bob_eskridge2

<p>Yes, IMO Leica could have. The company isn't interested in ground breaking innovation but instead seems to try to stay ahead or afloat by keeping to the small, handheld and expensive cameras but also by adapting the newer innovations - such as digital.<br /> I use a miniature Crown Graphic with a variety of lenses and backs from 645 to 6x9 (Horseman). Still, due slower lenses, it tends to live its life on a tripod more than being handheld. A Leica type camera would have the same problem.<br> Consider the Mamiya Universal - interchangeable lenses including a 100/2.8. It can do it all (except for meter) but is heavy!</p>

<p>When I purchased the camera from a guy in Canada I asked him to remove the meter and also the provision for 220 film.<br> He removed the meter and replaced the little "window cell" with an appropriate blank. Harry very likely has the blanks as they appear to be simple plastic pieces. <br> 220 film in B&W is likely to be gone soon and I never have used it in any case.</p>

<p>For what it is worth, I had the meter removed from my Rolleiflex 3.5 Whiteface - I didn't trust it plus wanted the camera to be<br /> as small as possible. I have seen too many cracked meter housings.</p>

<p>If you purchased the apo-Symmar you made a good decision. I own both. FYI I have found that my apo-Symmar will fold<br> up in the camera but the Nikon would not. It is important to orient the shutter just right for it to do that. The shutter cocking<br> knob must be at an angle so that it is at the diagonal of the lensboard (the widest part.)</p> <p>A friend once compared this lens to a Hasselblad 80/2.8 and said that it resolved more taking into account the extra square cm of area of the film format.</p>