Two23

<p>I'll throw another factor in to consider. Since Nikon no longer gives independent shops access to parts, even broken Nikon gear has value on eBay. You might be ahead to sell yours for parts and go with a used D7000. I'm getting a chuckle out of those wondering if a DSLR can make it three years, four years, or ten years. Last weekend I ran around Chicago taking photos with a 70+ yr. old Leica, and one of my lenses was 80+ years old. All worked perfectly.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>I've been quiet, but that doesn't mean I've been sitting on my butt. A couple of weeks ago I went to the annual Center for Railroad Photography & Arts convention in Chicago. I always arrive on early Friday so I can run around down & ride the trains! I have a nice selection of cameras, including a year old Nikon D7100 with pro f2.8 zooms. What to choose? I brought my restored Leica IIIc (1942) with '40s vintage Leica lenses 28/35/50/90mm, along with some HP5. I love the little Leica! First stop downtown was Central Camera, where I fondled a near mint M2. Dang, I didn't realize they were so nice! The tag was $2,000, and it was hard for me to justify spending that for a pretty camera I would often use. I bought a few more rolls of HP5 and a roll of X3200 for use in the subways. I also talked to someone there who "knew" Vivian Maier.<br />It was lightly raining outside--perfect conditions! I don't get to do street photography in South Dakota very often, so I take full advantage of my trips to Chicago. I rode the Loop trains around some, shooting from the platforms. I also walked around a lot and even visited the Vivian Maier exhibit at the library. It was interesting! Not big, but interesting. <br />After the convention, I spent Sunday afternoon walking around, shooting another roll. The Leica is just great for this! It all fits into a LowePro Slim 300 bag--smaller than most women's purse. The shots inspired me to make my first video in several years. I picked "Take 5" by Dave Brubeck, recorded 1959. The minor key seemed to match the gritty feeling of downtown Chicago in the rain, and the relentless rhythm was a great match for the Loop trains as the banged around. It was a lot harder to make a video than I had thought, but I gave it my best effort. I'll take constructive criticism as I'd like to do some more and hopefully do a better job. What I was after was the FEEL of downtown Chicago, in the rain.<br> <p>I'm now thinking of trying New York City. The Leica will go too, of course!</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>I would level the camera in two planes, and use x2 two flash mounted on lightstands with umbrellas. The lens you have will work fine--your deficit is lighting.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>The original coatings on lenses, from the 1940s, is blueish purple. This is a single coating (mono coating) and is vaccuum applied magnesium flurite if my memory is correct. Multicoating didn't really get going until the 1970s. I mostly only collect uncoated lenses (pre-WW2) but do have a few single coated lenses from the 1940s, mostly Leica plus one Zeiss Tessar (on a Rolleiflex.)</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>The best choice is the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 if you are looking for something really wide. Having been to Iceland twice, really, just about any lens between 18--50mm is going to work. The Tokina would be great for cramped cities like Barcelona, and it's faster than anything Canon has.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>Nikon sets the price, and Amazon has to sell it for that. Nikon obviously doesn't want to sell many D300s.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p><<If you like going out in subzero weather, rain, sleet and snow and want to know your camera won't fizzle out on you, get a D300 or D300S>></p> <p>I live and photo in the Dakotas. Winter is my favorite time of year. The more extreme the cold, the more I like it. Mostly I am photo'ing at night long after the sun has retreated and the temperature has dropped like a rock into double digits below zero (F). Thirty mph winds drive the snow sideways with nothing to stop it for hundreds of miles. Ah-h-h-h-h.........I'm in my element! So is the D7100. It sits out on my tripod for hours at time. It handles everything the Dakotas and Minnesota can throw at it every bit as well as my D300 did.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>It's only a problem if your wife finds the packages on your doorstep before you do.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>Totally agree on bringing a back up body. When you're on an "important" trip and your camera goes down/gets stolen/drops off the edge of a waterfall, it will likely be very expensive to replace it if that's even possible. I too bring three cameras, although the third one is usually my Leica IIIc with four small lenses. Once, when I was in Iceland, I lost my 77mm polarizer. There was ONE camera store in Akureyi, the only town of any size on the entire north end of Island (~22,000 people.) Yes, they had a replacement filter, but with taxes etc. it was nearly $200! I ended up using my back up lens a lot because I had a spare (52mm) polarizer for it. As an owner of a D300, I'm betting Micheal sells the D300 and keeps the D7100 when he gets home.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>The D7100 plus 80-400mm VR-G is an awesome combo for wildlife--rocket fast AF and 24mp. You could resell when you're done with your trip.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>I'm surprised NIkon is suggesting using the TC-14Eiii with the 80-400mm VR-G. I wouldn't think that image quality would be all that good, but I have not tried it with the old TC-14 or (of course) the new one.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>S/b BNSF oil tanker train at Struble, Iowa. Camera: D7100. Lens: Darlot achromatic doublet, ~50mm f11, c.1895.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p> <div></div>

<p>Unfortunately, nothing here for me.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

Kent in SD<div></div>

<p>The great thing about ebay is as cool and "rare" as something seems, if you are patient another one will come along. Check the completed auction prices before you bid, to see what kind of a deal this is or isn't.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>From Kodak Panoram No. 1, c.1910. This is a fun camera to use!</p> <p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

<p>Agree it's a single coated post war lens. The purple tint gives it away.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>Ellis--<br /> I've been taking my little Leica IIIc with lenses 28/50/90mm on trips shooting FP4 and HP5 for the past two years. I'm heading to Chicago on Friday and only taking the Leica. There's something really cool about travel photos taken on b&w film, and I just love the little Leica. It's the original 35mm travel kit and still does the job quite well. On "major" trips abroad I also take the D7100 & D5100 for color images. The shots from the Leica are just as nice though. They have a timeless, classic feel to them. I understand the OP perfectly.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

Kent in SD<div></div>

<p>I get to Chicago a couple of times a year, and I too am fascinated by the urban neighborhoods. I've been using a Leica IIIc and sometimes a Voigtlander Bessa 6x9 to take b&w photos of what I see. I understnad the attraction perfectly. I have to wonder if the reason Maier didn't show her work was she was afraid of failure & rejection? Maybe she had experienced both when she was very little?</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>Another vote for the F100 instead of F4, mainly because of reduced bulk & weight. Remember, a lighter camera means you can get by with a lighter tripod too.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

Kent in SD<div></div>

<p>Really, only the OP can answer this as it all depends on what you photo, and how.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p><< If Canon, Nikon, or other companies beside Leica, start offering specialized models along these lines, it would seriously cut into the film camera usage. Then, even the 120 Twin Lens models and other 120 cameras will fall out of usage.>></p> <p>I think you totally miss the point why most are using older cameras. We are shooting b&w NOT because it's "hard" to get color film, but because it's period-correct for the camera. We like our Rolleiflexes and Leicas BECAUSE they are old. They give us a sense of connection to the past, of the photographers who once owned and were delighted by them. We like the challenge of having the skill to make images the same way they did 80 years ago. We aren't totally dependent on something electronic that calculates an exposure. We can do it for ourselves Our cameras were made by craftsmen, not robots in China. Our lenses were ground by hand, not by a machine in Thailand. These classic cameras are not a means to an end, the experience of using them is an end in itself. Note that sales for the b&w Leica digital have gone nowhere, while at the same time the classic Leicas continue to edge upwards on ebay. There is no emotional attachment to a Nikon made in 2014. There's a big personal attachment to a Derogy lens made in 1858.</p> <p>Kent in SD</p> <p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>If you actually need f1.8, then the Sigma 18-35mm is the logical choice. If you don't, then I wouldn't bother. I took a close look at that lens since I am a hard core night photographer. In the end I kept my Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 because it is more versatile and I don't shoot it at f2.8 very often, even at night. </p> <p>Kent in SD</p>