Richard Williams

<p>Oops, my direct link doesn't work. However, going to http://www.megaproxy.com and selecting 'try it free', then entering the BBC link does.</p>

<blockquote> <p>This BBC website is not available to people in the UK - the home of the BBC! What a pity. </p> </blockquote> <p>Try this:<br> http://www.megaproxy.com/go/_mp_framed?http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20141104-the-camera-that-snapped-a-century</p>

<p>Just heard the news - a terrible shame, but apparently nobody hurt. Was anything visible from DC, or did it not get high enough?</p>

<p>Rock solid on mine. You should be able to see and feel the 4 little metal clips on the inner circumference of the hood when it's off the lens, and you should feel significant resistance from the spring when you push one in with your fingernail. They should retract when you push the pinch buttons, and engage with the groove on the lens when you release them.</p>

<p>Definitely look at that manual, especially the bit about loading the film. Note that the Leica was designed for a different film leader shape than that sold today. Therefore, before you load the film, pull out the leader so that you can see the same number of sprocket holes (25) as the illustration on p29. Carefully trim it with scissors so that it matches the shape in the picture (i.e., cut away the lower edge including the sprocket holes so that you have a thin leader for the first 23 upper holes). Then follow the rest of the instructions. Have fun! By the way, there are some pretty good lightmeter apps for most smartphones - it's worth downloading one to use alongside this camera.</p>

<p>I think Leica's idea of 'cheap' doesn't really overlap with mine! Even at ~25% off, that's still a lot of money for the 50 f/2.5, which must be the slowest double Gauss 50 ever made for the 35mm format. A decent secondhand 50 f/2 would still probably be in the same price range...</p>

<p>To this list you can add the screwmount IIIg, with framelines for 50 and 90. The IIIf and earlier have no framelines, just a small but clear 50mm finder - you need an accessory finder for anything else, as mentioned above. If you do end up with a screwmount camera, it's worth getting a collapsible 50mm lens of some description no matter what other lenses you buy - it's handy to have such a small, self-contained package with nothing else to carry.</p>

<p>Pretty much any Leica can still be serviced, and there are many screwmount models still in excellent condition. But it's worth going somewhere with a decent selection so you can at least avoid cameras with obvious issues (sticky slow speeds, dim RF images, etc.), even if you decide to have a CLA afterwards. The separate rangefinder and more fiddly film loading make the screwmounts a bit more quirky to use, but they can be surprisingly quick to operate once you get the hang of them, and the smaller size makes them very pocketable. Yes, no problem using new lenses on an old M, or screwmount lenses with an adapter on any M.</p>

<p>So many cameras, but so little real variety. You could reduce the entire range to half a dozen and not lose much. How about a couple of more distinctive models - optical viewfinder? full retro controls?</p>

<p>The technical advances in the new entry level cameras are pretty obvious, as are their limitations (fps etc.). Which, if any, of these are relevant depends on the output resolution you need, how much light you have, how fast your subject is moving, and your own choices about what actually matters. There's a nice 'behind the scenes' video on Youtube of Steve McCurry shooting the 2013 Pirelli calendar. Alongside the D3X and high resolution Hasselblad he's shown using (shock, horror!) a D2Xs...</p>

<blockquote> <p>As for Nikon being able to play collector's tricks, Gray's of Westminster are very good at wheeling out cameras that have been into space or which are gold-plated special editions.</p> </blockquote> <p>Gray's whole schtick is to sell Nikons the same way other specialist dealers sell Leicas - a single brand boutique with current products and reverently displayed vintage gear. Is this the only shop that has tried to pull this off, or are there Nikon-only dealers elsewhere (maybe in Japan)?</p>

<blockquote> <p>Leica camera's cost too much. So what's new?</p> </blockquote> <p>Only that they've gone from being very expensive to extremely expensive. 10 years ago, their 50 f/2 was 5-6x the price of the Nikon equivalent, fair enough considering the relative build qualities and economies of scale. Now it's about 16x the price. Even their 'economy' 50/2.5 (just re-launched as a 50/2.4), which must be the slowest double Gauss 50 ever marketed for the 35mm format, is a £1200 lens, double the price of their 50/2 a decade ago.</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>What about the Zeiss Otuses? Also ridiculously priced.</p> </blockquote> <p>Indeed they are, though they've been priced this way (as a niche product) from the start - anyone thinking of buying something like this knows what they're getting into, and can choose much more reasonably priced alternatives from the camera makers and even from Zeiss.</p> <blockquote> <p>The price rises instigated with the Kaufmann regime are transforming Leica from an embattled company to a profitable one. The collectors' editions are just that: for rich people who collect beautiful things or things with mystique. They simply generate extra cash and cachet for the brand: they are not really meant to be used. They simply help the bottom line.</p> </blockquote> <p>Yes, I agree.</p> <blockquote> <p>The high prices for the rest of their goods are there to ensure a sufficient profit margin to still continue to operate. The important thing is that they are enough buyers to make it all work.</p> </blockquote> <p>It clearly works for Leica as a company, though that's pretty much irrelevant to the potential (and former) customers who now find themselves priced out of the market. It's like caring about the fortunes of Cartier or Patek-Philippe. A decade ago, that 50/2 was a £600 lens. Now it's nearly triple that. Over the same period the prices of basic prime lenses from Nikon that haven't been replaced by newer formulas or AFS versions have barely shifted (probably cheaper in real terms). Some of this is probably due to currency fluctuations (and VAT sales tax in the UK is now higher than before), but _triple_ the price..?</p>

<p>To be fair on Leica, the collector's item market must account for only a tiny fraction of their production. It's just that even their regular range sells for what would be collector's item prices from any other brand. Even the overpriced 58 f/1.4 AFS, Nikon's entry into the luxury prime market targeted by Zeiss, is only about half the price of Leica's 50 f/1.4. The only current Nikon dSLR I can see becoming collectable is the Df, and then only if it's not replaced when they discontinue it. The same would go for any lenses that go out of production without direct replacements as Nikon moves entirely to AFS (e.g. the DC primes may not be replaced).</p>

<p>If Leica can get some publicity and turn a decent profit on these 'concept cameras' then good luck to them. Like Shun says in the first reply to this thread, this camera is designed for the white glove brigade - whether it's a practical tool is pretty much irrelevant. It's more of a shame that the pricing of their bread and butter items is so stratospheric - their 50 f/2 goes for £1750 nowadays, a price so crazy that they've launched a 50 f/2.5 'starter' lens (similar design, but artificially slow and a little smaller for product differentiation), yours for a mere £1200. Only their 'sports optics', though expensive, do not have prices completely out of touch with their high-end competition - birders and other binocular users seem to be less susceptible to the Leica Mystique than photographers...</p>

<p>This seems to be quite a common problem. You'll see various solutions posted on this and other forums, but I don't think you'll find a universal fix. Sometimes the tacky residue is easily removed, but often the material itself has started to degrade from age or exposure to environmental factors. I've personally had the problem with an F100 and D70 stored in a bag. Only the 'rubber' areas were afffected (F100 back, but oddly not the front grips, all the rubber on the D70). The bag contained fabric-covered foam dividers and neoprene straps, and was lined with artiifical fibres, none of which were themselves sticky to the touch. though I guess they might have 'outgassed' in the closed bag. Wiping with a damp cloth didn't seem to help. Various solutions were suggested to me (isopropanol, 303 protectant, 'Goo Gone', WD-40, etc.). Before I tried any of this, I simply left the cameras sitting on an open shelf in a well-aired area. After a couple of weeks they had become significantly less sticky and improved further over time. I've seen one other report of this happening, so it might be worth a try. Looking at the cameras today (currently stored in a closed cupboard) my impression is that they are now a little more tacky than they used to be, but not to the unpleasant extent they were when I first removed them from the bag.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I don't see any way Nikon can support five FX cameras--F4s, D810, D610 Df, D750. I really doubt the market is that big any more, and I'm guessing that two of them will go.</p> </blockquote> <p>I think the 610 will quietly fade away, and the Df 'doesn't count' - it's a bit of an oddity for a specific market niche that isn't really affected by what happens in the rest of the range. If it sells well enough, expect periodic upgrades borrowed from the more conventional cameras. If not, it'll probably be dropped but then become highly collectable!</p>

<blockquote> <p>Well, I guess the D750 isn't what was expected (a D700 with the D610 sensor, and a lot of added speed). This only confuses the FX lines even further, and that's even disregarding the fact that there are still a lot of D800/D800E in the channel, and some D600's as well. At the current prices, the D610 and D810 aren't all that far apart, is there *really* a space between these two?</p> </blockquote> <p>Most of the rumours pointed to a 'lightweight' body with a tilt screen, so I think we're getting something pretty close to what was expected. There were conflicting rumours about 8fps vs 6.5fps, so there'll be some disappointment about that. Agree that there's not really enough of a space between the D610 and the D810 - I'm guessing this is the end of the line for the D6xx series, and the D750 is its somewhat higher spec replacement (as with the D90 and the D7000). They'll still sell the D610 for a while, but I don't think there'll be a D620.</p>

<p>Dzerzhinsky died several years before any FEDs were made, though the commune named in his honour that produced the cameras was indeed administered by the NKVD. Some fascinating history here: http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/commune_A.htm<br /> </p>

<p>I got the impression Luke wasn't happy with the in-camera jpegs, but liked the preview images from the NEFs. But if all the jpegs are conversions from NEFs done in PS6, then that's the explanation for the difference.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I dont think that Windows foto viewer displays the NEF but the in the NEF included jpeg.</p> </blockquote> <p>I don't have the NEF codec installed, but that would also be my guess. NEFs contain full-size embedded jpegs that are used for previews and can be extracted by various tools. One way to view them is to upload a raw image here:</p> <p>http://regex.info/exif.cgi</p> <p>Another is to use the command-line version of ExifTool, which allows you to extract the embedded jpegs to separate files:</p> <p>http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/<br> http://thomer.com/howtos/embedded_jpg.html</p> <p>Does this match what you are seeing with the codec?</p> <p>I don't know why an in-camera jpeg would not match a jpeg embedded in a NEF. Perhaps different camera settings apply in raw mode? As for your PS6 conversion, that will be different again, using Adobe's raw conversion engine and profiles rather than Nikon's. How do your images look if you convert them in NX-2 (or NX-D or VNX)?</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Well, you have to be pretty picky to be put off by having a camera that can do 12MP and 5fps and not want a camera that offers 36MP at 4fps and 25MP at 5fps with a small crop. Not so much if you want to use a grip at 8fps, but there's the used D3s and D4 market to consider if that's of interest. But I speak as a D700 owner who's happy with my D800e (though I may still defect to a D810) so I may be guilty of not understanding those with a different opinion.</p> </blockquote> <p>Depends entirely on what you shoot, really. If you used a grip with the D700 to shoot sports at 8fps, the D800 is going to disappoint. If you never bothered with the grip the D800 is not quite there, but the D810 has finally equalled the D700, and added its spectacular own pixel count and other advantages. Of course, the faster single digit bodies would be much better for fast action, though heavier and more cumbersome for all-day general use. What the D700 and D300 really nailed was the concept of the gerneral purpose camera that tackled everything reasonably well. Technology has moved on since then, but Nikon has also moved away from this sort of camera. The D750 may, or may not, change that (if it actually exists!).</p>

<blockquote> <p>However, it's not a case of <em>ALL</em> modern ones, there's new lemons just as well as old gems.</p> </blockquote> <p>Sarcasm aside, I completely agree. I hope the older lenses aren't orphaned by the new range of cameras, though I suppose 'AFS only' will eventually creep up the range. If there is a 'D750' next month, whether or not it has an AF motor might be seen as a statement of intent by Nikon (they've been pretty busy lately knocking out, e.g., f/1.8 primes to replace older pre-AFS designs). I suspect lenses like the 105 DC might never get the AFS treatment, and it would be a shame if you had to buy at least a D810-level camera to make them work (for now). You can argue that a 'sports' camera is best served by AFS lenses, but many of use don't buy a body for only one type of photography, and some of the AF/AF-D lenses actually focus very quickly (they just <em>sound</em> slower).</p>

<blockquote> <p>If you're into AF-D lenses, this camera isn't meant for you....and you'd be far better off with another FX body, with more resolution blah, blah.....</p> </blockquote> <p>Of course according to the other thread ( http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cmkF ) we aren't supposed to use them on the higher res cameras either, as they won't be taking full advantage of the sensor. I guess we should return all our AF-D lenses to Nikon for re-cycling, or dispose of them sensibly in the nearest landfill.</p>

<blockquote> <p>As ever, no one-size-fits-all. An FX DSLR with a flip-out screen would be an interesting differentiator, but if Nikon are really after the D700 crowd who weren't tempted by either the D600/D610 or the D800/D810, and who haven't already picked up a D3s or D4, I'd be worried that the picky few would be put off by a screen like this.</p> </blockquote> <p>You'd have to be very picky to be put off by a rotating screen, though there are several other ways that you might imagine the bean counters could still mess with the D700 hold-outs. An undersized buffer would do it, or a smaller body with poorer handling, or (my favourite) leaving out the screwdriver AF motor...</p> <p>Latest rumours are 51 point AF (hardly surprising) and 8fps without a grip (hmm...). Since everyone is saying Photokina, we will at least know if there's any substance to this in a couple of weeks.</p>