randy_samos

The photographer in the photo you linked to looks to be using an F2. (I don't believe the F6 has the end pockets.)

An F2 may carry all you want - I have one, and can carry an EOS3 with a 135/2 attached, a strobe, and 5-6 more lenses. Certainly, I could make room for an M body with a 35 or 50 on it if I pruned down how many SLR lenses I threw in.

First - set the shutter speed on that camera after winding to the next frame.

The slow speed knob on the front is held in place by way of a small latch at the top that settles into a small notch on the dial. Pull the little latch straight up towards the top of the camera, and you should be able to turn the slow speed dial.

To use slow speeds, wind the camera and set the shutter speed on the top to it's slowest speed. Then - pulling up on the "latch" at the top of the slow speed dial, rotate that dial to get the speed you want.

To go back to higher speeds, rotate the front slow speed dial back to it's latched position.

I've found I like the Billingham Hadly best for the M stuff. I carry an original Hadley with Two M bodies (one with a 35, the other with a 90) on the ends, and a 15, 28, & 50 in the middle. The two large outside pockets easily hold the three f's (film, filters, flotsam).

I like the bags shape and how it lays close while I carry it. Build quality is 2nd to none also.

/r

I'm using an older Polaroid Sprinstan 35+. It works pretty well with the stock software, but I've been meaning to see if Vuescan supports it.

I do all sizing, etc in Photoshop. I've got a two monitor setup so that the tools are on a secondary monitor, leaving the entire main display for the image. Speeds up a lot of work. Like all the dusting I have to do because I don't have ICE.

Mark -

I'm so sorry for you and yours. Thank you for sharing your situation with us. And your advice on photos is absolutly right. I'm having a bit of trouble composning myself right now. Know that many of us are sharing your sad moment with you.

Take care, and take your pictures.

I know that in some circles it can be sacrilege to suggest this, but have you taken a look at a CV finder? I've not seen the 21 but have heard it's pretty good. Cheap too at about $150 new.

Just a thought.

My goodness.

There we were, having a nice objective discussion on the subjectivity of someone's statements. I go to a couple of meetings, take the long drive home and come back to a free for all with people bordering on the edge of flinging outright insults at each other.

Gotta love the Leica forum. And if you don't like any of that, we have beef too. You guys are too much fun.

/r

For starters, most of these methods work in the same way. They are designed to move the lens away from the body enough to do some level of magnification.

1: Auto Extension tubes. Just a metal tube with whatever connectivty it needs to couple the aperature and whatever else the body needs to see from/do to the lens. They work just fine, but if you're not metering TTL, then you need to compensate for the extension on your own. Also - if you want to change magnification or focus at infinity, you need to remove the tube.

2: Helicoid Extension tube - This is an auto extension tube that adjusts in length. No need to change it out for another if you want to change magnification. Still need to remove it if you want infinity.

3: Macro lens - best solution. Mostly, a lens optimized for close focusing that has a built in helicoid extension tube. Though - it will focus at infinity as it is.

/r

Roger -

<p>

Wow. I have to agree with you. I hate that. No - not that it's <i>you</i> I'm agreeing with, but that I have to agree that an objective argument can be made for subjective reasoning. But you're right. It can. I do it all the time. I'm really not anywhere nearly a good enough photographer to justify owning a Leica (much less three of them) based on needing it as a tool. But I do manage to justify it somehow.

<p>

Unfortunatly, being the argumentative sort I need to point out that subjective response being an objective reason to do something a certain way is a very personal one. My feelings on something have nothing at all to do with reality in your world. (Please - just trust me on that.) Therefore, that I might feel a given camera is a <i>mere</i> appliance doesn't make it so for everyone. Just for me.

<p>

I still believe though that the PIQ (Poster In Question) was simply stating his opinion on subjectivity vs objectivity, and got jumped on for having a dissenting opinion.

<p>

Ok. I'm reaching out too far on this one. And I didn't answer this thread just to "prove Bob wrong". I just didn't read the PIQs statements as though as though he was trying to invalidate somebody's feelings. Just taking exception to what he seemed to feel were statements of black and white facts.

<p>

/r

Actually Bob, I couldn't find where the original poster of the 'part 2' thread said "I think" or "this may not make sense...". Certainly, one could read it that way. Or, I can see how one (esp if it was somebody who specilized in the picking of nits) could easily read the post as though somebody were talking about facts.

Yes, yes - I know. Feelngs and emotions are real. I have them, and I can talk about those feelings and emotions as though they are facts, because they are. They are *my* facts, but that makes them no less real. But they are my own personal reality, and have nothing at all to do with the physical world. Doesn't make them wrong - but that doesn't make them right either. They just are.

While we both know that it was only an opinion, I can easily see how somebody might read a statement like "The Hexar is an appliance." as a statement of fact, not one of feelings or thoughts.

I think it's completely possible that the poster we're talking about here misunderstood the original poster, and pulled out his 'skeptics' soap box. But even on a 2nd read I can see how the post would have been very easy to misunderstand.

/r

I had been reading the "part 2" version of this thread, and I believe I know which poster and what comments were made that inspired you to write this. Maybe I should have spoken up in that thread, but I didn't. And this one is allowing me another opportunity to share my thoughts on it.

<p>

I do NOT believe that the poster in question had any problems with people having emotional reasons for shooting Leicas. He never said that - at least not in any of the responses I read from him. What <i>I believe</i> he did was to take exception of somebody talking about emotional reasons for using Leica, but talk about them as though they were objective reasons.

<p>

I agree with him. I know many of my own justifications for owning and using Leicas are emotional ones. But I'll not kid myself into thinking that makes them objective reasons. Nothing could be less true. His was a discussion of the difference between objectivity, and subjectivity. Not the legitimacy of liking a camera for a given reason.

<p>

He was just trying to say that we shouldn't use subjective value judgements as though they were objective.

<p>

Never did I read where he had a problem with people having an emotional attachment to a camera.

<p>

/r

For the life of me, I can't remember which model I've got - it's the older one with four leg sections. I bought it to have a travel tripod, and it works <i>very</i> well for that. But - it's not the most stable tripod out there. With my camera bag on it though, it's certainly stable enough to justify bringing it along. Light enough and short enough (with the 4 leg sections) to always bring it on trips. FWIW I've banged it about quite a bit, and not yet had any problems like fracturing of the carbon.

<p>

But when it's not too much a hassle, I bring the Bogen 3221 along instead.

<p>

A short story on Hakuba service - I bought my tripod from a local dealer. The only one they had was the one in the display rack, and couldn't find the box or anything else that went with it. One of the items missing was a short column that was supposed to be included. I got ahold of Hakuba customer service to find out how I could buy another, and what it would cost. I was going out of town in two weeks and wanted it for the trip.

<p>

They (Hakuba CS) asked for my address and sent me one <i>right away</i> at no charge to me. No questions, no charges, no delays. Very nice.

<p>

So - overall I've been happy with the Hakuba for what I got it for. It's not an all things to all situations tripod, but very nice as a travel tripod for a reasonable price.

<p>

/randy

When I went on a mission to buy an M6, color is something that never even entered the equation. All my newer lenses are black, my older ones are chrome.

First deal I found acceptable was on a chrome body, so there I have it. No problems, no worries.

Now, I have a black M4-P, and a chrome M6. So no matter what I wear, I can bring the appropriatly colored Leica along to complete the ensamble.

Chip - The black M7s wont wear to have the neat brass edges. That will only happen to a painted body. And though the M7 has a brass top, both silver and black finishes are chrome (normal production).

/randy

I suspect it wouldn't be too difficult to get enough people from photo.net forums to pony up $100/print up front. Maybe get enough money together for him to find the space he needs to set up and get running again. At least to store his negatives.

I know for sure I'm not the only one here that would kick in $100.

/r

Hi Hodo -

I'm only aware on the price this model has brought on the big auction site, and I suspect that's only a vague reflection of what they may actually be worth. I bought one last year myself for around $460. It was in what KEH would rate as 'BGN' condition. Some cosmetic flaws but nothing major and it's functionally just fine.

Just either yesterday or today I saw one that looked like EX+ condition go for almost $800.

Both that lens, and mine came with original box, paperwork, hood, and caps.

So - take all that for what it's worth. I don't know what 'green' condition is, but I think I got a good deal on a nice lens. I'm not so sure the one that went for $800 today was such a great deal, but I'm not a collector.

Randy

Scary stuff Mark.

/r

Bad news Johann. And you're right ... it could have been a LOT worse than it was. Now maybe next time you go into someplace to shop you'll have that Crumpler on your shoulder instead of in the car.

I'd hate to read about your Leicas going awol someday.

Ah-ha - Looks like Stuart had the answers.

Ok. I'll shut up now.

/randy

I thought that was a more current lens than that. When did the Aspherical come out?

I don't read German, and I can't tell from the picture if it's a "special" lens. Doesn't look like it though. The bidding closed at only $200 or so more than you can buy one brand new out of New York for.

Randy

Look for bay 1 jewelery for that body.

If I'm not mistaken, the focusing screen on that one may well be better dealt with by a proper camera tech. Keep in mind this is coming from a guy who's scared to get near any of his cameras with anything sharper than he'd stick in his ear.

/randy

Hi Frank -

<p>

I've not even looked at the Rollei until this post. It sure <i>does</i> look like a Bessa R2. Maybe with a bit nicer upholstery and a cooler name, but I can't see any real external differences. Same selector switch on top for brightline selection, same short base rangefinder, etc.

<p>

Now - let's give Rollei the benefit of the doubt and assume that their 40mm lens is as good as something like, say ... Leica glass (Not a big stretch of the imagination - if Rollei really made it, or had Zeiss make it.) The Leica 50mm/2.8 Elmar costs $695 (B&H) new. So let's give Rollei $700 for the 40mm/2.8 Sonnar.

<p>

That puts the Rollei rangefinder body at $1195. (again B&H)

<p>

Hmmm. I must to be missing something here. That camera seems to be an expensive German knockoff of an inexpensive Japanese camera.

<p>

Yes - that seems a <i>very</i> high price to me. You could (rather easily) get a used but nice condition M6, and a 50mm/2 Summicron for less.

<p>

Randy

<center>

<img src=http://samos.lighthunters.net/temp/friends/friendly.jpg>

</center>

<center>

<img src=http://samos.lighthunters.net/temp/friends/friends.jpg><br>

<i>sorry - not leica</i>