OK. Great. I've conducted a few new experiments in the last day or so,
and I can say conclusively, real Photofloods don't make $6.50 worth of
difference (that's what they cost) over vanilla household blubs.
they DO have a bit more light, so I was able to get more even lighting.
Other than that, there's no diff. The camera seems to eat any extra light it
doesn't want.
Stopping the Bluromat down to f/16 (thanks to the higher light level) made
the pictrure WORSE, not better, at both close and medium distance. I conclude
that the problem is probably the uncoated nature of the Bluromat (though it
claims to be coated in ad copy on its box–probably coated poorly).
Next week, I'm going to adapt SOMETHING to the camera for further testing.
SOMEHOW. ANYhow. Even if i have to buy a Nikon lens.