User_4754088

For years I've used an 85mm f1.4 and a 180mm f2.8 for portraits. The 85mm for upper body and face, the 180mm for headshots.

Interesting new look, and thrilling to see that we can now review archived threads from previous years (and decades). What a wealth of information. Thank you.

<p>One of the advantages to the old "uncoated" lenses from the 1930's & 1940's is that when they were attacked by fungus, you could take them apart, clean them up, and they were as good as new.</p> <p>Unfortunately with newer coated lenses, the fungus attacks the coatings. So you can get rid of the fungus, but now you have etched coatings on the elements. What Stephen said, the only real fix is to have the lenses stripped of their coatings and recoated.</p>

<p>Nice shot Bill.</p>

<p>While I think the D700 is getting a bit long in the tooth, and the one issue I have with mine is the 12MB sensor doesn't hold up as well as 16MB and 20MB in my other DSLR's when it comes to post processing, I've never had a DSLR that was easier to manual focus. Not sure why, but I can get much sharper images out of my manual focus Nikon glass with the D700 than I can with my D4, and it was as easy to manually focus the D700 as it was to focus a Df I borrowed a while back.</p>

<p>I believe the Korean war story was actually, David Douglas Duncan and another photographer (who's name escapes me right now), got a hold of some Nikkor lenses that were in LTM and used them on their Leica iiic camera bodies and found the images they created to be better than what they were getting from the Leica glass of that time.</p>

<p>Also check out buying refurbished right from Nikon USA. I've gone that route in the past and was not disappointed.</p>

<p>I'm not familiar with all the FM2's intricate lubrication points, but one of the reasons many avoid "never used" cameras is that exercising the mechanism in a camera keeps the lubricants moving around and keeps everything lubricated and in good condition. This was especially true of the wet cameras from the 1940's, 50's and 60's. Again, not sure about the FM2, it might be a dry camera, meaning the bearing surfaces could be materials like teflon and delrin, which do not need wet lubricants, and in that case, "never used" would not be an issue.</p>

<p>What everyone said above. My D700 has the serial number on the bottom label (hidden when the battery grip is attached, so if your's has that, it must be removed). And it shows up in Photoshop when you look at camera data.</p>

<p>Speaking of re-issues, when Nikon did the reissue of the SP and S3(I think it was), did they use the same tooling from the late 1950's, or were these "reissue" cameras in the same vein as the Mini-Cooper is a "reissue" of the original? In other words, it looks kind of like the original, but is a whole new redesigned item.</p>

<p>They had them early this morning. Maybe they only had a few copies (maybe they only printed a few copies). It's being talked up on other Nikon sites.</p> <p>Come on Nikon, show us what you got!! Let's see a 100th Anniversary Df, D5, F6, maybe even a re-issue S2 rangefinder. That would be cool. Or better yet, how about a black paint 100th Anniversary Nikon F with plain prism finder (the one that takes diopters), that would be awesome.</p> <p>I couldn't afford any of them, but they're really cool to look at and read about.</p>

<p>Well now the 100th Anniversary book is out, but WHERE'S THE 100th ANNIVERSARY CAMERA?</p> <p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-100-Anniversary-Uli-Koch/dp/3200047402/ref=as_li_ss_tl">https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-100-Anniversary-Uli-Koch/dp/3200047402/ref=as_li_ss_tl</a></p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>The Canon A-1 can be a tricky camera at times. I've never had the experience you are describing, but I would recommend getting a copy of the instruction manual and reading it carefully, making sure you do all the steps they show you. You can see a PDF of the instruction manual here:</p> <p>http://www.cameramanuals.org/canon_pdf/canon_a1.pdf</p> <p>Best,<br> -Tim</p>

<p>Yeah, I've got an S2 and I really love it. And I've got numerous light meters (including one on my iPhone), but it would be nice to have the light meter built in, but not sacrifice anything else about the S2. Just dreaming.</p>

<p>Would love a rangefinder that used the original lens mount (so all the old lenses would still work), functioned just like the originals, and had a light meter built in. That would get me to pony up the bucks.</p>