z1x4y7

If noise is your only criterion, then, in my experience, any of the

TLR's that I have used are much more silent. My Mamiya

Universal is even more quiet than my cords, flex or C330. I agree

that the rangefinders are easier to focus with wideangles in dim

light, IMHO.

<p>

I must admit, the last time I used my M3, it was totally silent.

Everyone commented on it. Turns out that the shutter had quit

working. ;o)))

<p>

Art

Ken:

<p>

<b> 1) Marketing. 2) Production consistency = lower production

costs.</b>

<p>

I would guess that those make sense. Since, I mostly use an F2

with a non-metering prism, I hadn't considered the matrix

metering connection. I wouldn't have the courage to try a flash

set-up with a 16 mm lens on a regular basis.

<p>

The question still remains: Is this a good way to design a lens?

It is certainly different than the way Leica has done it. [Let me add

that I am not a real fan of the Nikon lenses in AF mount. That is

just a personal impression].

<p>

Thanks,,,

<p>

Art

Paulo:

<p>

<b> <FONT COLOR="red"> FM2N + Nikkor 35-70 f/3.3-4.5</FONT> </b>

<p>

I have both the FM2 and FE2's as backup Nikons. The FM series is a

much better camera IMHO. I am not impressed with the lens mentioned; I

get better results with the prime lenses. It would make a reasonable

starting lens.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,

Al:

<p>

Most of my experiences with Sigma match yours [i haven't had much luck

with the one Sigma Zoom that I have]; but there are exceptions. I have

about 14 Nikon fixed length lenses between about 16 and 300 mm. I

have one Sigma; a 135 mm. This particular lens is better than my Nikon

lens of the same focal length. In addition, I have a Sigma

85/1.8/t-mount for my Minolta [purchased in the 60's]. It has awful

flare problems, but used properly, it is outstanding. Otherwise, I

have also been unsuccessfu

Mac:

<p>

I have done it for some time [wow, we are talking decades now, I am

getting old; it seems just yesterday that I had to coat my own plates

in the tent and watch out for the Indian attack]. It is easy to do. It

just depends on the time required. If your time doing other things is

more valuable; pay someone else to do it. If not, you can do it

yourself.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,

It is on LUSENET which can be accessed at the top of the page; or:

<p>

<a

href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=HTML%20Playgro

und"> HTML playground</a>

<p>

That should do it.

<p>

Z

Al:

<p>

I have actually given your question some thought. If I had to start

over from nothing, what would I get. No question: Mamiya TLR. I have a

C33 and a C330. They didn't cost that much; so they have been with me

everywhere. Sailing on the big salt pond in a small sail boat for

weeks; tops of mountains; climbing glaciers; across the desert; and it

goes on. Properly used, they are great pieces of equipment. Mine still

work as well as the day I bought them.

<p>

If I had one system, that would be it. [from the files of a 40 y Leica

M user].

<p>

Best wishes,,

Paul:

<p>

If you haven't done this much before, there is a site on Phil's board

called HTML playground. It is there for people to try these things out

before driving the site administrator here nuts.

<p>

<b> <FONT COLOR="red"> Give it a try. </FONT> </b>

<p>

It is there for that purpose. Have fun.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,

<p>

Z

Paul:

<p>

Its ok. The link to your thread should be typed in as follows:

<p>

&lt a

href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003

Bc5" &gt Hazy Lenses &lt /a &gt

<p>

The only space should be between a and href. I have spaces between the

< symbols and what follows because I am using an escape so that the <

symbols will show up on the screen.

<p>

I'm using a G4/500 with netscape and IE.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,

Paul:

<p>

You need to write out the HTML command in the dialogue box. By the

way, why do you have a colon in front of the http. If you have

netscape go to view and look at this thread under page source [there

is a similar feature with IE. See how the link to your hazy lens

thread was formed.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,

<p>

Z

Al [didn't you run for president] Smith:

<p>

I am probably not the person to answer this question. I doubt that I

have the equipment of others who post here. In 35 mm, I have Minolta,

Nikon and Leica. Medium format: Mamiya TLR, Universal, Hasselblad,

Rollei TLR; 4 x 5, Arca Swiss; 8 x 10, Deardorff. I've always just

considered them tools. Each has some function that is better than

another for a specific task. I lack emotional attachment to any of

them.

<p>

Now if you ask which I like when I just want to go out and have fun

doing photography. 35mm; my old DSM3; I just like it. Focal lengths,

35 f2, 50f2 and 90 f2.8 [unlike you I love the 90]; longer or shorter

than these, or macro, I go with Nikon or Minolta. Medium format:

Mamiya TLR; why, I don't know, we just get along. Large format;

Deardorff, once again we get along.

<p>

Sometimes you just get along with a piece of equipment and sometimes

you don't. I must admit that their are situations where I have found

the Leica lenses to be too contrasty and have gone with other cameras.

<p>

Your question doesn't have meaning for me. You would have to pry my

DSM3 from my cold dead hands. So there may be a wee bit of emotional

attachment for just one.

<p>

Best

Your link is:

<p>

<A

HREF="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003

Bc5"> Fungal lenses</A>

<p>

If this is what you want, you can see page view.

<p>

Z

Paul:

<p>

I'm not sure what you mean. It is just straight HTML

<p>

&lt a href="http,etc" &gt site name &lt /a &gt

<p>

You may mean something else.

Bob:

<p>

Speaking as someone who has a PhD in chemistry, I can confirm that

your statement can't be supported. Even so, It matches my experience.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,

<p>

Z

My experience is the same as John's. How much a given filter fades is

determined by what part of the spectrum the dye absorbs. No need to go

into the chemistry here. Having said that, I still have some 40 y old

filters that work fine [both kinds]. Probably not the same as when

they were new, but still do the job. I've found scratching to be a

bigger worry.

<p>

Best wishes,,,

Well you learn something every day. I have been in Portland 5 times

this winter. I wasn't aware that they had a sun <b> <FONT COLOR="red">

:^)</FONT> </b>

<p>

I know that Mt Hood is there; I skied it. I've just never seen it.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,,

<p>

Z

Neil:

<p>

I checked ebay. I know the folks selling this. I think I'll pass and

look elsewhere.

<p>

Best wishes,,,

<p>

Z

Thanks for the help. I will give it a try. I got it at a rural estate

auction. The guy said no one around here has any use for an old

fashioned wooden camera. I have to get rid of it. Give me $50 and it

is yours.

<p>

To be honest, I've been using a monorail and I'm going to order a

4 x 5 pocket expedition this year. I really don't know what Deardorffs

go for. I just thought it would be nice to get it working. I could use

it from time to time.

<p>

Once again,

<p>

Thanks,

By the way:

<p>

From the information here:

<p>

<A HREF="http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/Deardorffcam/indexa.html">

Deardorffcam</A>

<p>

it was made in the late 50's.

<p>

Once again,

<p>

Thanks,,,,,,

<p>

Z

I bought a used 8 x 10 Deardorff way back in 1977. It was in like new

condition [bellows were and still are tight] and included a lens

[fungal damage to the elements; will need to be replaced], a back, and

a nice wooden tripod. At the time I didn't buy it to use [i had other

equipment]. I bought it because they only wanted $50 for the whole

outfit. I figured that I would get it operational sometime in the

future.

<p>

Twenty three years later is "sometime". The one problem is that it

came with a 4 x 5 reducing back. I would like to find an 8 x 10 back.

So far I haven't had that much luck. You folks know more about this

stuff than I do. Got any suggestions of where to look.

<p>

Thanks in advance,,

I haven't kept up with Leica prices. I looked the other day and was

astounded. About 10 or 15 years ago I bought a used one. It was an

M-3DS made in the late 50's. It looked nearly unused and came in the

original box, etc. With a one year old Black 50 f2 [German], it set me

back $500. I also got a year old 90 f2.8 for $500. Both were sold on

consignment from the same person [someone that I knew]. I have used it

heavily over those years and it is still like new. Amazing where the

prices have gone.

<p>

Best wishes,,

Bob:

<p>

<b> <FONT COLOR="green"> Everyone of the answers above reflect the

lens best for the responder and since everyone does their own thing

the answers are not meaningful for the person asking the

question.</FONT> </b>

<p>

I couldn't disagree with you more. The question did not include

specifics. Didn't even mention format. Hence, the answers are very

well suited to the question. If the original poster had wanted

specific information, he would have asked a specific question.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,,

Or try:

<p>

<A HREF="http://www.schusterphoto.com/found.htm"> Hose</A>

<p>

For a picture of a garden hose or a weird snake.

Chad:

<p>

It is dry out there. <b> <FONT COLOR="red"> Read Fire Danger</FONT>

</b> From my 1/2 lifetime in the west experience, they might start to

enforce the bucket, saw, shovel requirement to go onto national lands.

See what the rules are for the area.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,,

Thanks Bob:

<p>

<b> <FONT COLOR="green"> The camera is as sturdy as the "regular "

Technical Field,</FONT> </b>

<p>

This was a major concern since I have never seen one. I am presently

out of the country and I should sign-off before I break my host

[connect time is no so cheap in some places].

<p>

Once again thanks.

<p>

Best wishes,,,,,,