Richard Williams

To play around with this idea I've ordered a generic DM-55 clamp that's available under various Chinese brands. The Leitz head locks very solidly, but it's all or nothing with no friction control, so it might be worth getting an alternative. Those RRS heads look good and the Arca P0 is an interesting option, though larger than some of the alternatives.

Well, since resurrection of ancient threads is all the rage right now, and I've just bought one of these, here we are. I have a chrome Leitz head, in a medium size in between the current tall version and the old small head, and with reversible screws top and bottom. I'm not mad on the standard off-centre Leica tripod mount, so thinking of mounting a small Arca-style clamp on the head and using a generic plate with a long screw slot that allows me to position the camera screw at one end, but have the plate clamped in the middle, centering the camera. Has anyone tried anything like this? Incidentally, does the longest (current) version of the head allow a film M mounted directly on the head in the normal way to clear all three legs even with the head dropped down into portrait orientation?

I wonder if they have their own magic formula, or if (as I'd guess) they just replace all the grips? If the back is affected and can't be treated I think the whole door would have to be swapped out, though the Nintendo controller and the pressue plate etc. can be migrated.

Since we're on a roll with the protective filters debate, can someone resurrect a 7 year old Canon vs Nikon thread? I'm sure we can sort that one out once and for all.

BJP: http://www.bjp-online.com/

With that budget, I don't think I'd choose either. If I wanted a new fixed focal length compact digital, the Q's 28mm lens would put me off. Instead, I'd go for the new Fuji X100F: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-x100f/fuji-x100fA.HTM which has a 35mm-equivalent lens and costs about a third of the price of the Leica. Then I'd look at the remaining budget and probably decide that rather than saving up for the M-A, I'd just buy one of the classic Leicas it's based on (an M3 for a quarter of the price, or an M4 for half the price), get it serviced by one of the top technicians to run like it just came out of the factory, and then contemplate how to spend the rest of the money...

I've seen prices go up by 20-30% here in the UK recently and a distinct shortage of them at dealers - I wondered if it was just the weak pound after our Brexit vote madness, since the main dealers sell internationally. But >$2000 is way too much for a plain M6 Classic - you can do a lot better on ebay.

Getting a guided tour from the kids sounds like a good plan. There's a lot to see and photograph if you haven't properly explored the City before, and you can walk nearly everywhere if you don't mind hills. Just watch out if you get a Leica and your film shooting son asks to 'borrow' it!

SF is probably easiest by public transport - e.g. if you were visiting Camera West, you could get the BART from Walnut Creek to Montgomery St in under 40 min. There are also some downtown parking garages - see http://sfpark.org/ . I think this one is cheaper than the garage under Union Sq: https://www.yelp.com/biz/sutter-stockton-garage-san-francisco

So you have completely uninstalled and reinstalled CS6 and this keeps happening periodically? I don't think Adobe are really actively doing anything, this will probably just be some bug in the code they wrote years ago to try to encourage upgrades.

The patch flare issue is real, but when it occurs can normally be dealt with by slightly re-positioning the finder relative to your eye: http://nemeng.com/leica/020b.shtml I imagine only a small proportion of M6s will ever be upgraded. Shopping for Leicas seems like a great excuse to go to San Francisco, which must be about the most photogenic city in the US!

I think the F90/N90 typically has a worse problem and the material is different - it's a rather thin coating that basically disintegrates over time, and you can actually remove it completely with alcohol. The F100 back has a similar texture to the front grips, a rather thick material that can go sticky while (so far) remaining intact. I would try the gentle approach first.

There's more room around them. The magnification of the finder does not change (unless you swap the camera or use the eyepiece magnifier), so a smaller area of the finder is outlined as the focal length increases. You may find this helpful: http://www.tamarkin.com/sites/default/files/general/_vf_magifications.jpg That lever on the front of the camera allows you to preview different pairs of framelines without changing the lens. The 50mm frame feels rather undersized on the M6 - perhaps it's accurate at 0.7m, but I don't have a 50 that focuses closer than 1m, so I'd rather it was slightly larger!

Yes, always a good idea.

I've never measured anything or used a template, but count perforations, cutting with scissors to leave 23 'unpaired', and pulling the film out to expose 2 more 'paired'. I got this from an illustration in one of Leica's own manuals rather than the FED instructions above - see p29 here: http://www.cameramanuals.org/leica_pdf/leica_if_iif_iiif.pdf If you shoot these cameras it's handy to carry some sort of pocket tool with scissors, like this: https://www.leatherman.com/micra-20.html

The D300 and D3 are the earliest dSLRs to support E lenses (see Shun's article: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/nikon-e-lenses.503803/ ), and were introduced less than a year before the first of these lenses, so Nikon must already have been thinking ahead about compatibility. They may have hardware that is absent from earlier dSLRs (which were never updated to support E lenses) and film SLRs.

In this case we don't need to bother with the relative merits of B+W and Hoya, since the B+W MRC is (oddly enough) the cheapest 95mm multicoated filter on the linked B&H page. I think uncoated filters are a false economy for most users - why buy something that will flare horribly in common conditions, and you intend to remove to take the shot? Just use a lens cap. As for UV absorption, the received wisdom (I haven't seen hard evidence) is that digital cameras are much less sensitive to UV than film, hence the recent popularity of 'protector' filters that make no claims about UV. I haven't yet had problems with any filter jamming, brass or aluminium - don't over tighten.

The lenstip review gives a good overview of how various common filters perform, but note that the overall score takes into account the UV absorption properties of each, which may or may not be something you care about. Otherwise, the biggest issue is probably flare resistance, which means a good multicoated filter, as you'll see in the individual tests. It also helps to have one of the more recent types of multicoating that includes an 'easy clean' layer (some older coatings, like the original version of Hoya's HMC, are pretty hard to clean without smearing). In general, I would suggest B+W MRC, B+W MRC Nano, Hoya HD, or Hoya EVO (aka 'Fusion'). On the B&H page, the 3 cheapest filters say nothing about coating, so I'll assume they are uncoated and likely to flare very easily. The cheaper B+W SC is only single coated. I would therefore consider the B+W MRC, as Ed suggests. However, note that this uses B+W's standard 'F-Pro' mount. Some wideangle lenses can vignette with standard mounts and require a lower profile mount. B+W's XS-Pro mount, as used by their Nano filters, can help in this situation, but isn't listed in 95mm on that page. The Hoya EVO will be low profile, but is a lot more expensive in 95mm. If the filter can be tried and returned if necessary, or the lens isn't very wide, I'd go for the B+W MRC.

Like Dan's, the problem with mine has so far been confined to the back. Incidentally, replacement backs are hard to come by, which is a pity since another possible point of failure is the plastic door catch. The otherwise not very useful MF-29 data back is easier to find, as it was a retail rather than a service item. I've bought one, but have set it aside for now as the stickiness has largely been resolved. Two things helped reduce it from really irritating to barely noticeable levels, and it has now been stable for months. First, letting the camera air on an open shelf for a week or two made a significant difference (I noticed the original problem after extended storage in a padded bag, where the back may have interacted with other polymers). Second, repeatedly rolling some of this 'Super Clean' gel: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cleaner-Keyboards-Mobile-Phones-Computers/dp/B00C6LS64I over the surface, then leaving the camera to air for another couple of days, reduced the stickiness further. Your mileage may vary. I didn't need to treat the front grips, and a D70 that initially responded well to airing has relapsed and the cleaning goo didn't help. Note that there seem to be some knockoffs of this cleaning gel that may or may not be the same compound, so check the reviews first. The one I used is branded 'Betron' in the UK.

It kind of depends if they are like this or more like this.

I would enjoy it for the interesting historical curiosity it is. It would have started out as an honest copy of the Leica, closely following the original design but not pretending to be anything other than a Soviet camera. These were made in large numbers in the USSR from the 30s to the 50s, a fascinating story in itself: https://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/commune_intro.htm http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?414372438 http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?844440941 . Your camera's snakeskin cover, paint job and Leica disguise are likely to be much more recent additions by an enterprising craftsman somewhere in the former Soviet Union.

We might as well go full out on a fantasy F7, since they aren't likely to make one! How about an interchangeable digital back like the Leica DMR? Updated AF is a given, and it should also support all other current Nikon technologies like electronic aperture lenses. Is there anything else the F6 isn't compatible with? I know it does iTTL. Bring back the interchangeable finders, but keep the body as close as possible to the current F6 size. And why not make the pre-AI mod standard?

As I understand it, the problem is that auto aperture lenses supposedly do not always stop down to precisely the same aperture every time, even in manual or aperture priority modes, a limitation that only becomes apparent in time lapse work. If this is the case, I don't know why the 28-105 would behave any differently when 'untwisted' - have you tried other Nikon lenses with aperture rings? Incidentally, I don't find this lens soft when stopped down a bit. One thing you might try is a Leitax conversion, which will allow you to use a Leica R, Contax/Yashica or Olympus OM lens on Nikon: http://www.leitax.com/ Converted lenses have entirely manual aperture control.

V nyjnlf rapelcg zl zrffntrf jvgu ebg13. Va lbhe snpr, AFN!

I've used most of these at one time or another: http://www.speedgraphic.co.uk http://www.mathersoflancashire.co.uk http://www.7dayshop.com http://www.silverprint.co.uk http://www.ag-photographic.co.uk http://www.processuk.net http://www.calphoto.co.uk