Robert_Lai

Ken is the BEST. He's overhauled a Canon FX for me (jammed), as well as an FTb. Also several lenses, to have the haze cleaned out, stuck diaphragms degreased, etc. The finest workmanship, and FAST.

There are a set of gold plated contacts that transfer the ISO dial settings to the camera. It is possible that a speck of dust or debris is preventing good contact. Once the film roll is done, it may be worthwhile to use a Q-tip with some rubbing alcohol (91%), and just give them a good cleaning. Then try again with your previous roll of film (wound into the cassette). See if the ISO dial works again. At least it is reading the film can correctly. When my M7 went crazy (after upgrading to the optical ISO reader), it kept saying ISO 5000 regardless of whatever the setting was. A repeat trip to Leica USA was needed (they had just made the change to the optical reader), and they said that the circuit board was faulty. They replaced that circuit board, and it's been fine since. If your camera still behaves badly after cleaning the contacts, then it may require a visit to Leica USA in New Jersey. Don Goldberg says that he can't handle the film speed reader issues as he doesn't have the circuit boards. Only Leica has them.

I've had the 0.85X finder, and the 0.72x finder. If you want to use the 35mm lens almost exclusively, then the 0.72X magnification of the viewfinder is easier to use. I wear glasses, and I found the 35mm framelines hard to see with a 0.85X finder. You have to pan around with your eye to see all 4 corners. With the 0.72X finder, there is a 28mm frame which is very hard to see with glasses. However, the 35mm framelines are easy to see and compose with. The 0.85X finder will have greater focusing accuracy for the 90 and 135mm lenses. However, at the focal lengths of 35 - 75mm, you will not suffer in focusing accuracy for having the 0.72x finder. What Mukul Dube is referring to is framing accuracy: how well the framelines compose a picture relative to what you get on film. Earlier 35mm framelines (on the M2 - M4) were a bit farther apart. They represent the field of view with your lens set at 1m, which was the minimum focus distance of Leica rangefinder lenses in those days. When Leica added the 28mm framelines in the M4-P onwards, they pushed the framelines for 35mm a bit more towards the center. Their reasoning is that the minimum focus is now 0.7m, and these framelines give you the field of view at 0.7m. As you focus towards infinity, more and more of the "edges" will show up on your film that the frameline won't show. The reason is that as you focus closer, the lens actually becomes slightly longer in focal length, so it becomes slightly "telephoto", and has a narrower field of view than when the lens is at infinity. So, at infinity you have more stuff on film than what you saw in the finder. You can always crop to restore the view you had when composing.

If you read the original posting, the person seems to have decided that he likes film better. Thus, I find it odd that so many people are trying to get him to try another digital camera, of whatever make. If you go to RFF, one of the most popular threads there bemoans how the Leica M10 has now killed off the resale values of the previous Leica digital cameras. Digital cameras are computers. Computers depreciate very quickly in value as newer models come out. Thus, if he wants to get rid of his current Nikon digital camera, the time to do it is NOW. As for the film camera, since he already has an FTb (which I also have), he already knows what the 35mm SLR experience is. Presumably, he doesn't want to continue having more of the same. After 25+ years of using a Nikon F3, I now view it as a loud cacophony anytime I press that shutter release. The same goes for the Nikon F, F2, F3, and the Canon FTb. It's just the nature of the SLR beast. I suggest that he go with his initial inclination and get an M6 or M6TTL. Leica lust is like no other. No other camera will ever be good enough until you get one. I have Leotax and Canon RF cameras, but I also have my Leicas. The Leicas are very wonderfully built, silky, smooth, and precise. The meter in my M7 is very accurate, as long as you are aware of the semi-spot nature of the metering pattern (analogous to the semi-spot metering of the FT-b, except that the Leica's is a circular pattern). I'm sure the meter in an M6 or MP will be as equally accurate. I have an M4-2 with MR-4 meter also, and it does take more effort to get a good reflected light reading. Carrying a hand-held meter for incident light metering is probably the best way, but then you have yet another gadget to carry around. Just get what you want. If it turns out that the M6TTL is not for you, then it is easy to resell with little to no loss.

<p>A Leica MP for $80 more than a standard M3. If only I had been alive at the time, and I had the money!</p>

<p>They still look like ugly worn cameras to me. I wouldn't pay any extra money for them.</p>

<p>I presume that you are using the X-flash port and not the M flash port?<br> If you are using the X synch port, then this is incorrect. The flash should fire at 1/50 and all slower speeds.</p>

<p>I have Tim's 50 1.2 L and 85 1.2 L, and I have to respectfully disagree with him. I find both lenses exceptionally good. They are better than anything comparable that Nikon has made, with the possible exception of the Noct Nikkor, with which I have no experience. </p> <p>The 50 1.2 L is perfectly usable wide open. I could not have said as much for my 58mm f/1.2 FL Canon that I originally had. Stopped down, the 50 1.2 is very sharp also.</p>

<p>Hi David,<br> I received it today, THANKS! It works great.</p>

<p>Hi is active. If you do send him your equipment, prepare to wait a very long time. His skills are very much in demand. He's had 3 of my Leica cameras with him for the past 2 years or so, waiting in his lineup for full overhauls.<br> He will give you a link and a password to his queue to show you where you are in line, when you send your equipment. I see from his web site that he is currently not accepting any more repairs until mid Feb. 2017.<br> Also, he does post here now and then.</p>

<p>Hi David,<br> I would be interested in the release. I have an MD-3 for my F2, and it should work for this also.<br> I'll send you a private email with my address.<br> Rob</p>

<p>Thanks for this edition. I have the compensating aperture Canon FL 50mm f/3.5 Macro lens, and I always wondered how good it was. Now I don't have to question it.</p>

<p>One possible way is to use a 1/4" x 20 bolt (or is that base a 3/8" x 16 hole?). On it, put a nut to act as a lock nut. Thread the bolt all the way in, finger tight. Then use a wrench and tighten down the lock nut against the base of the tripod head. Now you can use a socket wrench on the top of the bolt to loosen the works up. You may need to put the tripod head in between padded vise jaws to prevent it from rotating while you try to loosen it up.</p>

<p>Ken Oikawa is my US Canon repair expert. He used to work for Canon, but he is now retired.<br> Call him at 951-246-9136, and leave a message. He will get back to you.</p>

<p>I ordered 6 rolls of the Cinestill 50D and 800 films. I brought them on a visit to Toronto, to photograph my children with their grandfather. After I got back, I sent the rolls to North Coast Photographic for developing. They called me, and warned me that they've had problems with Cinestill films. Occasionally the remjet is not removed properly, and you get long horizontal streaks which extend the entire length of the film.</p> <p>Sure enough, the roll with the pictures of the children with their grandfather was the one that had the streak issue. All pictures on that roll were ruined.<br> From now on, I will stick to Kodak Portra, or a Fuji film instead, for color negative film.</p>