta NSA, and which I think were taken
with a Nimslo modified by Bob Aldridge.  The idea of a light, auto-exposure
Realist-format camera is very appealing.
     Anyway, by all means, enjoy your Nimslo!  


------------------------------