rgerraty

<p>In twenty years with an M6 and nearly forty years with the an M2, I've had one misload on my M6 and none with the M2. I dismiss any suggestion of inferiority of manufacture of the M6. Some of the materials are probably superior with regard to the interaction of different metals etc. Doing it literally as the M6 manual does work, but I do the triple check method as described above.</p>

Great science here. Well done. I occasionally now have difficulty focussing with the M9, especially when I'm tired. I remember once my M5 RF vertical alignment was out just a little. While technically that needn't matter for focussing it did slow me down and was very distracting. Hope your x 1.25 proves satisfactory.

<p><a title="The Elms by Richard, on Flickr" href=" src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3927/15411052986_57e938ed18_z.jpg" alt="The Elms" width="640" height="426" /></a> Richmond grandeur. MM + 28 2.8 ASPH</p>

<p>Magnolia; Camellia</p><div></div>

Beautiful composition Robin.

<p>Art Deco. I never noticed the complexity of this entrance until the other evening, despite entering there most days in the last twenty years.</p> <p>Love that leaf and shadow Jim.</p><div></div>

The new Summarits are the same formula, just manufactured to tighter tolerances, apparently, to widen the maximum aperture slightly.

Even in A mode you can keep some manual control by using a half-press of the shutter release to lock exposure at a desired level, chosen from within the final frame or near it.

Well put Alastair. "Noticeably thinner than its digital counterparts." Wait a minute, is Leica conceding that the M9 and especially the M240 are '"fatter"? It is remarkable that after releasing a metered M2 just short of 50 years after the original M2 release (the MP) we can now see a market savvy company on top of the world release for sale at a premium the same configuration and technologically advanced item that they released 56 years earlier. If the M2 frame lines could be swapped in I'd be in heaven with this new camera.

<p>280SL</p><div></div>

I'm sympathetic to your idea here. I hate the idea of the burden I'll leave my family knowing how valuable my gear might be and how precious it has been to me. I've been keeping boxes and receipts for years in case my children need to sell my stuff for money after I crack my skull skiing or something. I now hope that I'll get rid of most of the cameras and lenses in my 70s while I'm well and just keep the M2 and the collapsible 50 Elmar. And maybe not even that.

<p>I went from 35 to 25 and enjoyed using that. I got the ZM Biogon first. Brilliant lens. For compactness I also got the little VC Colour Skopar, but mine flares a bit too readily. Very handy to keep in the bag. I loved the 21 Zeiss 4.5 which is great for black and white architecture shots. I did not think I would ever get a 28, although I was never convinced that it was too close to the 35 focal length. In the end I did get the tiny and relatively cheap (esp second hand, flawless) 28 2.8 ASPH. Before long two things happened. First, I began to see why some wise heads reckoned a 50 and a 28 is the perfect kit; and I stopped carrying the 21 in the bag all the time. The latter was because for casual architecture shots the 28 usually will do. I recently took a trip to Europe with just the 50 and the 28 and I wanted for nothing. I could and have shot all day with the 25 or the 21, which is a great education. If I was dropping one focal length now it would be the 25. But I have never got rid of a lens.</p>

<p>A straight house behind it.</p><div></div>

<p>A little crooked house</p><div></div>

<p>Congratulations. You have some fantastic gear there. Set the 21 as a 21 2.8 pre-ASPH: it seems to cut the magenta edge cast best.</p>

<p>I am happy with the M9 and MM: I don't need the complex offerings of the M, and I would not want the greater depth of the M body. With the Monochrom and ME being current products, the longevity of the M9 is longer than it might otherwise be. Great camera.</p>

<p>The end of winter</p><div></div>

<p>The Leica M9 manual warns that the Tele Elmar can't be focussed reliably at f4. I have not found this to be a concern and have used it on the M9 and the Monochrom. Great lens. The focus on mine is quite stiff, but I find that makes accurate focussing easier. I use the SHOOC external finder for framing and the combination is great.</p>

<p>And second one.....</p><div></div>

<p>My daily walk near work. Early blossom.</p><div></div>

Try a new set of batteries. See if you can find SR44s which don't have a drop off in charge in the second half of their life. Find a manual and read it. The film Leica is a mechanical device, the M7 slightly less so. Turning the shutter speed dial to OFF only ensures the meter is off. The film transport still works so the shutter can still be cocked. More mechanics would have been required to make OFF prevent shutter firing. Hopefully there is nothing seriously wrong with your camera, but the worry is that there is a short circuit somewhere and the top might need to come off under the hand of someone very competent.

<p>St Patrick's Cathedtral, Ballarat</p><div></div>

<p>1. I am not sure.<br />2. Maybe the new battery is a dud.<br />3. Those ccontacts are gold.<br />4. Never hurts to reread the manual.<br> .</p>

<p>I love your name for this condition. You could also consider episodic blinkorrhoea, paroxysmal blinkorrhoea, or acute intermittent blinkorrhoea to paraphrase the medical nomenclature of a number of conditions. Meanwhile there are three main considerations of the cause: incipient battery failure; dirty gold contacts between the door and the body; and the ISO selector not sitting properly at the selected detente. The last has been the cause of this for me, after selecting a new ISO. You need to move it and then reselect your preferred ISO trying to ensure the dial rests right on the proper point. Good luck.</p>

<p>Low tide, Catseye Beach, Hamilton Island, Queensland</p><div></div>