john_robison4

Yep, not enough market to sell a lot of them so the price will be affordable for us ordinary folks. And, seems like most folks get along fine with the cameras in their phone, something most of them always have on their person. Interesting idea though, and Minox even tried it out in 2008 with the Minox DCS 5Mp camera with a form factor similar to the classic 9.2mm 8X11 film cameras. There was also a flash attachment that had a screen to preview shots. That camera is all but forgotten today, a decade later.

If you do go for a RC there is one bug that can be fixed for a couple of dollars. Go on ebay and hunt for a 43.5mm to 43mm step down filter ring. You are only going down .5mm and the adapter won't block the metering window on the lens. Just screw it on and leave it on. The 43.5mm filter size is very hard to find filters or lens caps or hoods for. The 43mm size is common. It's the first accessory I ordered for my RC and it makes the RC a useable camera.

If it was me, I'd get a Pen D because I've seen more of the shutters working in the 'D' than the 'S2.8' models. For some reason the 5 blade Copal shutter in the S3.5 and S2.8 seem to be prone to being found gummed up and/or slow (sometimes very slow). I've had two S2.8 and one S3.5 Pens and all three shutters had to be cleaned to work. My Pen D on the other has worked for 15 years, from day one. Yes I know, a sample of one is really not valid but on almost every other Pen D model I've personally handled the shutters all seemed to be running free and clear. Granted, this is a scale focus lens and you have to be able to estimate focusing distance accurately if shooting wide open, at least if focused under 18~20 feet. The minimum focus distance of the Pen D 32mm f1.9 lens is marked at 2.6 feet and if I wanted to shoot at that distance wide open I'd use a tape measure. A lot of the Pen D meters are dead, mine was but I can estimate exposure or use a meter if necessary. I estimate 95% of my exposures.

The 65~200 ain't supposed to do that so....somewhere along the line it is damaged. If you like the lens it would probably be cheaper to find another sample than try to fix this one. Had one years ago, too big and heavy for me since it used it at 200 most all the time. Switched to a 200 f5 Zuiko, it's tiny and I don't mind the 2/3 stop loss.

Not modern in the sense of using plastics more in the construction but my favorite is the Olympus RC, compact, can operate with dead or no battery. A couple of gripes; hard to grasp aperture ring, and silly 43.5mm filter size. I solved the filter size problem with a 43.5 to 43mm step down ring that stays on the camera all the time. This also works for me because I have a Pen F kit, and all the old Pen F lenses I have use 43mm, as does my Pen D.

Ten years later when 110 cameras were introduced there were dire rumblings that this small format could gobble up 35mm cameras. Didn't work out that way, what with compact auto 35mm RF's like the Konica C35 plus offerings from other camera companies that were just as small.

My developing kit all fits in a plastic hanging file folder case. Waterproof in case of leaks. One case for film and one for paper.

Fuzzy photographs that look sharp until you click on them. Or, 10 photos, all from the same angle. Sometimes though, items with honest descriptions can net you a good deal. I won a lowball bid on a 25mm f4 Zuiko Pen F mount lens that was described as 'sticky aperture blades'. I knew these lenses were fairly easy to work on so I took a chance. Sure enough, 10 minutes work to open the lens mount and reattach the spring that had come loose brought the lens back to nominal.

I've got that little Duo-Tamron shown in the ad and listed as "famous make" 135mm f4.5 tele that has a little 1.66X included. It was introduced in 1958, don't know how long it was sold. It is not a "T" mount but about 37mm or so. Mine came with a M42 adapter otherwise you would never find adapters for it. The front filter thread is also a very strange size, somewhere between 38 and 39mm. It came with an adapter for series 6 but that was gone from my sample. The teleconverter has a single element, or more likely a cemented doublet. When attached it is a tiny package for a 225mm lens, but of course that is at f7.7 maximum aperture and that makes for a fairly dim viewfinder. With the teleconverter attached it is 107mm long and 8.5oz or 245gm.

Well, I guess the bright side is that the camera will function without a battery. Have you been using the camera without the meter? If it was my camera that is what I'd do. While I searched for a solution (which may never be found) I'd continue to use the camera.

Also to consider is that by now 1/200 might actually vary between 1/100 and 1/180 or so, depending on how many times it has been set and released in the last few days. Also outside ambient air temperature could affect shutter speed. So......all your shutter speeds could vary, usually on the slow end, by 30~40%.

The aluminized coating is fragile for sure but wouldn't most modern first surface mirrors (i.e. since the 1970's) be overcoated with some hard material such as silicon monoxide?

The Fuji Acros 100 I have (expired in August 2014) has black numbers on a white background, very easy to see. My last roll of Arista 100 was fainter white numbers on black background, not as easy but still ok if you are careful.

Just got to dig out my IIIs and load some film. Trouble is I have so much Ilford Pan F old stock (expired in 2010) that I don't want to buy any more film. I've been exposing it at ISO 25 and developing in HC110 at dilution 1:60 as a one shot. Usually leave it for 13 min. @70F with 2 inversions every 2 min. We moved house in May last year and I finally found my 16mm film and my Mamiya 16 Supers. The trouble with the Mamiya 16 cameras is the hard to find film cassettes. I've have just 4 and only two of those are the metal ones.

I'm a very much DIY type and built my own slitter, modeled after the one pictured in the OP but with hobby plywood, not plexi. Even so, my cuts are clean with smooth edges, exact width, and fit the cassette's perfectly. The difference in my slitter is the channel under the emulsion side is 1mm lower than the two shoulders where the outsides of the 35mm film run. This means the emulsion side touches only air. The base side slides on a ultra smooth 'pressure plate' to keep the film pressed against the blades.