hil3

<p>Yep, now that we know that the camera is used, I'll go back to my original comments regarding current costs. My M7 was also purchased used. Summary: DX reader, free. MP viewfinder + CLA, $660.00. Time needed by Leica to perform the work, 11 weeks door-to-door. YMMV.</p>

<p>Good point about Leica Warranty. I've never had one of those. So disregard the "factor in" comments and buy this spankin' new baby loaded with a warranty pronto!</p>

<p>What depressing responses! Where is the love, indeed! I have an M7 and a Summicron 50. This is the best combination of body and lens in the Leica film stable. Period. At half price for NIB?<br>

The M7 with the .72 magnification and a 50mm lens is a match made in heaven. I own an M3, an M5, and an M6 as well. The M7 gets the most use - 80-90%. I only use the others when they need fondling. Especially the M5 - I really love the mechanical feel of the M5.<br>

My M7 has a serial number greater than the oft-mentioned 2885000 and it did <strong><em>not</em></strong> have the improved viewfinder and had the mechanical DX reader. I sent it to Leica to have it converted to the optical DX reader (a free upgrade still) and I had the MP viewfinder swapped in ($660.00, including adjusting the meter, the shutter and calibrating everything, complete CLA, etc, etc.) The view through the finder is great - clean sharp bright. The frame lines are luminous and distinct and thin - not a big fat distracting frame like on the M3 (I got to be one of the few people in the universe not in love with that viewfinder.)<br>

If the camera you are looking at does not have these upgrades, you may want to factor this in. My M7 was built in 2002, so I wanted it upgraded and restored to good-as-new. I sent it for the aforementioned work in December and got it back last week. So factor that in as well - 11 weeks. You also don't really need these upgrades. My non-MP finder flared a lot less than my M6 classic. In fact, I had to work really hard to make it flare - something that I could easily force my M6 and even my M3 to do (though rarely). The M5 is fairly flare resistant, also. Like the M3. The mechanical DX reader gave me no problems, other than grabbing the film canister a little too tight most of the time. I like the new optical reader. If I were to design the M7.1, it would not have a DX reader at all and everything else the same.<br>

The meter is fabulous. AE is highly reliable and very sensitive in incredibly low light. The AE rocks - makes all the difference in the world. My M7 is always on AUTO. If you get good results with the F3HP AE and slides, you'll improve your ratio of keepers by some margin. Google Leica M7 reviews and read up on them. Particularly useful and informative reviews are from Luminous Landscape, Photoethnography, Andrew Nemeth, and Steve Huff and even Ken Rockwell.</p>

When scanning, are you using the accessory that lets you scan a strip of negatives at one time? My experience is that the rollers that feed the film into the scanner leave horizontal scratches on the film.

 

I stopped using this attachment and instead use the filmstrip holder that inserts into the slide attachment and scan one frame at a time.

 

I also quit using print file sheets and use single strip pouches - they are much roomier and not tight to the negative.

 

Hil

I have one of the HK magnifiers and I have no issues at all with it. Paid $50 plus shipping of eBay and got it within 2 weeks. It threads into my M5 & M6 without any problems and seats well. It came with an nice little case, but does not have the little chain thingy.

 

 

Hil

Just two weeks ago, I put three rolls into my 4 roll tank. When it was time to pour out the developer, I took the lid off instead of the cap and then poured out the developer. Guess what happened to my 3 rolls of vacation shots! You'd never know I've been doing my own developing for 30 years. Smile, be happy.

 

Hil

What's worked for me over the last 35 years or so is to fog the lens with a breath and then wipe it off with a corner of my shirt. At least when no one is looking :o)

 

At other times, I use a Lenspen - maybe once a year or so. Mostly I just keep my fingers off the glass and a lens cap when not shooting. No filters.

I love my M5. It is one of the best 35mm cameras ever made, in my opinion. I have three cameras: M5, M6, and F2AS. I will never get rid of any one of them, but if I had to get rid of them, the M6 would be the first to go and the M5 the last.

 

Congradulations and enjoy a great user!

Do you mean the little plastic trim bit that is about 2 x 4 mm, or do you mean the whole lever? If it is the little plastic bit, it popped off my M5 a couple of years ago, but I found it and glued it back on. My M6's preview lever, though, (the entire thing which is a similar part to the self-timer lever on the M5) flew off a few years ago. I found it but tossed it as I did not realize what it was until it was too late. Don't really miss it so I have not done anything about it.

M5 50mm Summicron Fuji Astia 100F

I use an M6 and and M5 together. Only problem I ever have is I keep flipping the M6 over looking for the rewind crank.

 

If I had to get rid of one, I would keep the M5. Love the meter. I still have a 5-6 year stash of mercury batteries, but when I run out, I would convert the circuitry or use an adaptor like I do for my Gossen Luna Pro. Gossen sells one. I think it would fit in the M5, but I've never tried it.

 

Noise like mirror slap? Keep that rumor going. It may drop the prices enough so I can get another one.

 

Hil

For less than $250, Nikkormat FT3 and Series E 75-150. Completely manual, flash sync 1/125. Your 50 will work.

When I don't have a sharpie on me, which is usually, I count back sprocket holes from the end and crease the film. A crease on the leader always alerts me that I've already shot some frames on the roll.

 

Hil

M5 + 50 summicron = 90%

M6 Classic + 35 summicron = 10%

Journeyman, 2 M bodies, 5 lenses

 

Hil

Wow! I have a near mint Nikkormat FT3. I think I paid around $60 for it with a Nikkor 50/2 AIS on it. Came with the manual, too. It looked like it was never used (camera and manual).

 

I am going to go get it right now and fondle it - and I am definitely upgrading the gear bag.

 

Would it be prudent to cover the name plate with black gaffer's tape now?

 

(What I don't have is a box - Anyone have one for $500 or so? Gotta be mint, though!)

 

hil

Takes me a very long time. I usually develop the roll I just shot before I put the next one in ;o) Now, if there's anything worth printing...could be days, if not weeks!

 

Who was it that said "...if there's no film in the camera, there are no pictures worth taking?", or something to that effect. I know I've seen that quote in this forum before.

 

hil

I second the suggestion using an adaptor. Got one on my M5 and on my Gossen Luna Pro I bought new in the 70's. I like the fact that the adaptor lets you use non-mercury batteries and is not an alteration to the camera. Steps down the 1.5v battery to 1.35v, keeping the meters accurate. I bought the adaptor at the Gossen (Bogen Imaging) web site. Not cheap ($51), lasts forever.

 

http://www.bogenimaging.us/

 

BATTERY KIT / Cat. No: GO 4145

Sorry. Try again.

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1656672-lg.jpg"></center>

TX @400 w/R09

<center><img src="http://www.photo.net/photo/1656672"></center>

D.K.

 

Exclusive? Expensive? HaHaHaHaHa.

 

Compared to what? Here's my math -

 

All my Leica gear (M6, M5, 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/2, 90/2.8, 135/4) = What my wife spent buying disposable point-and-shoots over the last 6 years.

 

Sure she makes better pictures than I do, but 20 years from now, I'll still be able to make my happy snaps without having to spend another dime on gear. She can sell it to pay for my casket, if nothing else.

 

Exclusive? Who is left in the world that is impressed by a silly little film camera? Heck, wanna know what's more expensive and exclusive than getting a Leica? Buying and collecting - what did you call them? Oh yes - Pictures!

I'm interested in continuing this discussion, mostly because I kicked the idea around a couple of years ago. So is the idea to try and find a correlation between Rodinal and Calbe R09? And the main assumption is that R 1:25 equals R09 1:40? So the time for R x 1.6 = time for R09.

 

That assumtion holds for me. With TX@400, my times for R 1:25 and R09 1:40 are 5m30s and 8m30s respectively. That's a 1:1.55 ratio - close enough to 1:1.6. So with TX and my technique, R & R09 are identical, almost, at 1:40. From this (only) one data point, I could assume that I should be able to look up dilutions and times for TX/Rodinal in the Massive Development Chart and dilute R09 the same way and get almost identical results, no?

 

If this is true, then, my times for R 1:50 x 1.6 should be almost the same as for R09 1:80. This is where it falls apart. My time for R/50 is 12m20s; for R09/80 it is 17m. The ratio is now 1:1.38. This seems to indicate that as you dilute the solutions, R09 is more active than Rodinal.

 

Comments, more data?

I've used both. Haven't been able to find a mathematical correlation between the two and have tried. For instance, with TX at EI 200 and 20 deg, my time for R09 1:40 is 8m 30s; with Rodinal 1:50 it's 12m 00s; with Rodinal 1:25 it's 5m 30s. I haven't got results I liked at greater dilutions with either.

 

I lately prefer TX at EI400 with R09 1:40 20deg 11m. I use a plastic JOBO 2-reel tank, pre-soak for 1 minute in distilled, agitate for the first 30 sec and for 5 sec every minute thereafter. I've standardized on this because 11 minutes seem reasonable - less time too hectic, more time too boring and EI400 works almost always for me. I try to err on the side of over-exposure, but TX is very forgiving, right?

 

Can't say I see a difference between Calbe and Rodinal. I like the look of the grain and I like how my negs scan, PS and print with this routine. I get very similar results with HC-110 dil H, but prefer R09.

 

I can say that with R09 at 1:40, I don't get grain clumping that I see with Rodinal at dilutions greater than 1:50.

I did this for years and years with my four kids. At age 3, I imagine the kids are playing on a small field, so a long tele shouldn't be necessary. At first I used a 75-150 Series E, but found it a bit short much of the time and it was always set at 150. Later on picked up a 200/4 and it was ideal. I used an F2AS or a Nikkormat and fast film so I could shoot wide open. A monopod is handy. Pre-focus on a spot and wait for the action to get there.

 

If I were to do it all over again, I'd pick up a film camera with AE and a decent AF mid-range zoom, and just concentrate on the action. (That's not true - I am a luddite at heart, when it comes to photography.)

I just duplicated your problem on my FT2 by lifting up the roller on the right side, looking at the camera from the lens side.

 

Take a paper clip and lift up the silver metal clip just to the right of it. It will click into place. Works just fine.