john_philllips

<p>Oh, and better bokeh</p>

<p>I went down this path in the first place after all but buying the new 85mm Nikkor macro outright, then reading some surprisingly lukewarm reviews of it contrasted to generally laudatory comments on the Tokina. The lines drawn by Ken Rockwell were particularly bright, although he wasn't the only one. The factors for opting for Tokina were, in order:<br>

1. Superior resolution, longer focal length, wider aperture<br>

2. Better build quality<br>

3. Adaptability to full frame (if I ever get that D700 I've been jonesing for)<br>

4. Almost $100 savings<br>

The Nikkor's VR feature (Tokina has no image stabilization) wasn't important enought to me to offset any of the factors above. Along the way I read a number of comments re: the Tokina vs the Tamron (you can find them googling Tokina/Tamron macro reviews). People came down on both sides, but I was persuaded by the consistency and number of positive posts by Tokina owners. </p>

<p>After reading reveiws of the pros and cons of the Tokina 100mm macro vs. the 85mm Nikkor macro for my D300, I pulled the trigger on the Tokina. I have to add my voice to others who have done the same who are very pleased with the build quality and performance of this lens. I do not miss Nikkor's lens stabilization at the magnifications I typically shoot at, and am delighted with the Tokina's color and resolution. Carry a lightweight monopod at a minimum and you will be rewarded with razor sharp images of this whole new dimension....</p>

<p>Just saw this. If the flaw is as minor as it sounds, and it is on the front element, shoot a number of pics and critically look for any flaw to the image when magnified. It is unlikely you will see anything, but if you do at magnification highly unlikely you will see a problem at normal image sizes. A pro friend of mine gave me some of his old fast Canon FD lenses and they are BEAT. Scratches, mars even one chip on the front elements, and the images are fine. Barring, any real effect on images, and therefore, I would keep the lens and not spend a cent on it. Call it character and save your money for your next lens and/or body. A ding on the rear element could make a difference </p>

<p>I just returned from Hong Kong and found camera prices to be comparable to, and even more expensive than here in the States -- went for used equipment too!</p>

<p>The rubber grips adhesive on my 3.5 year old D300 started letting go all at once this Fall. Tacking back down wasn't an option as they had also stretched beyond their recesses in the body. They were worn, but not worn out. I ordered a partial replacement set from Nikon for $71 (didn't include the bottom piece), finished peeling off the old rubber, cleaned off the old adhesive from the body and applied the new pieces which fit perfectly of course. I had to return the back piece because it was for the D300s, which is smaller. The adhesive on the rubber is like a sticky two sided tape. It holds fine when new (if absolutely all oils are cleaned from the body surface) but clearly has a finite life. When I have 40 year old Nikons with the good condition leather still adhering fine, I find having to pay for replacing rubber covers before they are totally worn out, after only 3+ years, adding insult to injury. I've talked to owners of D200s and D700s who have had the same complaints, and there are posts on this forum dating back to 2007 so this issue has clearly been around awhile. I haven't heard Canon owners complaining about the same thing. So if you are listening, Mr. Nikon, I find the rubber grips on your higher end digital SLRs to be substandard. I'm sure its not the first you are hearing of it, but after all these years, what if anything do you intend to do about it? I'm sure all digital Nikon owners would like to know.<br>

For those in a similar situation, below is a link to a San Diego company selling complete replacement grip sets for $61, versus a partial set for $71 from our friends at Nikon.<br>

<a href="http://www.procamerarepair.com/NIKON-D300-4-PIECE-GRIP-RUBBER-SET_p_718.html">http://www.procamerarepair.com/NIKON-D300-4-PIECE-GRIP-RUBBER-SET_p_718.html</a></p>

 

<p>My two cents tho you probably made a decision by now. I'd opt for the E2 over the F. optically it is the same camera. The F meter is probably not accurate and all the interconnect mechanics of the F are interesting but not particularly useful as a result. In paring down my Rolleis from 6 to 3, I sold my 3.5F and kept an 3.5 E2, a 2.8 E and a 3.5 E3 since I use a handheld meter for all three anyway.</p>

<p>Very happy with my D300 and waited a long time for the convergence of performance, features, user friendliness, image quality and price before popping for it. It will serve me well for many years to come and it will take more than a few more MPs and a video feature to upgrade and full frame has no immediate appeal.</p>

<p>Owned the 18-200 on a D300 for a year and a half now think it's a great walkabout lens. Sometimes wish I had a true macro, sometimes a longer lens sometimes a faster lens, but for 80+% of the shooting I do it is a very versatile, satisfying performer. </p>

I inherited this 35mm lens. Haven't shot with it yet. What is its

reputation? Worth keeping? thx.

Andy - Never shot Olympus before and lookng forward to the results. So far of all the kits I'm most impressed by the color saturation and resolution of the Canon FD 1.4 standard lens on the F-1. Wow.

 

I'm kind of done now collecting the lead Japanese cameras. I'll pass on the pricier Nikons, Contax's etc. Focused on getting a good condition body and standard lense and case if possible for the Pentax, Olympus, Minolta, Canon and Nikormat (although the OM-1 is coming with a 35mm 2.8 lens). Inherited a really nice Takumar 300mm and 100mm macro and it was cheaper to buy a beautiful condition black bodied Spotmatic SPII body ($67) than a lense adapter. The Konica AutoReflex T with standard and 35mm Hexanon lenses, case and manuals in pristine condition was $56. Taken back to 1971 $ that's like -- nuthin'. My son is taking beautiful pics with my 35 year old srt so they will last forever if taken care of

Since the cost of these vintage SLRs is so attractive now, I've decided to add one of every major SLR brand representative symbolic of its heyday in the 70s. So far I have my original SRT-101, a Nikkormat Ftn, a Spotmatic SPII, a Konica Auto Reflex T and a Canon F-1 first generation. I use them all. Each is unique and endearing in its own way. Very much look forward to my first OM-1, purchased but not received yet.

Thanks all. the jeweler idea is a good one. I have the eye and basic skill, but not the tools. I've done some minor surgery practicing on older parts cameras with some success that no doubt could be better with the right tools, surfaces etc. thx.

Maralian is close and so has done my work. Cheapest tweak has been $150. Full CLA with a minor repair was $400. Like FLeenor he is also a one man shop, so how he can turn around a camera in a week and Harry needs 3 months is a puzzle. He installed a bright screen, Maxwell I think, and it is a noticable difference in ease of focusing. But as pointed out earlier, it is not essential to good functioning and pictures, and should be considered a luxury not a necessity that is worthwhile if you can justify the expense, but not essential.

My 2 cents, 6 Rolleis later. If you owned a beater BMW and needed extensive dealer repairs, you'd still have to pay those prices if you wanted to keep the car. If you are fundementally happy with what you have, spend the $200 to fix it. Those are necessary periodic sunk costs no matter what you pay for the camera. If would rather spend that money to upgrade your camera and if money is less of an object, sell it, spend the premium to get a prettier camera, spend another $300-400 for a full CLA you need anyway to get it completely right and enjoy the camera for another 5-10 years.

Any services out there that specialize in taking dents out of brass bodied

cameras like my SRT 101? Thanks for any ideas. Mine is a black body.

I use a 70's vintage Gossen Luna Pro. the last two rolls that came back,both

shot very early morning before the sun was up, were underexposed by 2 stops at

least, yet I know I was very careful to use the given exposure on the meter.

Questions: can the calibrations of these meters go out? If so, can they be

recalibrated, and if so, by whom and at what cost? thanks much for insights.

PS - B&H price for a chrome 90mm Elmarit is $1,595. So $1200 doesn't sound so bad for a new lens.

Alas, change is hitting home. After 30 years, ye olde local photo

store is calling it quits. With film sales and processing down close

to 50% and people buying off the internet, Bob can no longer afford

to stay in business. Leica burdened him with too much of an

inventory requirement. The local market, though affluent, was too

limited to support it so he gave Leica up. He does have a new in the

box 2.8 Elmarit M in chrome he's willing to sell for $1,200. What a

jewel. Is it tempting enough of a discount to break the piggy bank?

Re: original question on separation...separation usually gives some hint at the edges so shop carefully. There are plenty of R'flexes of both lens types that are nearing 55 years old that show no signs of separation and likely won't for years to come if properly taken care of and kept out of high heat situations. You are over anticipating a problem that will likely not occur if you purchase wisely. And if two years down the road KAZAAAAAM!, you have seperation, well that's why God made Focal Point.com

Did (does) Leica make two versions of the 2.8 Elmarit 19mm, one with

and one without three internal filters controlled by a ring on the

lense, or do they all have the three internal filters? If there are

two versions, is there any difference in sharpness, desirability

etc? thx

Thanks again for the explanation. I will keep at it and hope for the best. Are replacement screws available do you know?

Actually it is the earlier one with the slot head screws. but why is the value any different than a later version 101?

Went to repair a dinged top cover on my SRT 101 and found that the

two back screws were held fast for no obvious reason. In any event, I

sheared off the heads of both trying to get them out. I got the

cover off ok and now have to deal with the sheared screws. Any

thoughts (short of professional intervention)to getting the little

guys out without buggering the threaded holes in the frame? thanks

for any advice.

For those particularly in the East looking for Rollei repair, Krikor

Maralian, formerly the chief Rollei TLR repair technician of MARFLEX,

has become the authorized (in the East anyway) Rollei repair guy with

the closing of MARFLEX in 2005. Krikor operates out of his store

KRIMAR PHOTO SHOP, 1058 Broadway, Elmwood Park, NJ 07407, 201 796

0554. His work is well known among NYC photographers. He's fast

offers the gamut of CLA to sophisticated repair.