dave_lewis

Hi everyone,

<p>

It was back in May when our good friend Sandy began an impromptu

photo.net subscription drive right here in the Leica forum. Several

hundred people contributed $25 or more to get that neat little

subscriber icon next to our names. The fine photo.net folks were able

to do a series of hardware upgrades because of the influx of new

subscribers. It's been more than six months since that effort...it's

time to start up again.

<p>

Just like public radio/television listeners, it's good to remind

folks of the incredible value that we get from the photo.net

resource.

<p>

Go to this link:

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photonet-donations">photo.net

subscription</a><p>

 

You can pay by credit card using PayPal (and get the subscriber icon

immediately) -- or pay by check. One-year is $25 or three-years is

even cheaper at $68<p>

 

Regardless, think about the value you get from photo.net -- and make

a holiday contribution now!<p>

 

Thanks!

It's been slow for me for the past four days too.

 

One way to help makes things better is subscribing to photo.net -- the more people that are subscribers...the more equipment updates that can be done. Because you value photo.net (as you've noticed it's been slow) than you should support the service...

And I'm always amazed when people actually fall for this kind of scam. It's the oldest trick in the book...and if anyone actually ponies up any money...oh well.

The Kodak film I buy from B&H is the 'USAW' version -- I'm based right here in the US and don't for the life of me understand why others buy the USA version. It's the same stuff!

$200 isn't <i> that</i> much more. You can't often go wrong buying new.

 

Good luck!

I was shooting with a 50mm at F2 this past weekend. It was my 2-year-old nephew. The little guy is fast and I spent most of my time chasing him around with the manual focus lens. Many of my shots were close-ups. But they ultimately ended up slightly out of focus. There's not much you can do when you're shooting at F2...the margins are so thin. But the best advice was just given...never take a new lens on a trip.

I prefer B+W's filters...especially the MRC (multi-coated) -- the price is high...but once it's on that lens, you'll be glad you did.

He lists his city and 'state' as Fremont, NE (Nebraska) -- yet the zip code he includes is for Fremont, CALIFORNIA.

 

I wouldn't send your money because you probably won't see it or the camera again.

And as a general rule, you shouldn't use 120 film in a 220 insert and vice versa.

No problems with my broadband connection here at work or my dial-up service at home.

At least with my pre-asph version, it's not particularly sharp wide open -- It's fine after F4. But there's noticable degradation at F4 and below. Otherwise, it's a fine lens.

Some U.S. credit card companies extend a 90-day 'warranty' that replaces an item if it's lost, stolen or broken. Might be worth checking to see if that's case with your lens.

I've shot with dozens of lenses over the years. All have had varying amounts of dust and even smudges on the front elements. I can't think of a single picture that was ever impacted by that.

 

Also: think about it...your lens is focusing on something far off...not on that miniscule piece of dust!

And another advantage of 220 is that it's less film that you have to take on vacation...all those pro-packs can add up to a lot of space in your backpack!

Linda,

 

Yes, a darkslide should be included with every Hasselblad back sold (if not, it's perhaps one of the cheapest accessories you can buy -- less than $10).

 

One other thing to watch for when buying a secondhand back...is to make sure the insert matches the back. You can tell by looking at the last three digits of the serial number on the outer shell and comparing it to the same three digits of the insert. That's important because the backs and inserts are matched at the factory before going out. Occasionally you find backs that have mismatched inserts...sometimes it's an issue in film handling...and sometimes it's not. Better safe than sorry.

Actually...this particular tiger has been used for the past seven years. It's part of their act to say, 'this is the first time we've used this tiger in a live show.'

I use the Sekonic and love it...that's what I recommend to you.

 

However...I believe from your previous posts you;re using a Leica M7 exclusively...so do you really need a handheld meter?

I get a lot of spam too ... and is interesting to look at the return addresses. But inevitably it's like the ones you posted...a valid domain (ie, photo.net) but an invalid user name (ie, that long string of names and letters you posted). It just sounds like the classic email spoofing we're seeing more of these days!

There isn't a whole of difference...but, as always, be sure to experiment first!

Actually the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed audio recordings of select proceedings (including one case earlier this year and at least one last year that I can remember) -- it is rare, yes. But it has happened.

I think the user names are too small. It's barely readable on my monitor!

Paul,

<p>

Yes that's correct...You can read more about B&H's gray market policy here:<p>

<a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=getpage.jsp&A=getpage&Q=GreyMarketStatic.jsp">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=getpage.jsp&A=getpage&Q=GreyMarketStatic.jsp</a><p>

 

And many people buy gray market lenses (they either work or they don't) but buy USA camera bodies (there's more than can go wrong).

My older backs often have erratic spacing too. But it's not drastic (as in there's plenty of space between the negatives to cut as needed). So I haven't worried about it. I will once the spacing gets so close as to almost overlap.

 

However, my newer backs are always spot on and never fluctuate.

Dave,

 

Q.G. has given you an excellent summary of the backs. So no need to amplify his technical explanations.

 

But, for practical experience, I can tell you I have several older and newer backs. They all pretty much function the same. Aside from replacing the light seals on the older backs, they've all worked flawlessly.

And just following up...

 

The smaller, Hasselblad B50 lens cap that bayonets INSIDE the filter has part number: 51640.

 

Hope this helps.