Richard Williams

Several late model film SLRs have the ability to record metadata digitally (though not digital images!). A couple of decades later, it can be hard to find the required cables and software, or to make them work with current computers, but one company is selling a modern hardware/software package that works with today's PCs and Macs: Cameras — Meta35

Aperture in London has a secondhand 25/4 M in user condition, as well as a 'Mint-' LTM version. This lens was discontinued several years ago, so you are either looking at 'new old' stock, which seems to have sold out at the major UK dealers, or used. Brexit may rear its ugly head on 12 April the way things are going, so probably best to put in any order from (or to) the UK as soon as possible.

I can't help with the Nikon software, but just curious why you want to try this rather than Meta35? I guess Cocoon SoftTALK 2000 (which is now freeware with the unlock code provided by the author) is of no interest?: What Is New@ COCOON... http://www.cocoon-creations.com/COCOON-NiCommSoftTALK-Download.shtml

The (in)famous Ken Rockwell has an interesting page on batteries and the Nikon F100: https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/f100PWR.htm According to his measurements, the F100 draws only a tiny current (41.5 microamps) when the camera is on but the meter has timed out and switched itself off (which takes 4-16 seconds, depending on a custom setting). Switching the camera off doesn't reduce the current drawn, since the camera needs to keep the exposure counter running (the count or an empty indicator is always displayed on the LCD, even when the camera is off). Switching the meter on raises the current to 250 milliamps. I'd be surprised if other late model SLRs don't have similar arrangements. I also imagine most digital cameras continue to use a little power even when switched off (e.g. to keep clocks running).

The Z-mount 70-200 f/2.8 is still on the roadmap for this year, and the 14-24 f/2.8 for next year, amongst others: This is Nikon's Updated Mirrorless Lens Roadmap Any guesses for the TBA lenses? A 70-200 f/4, together with 105, 28, and long tele primes seem obvious choices, plus cheaper kit zooms as they expand the range downwards. The adapter is a useful bridge that will encourage F-mount users not to jump ship if they switch to mirrorless, but Nikon won't want it to be the only option for any common lens on Z bodies a couple of years from now.

I imagine Bill is right about some of the high prices on ebay, though perhaps particularly rare FED and Zorki variants are worth a premium to specialised collectors. If your aim is to sell the cameras on, then it probably doesn't matter too much which camera the fakes are based on, since the process of making them look like Leicas will generally destroy most of their value to serious collectors of Soviet cameras. It's very likely they are just based on common variants, anyway. The main thing is to make it really clear they aren't genuine Leicas. If you have other Soviet cameras in original condition, it might be worth taking a bit more time to find out exactly what they are, though the odds are you won't have anything valuable.

If there were any original brass-finish Feds or Zorkis I imagine they are now very rare. Leica also apparently shipped cameras with a brass finish on occasion to special order (someone posted about one here a while back, a sort of 'poor man's Luxus'). But Soviet cameras with the chrome removed by forgers are very common. As Rick notes above, this is going to happen anyway if you grind off the original engravings. The forger can either strip off all the chrome to match, and hope the camera is mistaken for a rare gold-plated Leica Luxus model, or re-plate in chrome. Some of the more attractive fakes have highly polished brass, but whoever did this one hasn't bothered - either they concluded it wasn't worth the effort, or thought an 'antique' finish would look more 'authentic'. It might be fun to go through the various Fed and Zorki models on sovietcams to see if you can tell exactly which version this one started out as: Soviet and Russian Cameras - Fed Soviet and Russian Cameras - Zorki Unfortunately the fake engravings won't help!

I looked in Calumet (the old Euston branch) when I was buying a secondhand Nikon 24-70 G, and their stock seemed 'well used'. An independent dealer had a much nicer example - the zoom action was fine (and has remained so). I don't discount the stories about the problems some people have had with this lens (I wouldn't like to drop it!) but it's always hard to tell how common an issue is from internet reports that tend to emphasise problems, while remaining silent on the examples that just work. Presumably Nikon knows, but it isn't telling. Lens Rentals reported back in 2013 on the lenses they'd had most problems with over the previous year: Lensrentals Repair Data: 2012-2013 The Canon and Tamron 24-70 zooms appear in the list, as do the Nikon 70-200 and 14-24, but not the Nikon 24-70. We don't know the sample sizes, but the Nikon 24-70 was presumably one of the more commonly rented zooms. Make of that what you will. All I can say about the 24-70 G is that it's sharp and focuses fast and I like the images from it. The only things I don't like are the size and weight.

Did you check that link? It's a dubious looking PDF with text like a spam email and no photos, with embedded links you are invited to click on. I didn't.

I don't think we need to over-analyse this. Given your biggest concern, the answer is no. For the D300, ISO 3200 is very much in the high ISO range, and noise (etc.) will be significantly worse than what you see now with the D3400. You also won't be able to crop as hard starting from 12MP. The D300 still does lots of other things very well (nice controls, handling, build, framerate, AF, works with screwdriver AF), but high ISO is not its strongpoint. Where the cutoff is depends on your tolerance for noise, lower contrast and the artefacts of noise reduction. If you see a D300 cheap enough, you might use it normally up to about ISO 800-1000. You can still get decent results up to about ISO 1600 if you're careful, though I expect you'll already be visibly better off with the D3400. Beyond that, you probably need to take particular care with your choice of subject and exposure, and probably do noise reduction in post. It sounds like you'd be better off saving for the D7xxx for most purposes.

Nikon never seems to have made a bad 105. If the original poster ever wants to try another portrait lens on the D800, then the AI F-mount version of this lens, and later AF designs like the 105 DC f/2 and the latest 105 f/1.4 are all excellent.

The only situation where Nikon 'makes' you include a serial number is if you need to share NEF files from many of their dSLRs. For reasons best known to itself, Nikon encrypts some metadata (including 'as shot' white balance) using various keys, with a scheme that has long since been cracked. One of these keys is the camera serial number embedded in the NEF. You can delete the serial number from the raw file using something like ExifTool, but then your raw processor can no longer recover the white balance.

I suppose the only reasons to use Capture 3.5 today would be tethered shooting (which used to be in Capture before they spun this function off into the rather expensive Camera Control Pro package), or maybe compatibility with older operating systems. I think 3.5 also only works with the D1 series and D100. For all other uses, Capture NX-D would be a better bet.

I've never used it, but log matching is supported in ViewNX-i: Using Location Logs | ViewNX-i Help | Nikon Get the current version from Sandy's link, or here: Nikon Imaging | Global Site | ViewNX-i

The F100 is one of the best cameras Nikon has made. There's not much more I'd want in a film camera - it would be nice to have the improved AF module of the F6, but the F100's AF is no slouch - when I went digital with the D70, the lower spec AF (like the F80/N80) was a bit of a disappointment. The D300 had more focus points, but didn't seem that much faster than the F100. The F6 also does i-TTL/CLS and is therefore compatible with recent flashes, which lack the film TTL mode - the SB-800, which works with both film TTL and i-TTL, is a good flash for F100 owners who also shoot digital. I think both cameras have the same lens compatibility, so no problem with AF-D, AF-S, G and VR, but neither will work with electronic aperture E lenses or AF-P. It's a shame we will probably never see an F7 that brings compatibility up to date. But of course the F100 is older and probably harder to service. It's a real pity about the plastic catch, which if broken means the whole back has to be replaced (though you can keep and re-mount the multi-selector and pressure plate if necessary), and spares are hard to find. Many of the parts bodies on ebay have already lost their backs, presumably donated to other cameras. The data back, which was a retail rather than a service part, is easier to find. The data features are pretty useless, but it's a perfectly good back! I read somewhere it was the other way round. Though I think the F100 was released first, development at Nikon was already focused on the D1, and the F100 'inherited' some of its features.

Nikon have made a bit of a mess of backwards compatibility with G, AF-P and E, but can't really blame them for problems with another manufacturer's lens made decades after the F4 was discontinued. Well designed 3rd party lenses ought to work like Nikon AFS G VR lenses on the F4 - AF and correct metering in P and S modes, but no A, M or VR.

This image should give you an idea of what the framelines look like for various focal lengths: http://www.studio-plus.fr/images/NOUVELLESIMAGES/leica%20m6%20viseur%20cadres.jpg The viewfinder magnification (e.g. 0.72) is fixed for a specific camera. I think the Monochrom has a 0.68 finder, so the middle column (0.72) will be close enough to show you how the various framelines will appear with that camera. Framelines are displayed in pairs, so the 90mm framelines are the inner set in the bottom centre panel - a pretty small 'window' to compose in, which may take a bit of getting used to for photographers familiar with SLRs or EVFs.

It looks like this flash is made in several versions (no SCA adapters with this one, you just have to buy the right version for your camera to start with). One of them is described as 'Mecablitz 44 AF-2 digital Olympus/Panasonic/Leica', but as far as I can this model only supports a narrow range of digital Leicas (rebadged Panasonics?), so I suspect you're out of luck, at least for anything other than manual. I don't think this flash even has a basic 'auto' (flash sensor) mode like your other Metz - they assume that anyone buying a 44 AF-2 this will have a compatible camera with its own TTL flash metering. I don't know if there's any risk of anything bad happening in manual mode. It's not always a great idea to put an incompatible dedicated flash on a different camera system (at least if if any of the dedicated contacts happen to line up). This won't be a problem with the Metz 36 C-2, which only has an X-sync terminal.

The 36 C-2 is a simple flash that isn't compatible with the SCA adapters and will only work in manual mode or a very basic 'auto' mode (using the flash unit's own sensor, not the camera's TTL flash meter). This is what the R8 manual refers to as 'Flash photography with the X-contact' and 'Flash photography with the flash connection socket'. For the specific 36 M-1 / 36 C-2 instructions (in a rather awkward multilingual format!), see: mecablitz: Metz Some of the more advanced Metz flashes are compatible with the SCA 3501, and this combination would let you take full advantage of all the R8's flash features, including TTL mode: Metz SCA Module Feature Chart for Leica Camera

And in any case, the main reason to use an F3 is that switching it on doesn't poke you in the right eye if you shoot with the left.

Bargain!

Here's a real Leica II Luxus, apparently one of four made (the other three are MIA): Extremely Rare Gold-Plated Leica Luxus II Could Fetch $1.6 Million At Auction At first glance, it looks totally fake, but when you start looking at the details you realise it really is a Leica. The Luxus version of the Leica I is rather more common (95 made) and is presumably the camera that inspired the fakes though (like the Zorki in this thread) they are generally based on Soviet copies of the Leica II. As well as looking a bit like a Luxus, I suppose leaving the camera with bare brass also saves the faker re-finishing the top plate (they must remove some of the original chrome when they grind off the Zorki or FED engraving, so it's easier to strip off the lot and leave it that way). The Luxus models were gold-plated, but brass finish genuine Leicas also turn up, and we've seen a couple posted here. Typically the original finish has been removed for some reason (as with the fakes) but in one case the poster checked with Leica, and apparently the camera was originally shipped that way (a poor man's Luxus?).

The last one I bought (for a Fuji X100T) was a 'Crystal Clear' plastic protector by Expert Shield. It's been on for over 3 years (last year the camera was used pretty much every day) and I don't even notice it, which is really all I could ask.

Ouch! I guess that's why they sold standard and data versions rather than (as with the F100) an accessory data back. Incidentally, won't those screws in the ifixit link be JIS rather than Phillips?

The collectors of this stuff probably make special arrangements: