Supplimentary photo added to Post 1.

From the extra photo posted by Brad of the under chassis it looks like a refugee from STC!
Well built.

Fred.

Thanks Gents. Well I guess first thing is to recap it and go from there. One question though, 7 of the caps are .018μF, I can’t find any on line, if I change them to .015μF, I gather that should be fine??

0.022μF would be better.

Thanks

When taking photos I actually use a real camera: Nikon (what else). If you use flash it may need a diffuser, or Tissue paper to soften the light & bounce flash is an option in some cases.

The fixed tripod is not dead. A piece of white card softens shadows.

Auto focus is not you friend. Most modern cameras will take photos with flash at a fixed "f" stop also equally destructive. This apart from poor focus introduces the little understood "Hyperfocal distance" aka depth in field. Translated that means the distance in in front of and behind the point focussed on.

The better old lenses actually has a depth of field calculator on the lens. The auto focus in a basic camera has a tendency to focus on the first object, which means if focuses on the biggest cap skirting the base of a chassis, or an IF can; That will be the focal point. The closer you get the shallower the depth in field and the more blurry. The closer you get the more camera shake comes into play. The lower the "f" stop the shallower is the depth of field.

The idea is to try not go below f8 (some cameras a fixed "f" stop). Moving away softens the flash if used, improves depth of field and gives a better pic. Sunlight 2 hrs either side of sun up & sun down is best where practical.

Where its an option (Ideal with tripod, as you can use a higher "f" stop); Use manual focus and focus into a middle object: That gives a better depth of field where its needed.

Even Window's Paint can "crop" but it does have problems with huge size files. Many of my files, even those on Radio Museum are cropped. One wants the object: Not the peripheral irrelevant stuff.

Nikon (what else)

Canon

Actually 25+ years of photographing terrestrial orchids in the wild was done with a Zenza-Bronica with Bellows and a Macro lens.

70mm studio camera Positives 120 roll film; Image 6 x 4.5 cm. Iris shutter in lens. Fash up to 500th of a second. Sent photo for last posting.

Brad's tip elsewhere here somewhere was, to ensure good depth of field, use plenty of light. A small aperture is then guaranteed.

The simplest way to get the maximum depth of field for a particular aperture aperture on the old film SLRs, was to place the infinity mark on the focus ring to the aperture chosen, on the f stop markings adjacent the focus ring. The hyperfocal distance was then the centre of the f stop markings adjacent the focus ring. For the typical snapshot electronic camera this facility is not available so you have to depend on the camera. Maybe the high end electronic SLRs are able to do this.

I have not seen any digitals with depth of field calculators. The Nikons external larger flashgun has a sort of range guide. The digital camera works a little differently than film types.

Considering the light volumetrically you can fill a big hole with light quicker than a really small hole, to get the same volume. The lens's shutter is a focussing device, people with bad eyes squint as the smaller aperture, gives better focus.

Photo uploaded to Post 36.

Yes, let's get back on topic. I can see a dozen parts there that should be seriously considered for replacement.

However, that photo is not of the same equipment in post 1, does it belong in another thread?

The above picture is not from my post, the underside of the chassis in the original post is back on the first page.

Yeah I'm confused, what radio is the photo in post 36?
Marcc?, Brad?


Fred.

That photo was to show the clarity that can be achieved by following the ideas put forward by Brad and I to improve the quality of pictures posted:Important.

For info: That is a 1938 Airzone 609 Chassis, as it arrived for refurbishment . That is a photo that should be taken before you touch anything in a set.

It has wrong parts, Silicon diodes across a gassy #80, dangerous mains cable, stuffed fly leads & antenna wire & the 6D6 was dry jointed on all pins & the envelope fell out of the base. The burnt resistor relates to that tube. This is also a blunt lesson in why you never power as step one. This one was close to death trap and would have risked major damage if powered. "Caveat Actor" applies.

That should cover why we need good photos and safe procedures. The finished chassis is on Radio Museum, as theirs had a 1950's tube in it.

https://www.radiomuseum.org/r/airzone_656_ch_609.html