jorge

Yet another vote for Lutz's Sling. I've got one in each of my M's. Never felt more secure. OTOH, I'm a bit weary about my M2's lugs lateral strength which reportedly is not on par with latter models. On a M6 it should be all right, tho. I've never heard a bad comment about this gadget.

I shoot B&W [film] because I like B&W photos.

James, I am another satisfied owner of the Voigtländer 21. It's pretty good even wide open and I can handhold it fairly at 1/8", specially if I lean against something. For the small percentage of shots maed with it, it fills my needs perfectly. As an added bonus, it's a tiny lens and it occupies minimum space in my bag.

Should have said "If Leica and I are still around...".

If Leica is still around by the time I turn 60 (Feb 2007), I shall treat myself with one "a la carte" engraved "Jorge M. Treviño 60er Geburtstag goldenen Jubiläum", with matching aspherical Summilux. I hope I can afford it, I know I deserve it... :-)

Paul, good! Jot down my phones and let me know when your next visit will be. Although I live and work in Uruapan, 270 km from Guadalajara, two of my daughters live there and I try to visit as often as possible. Lots of school buddies there too so actually I feel very much at home there.

Paul,

 

>> Guadalajara <<

 

I's a pity we probably won't have a chance to meet. I shall be traveling to Guadalajara this Thursday and leaving from there for Miami early on Friday. Back to Guadalajara on the 26th. If by any chance you will be there on those dates, call me.

 

My Guadalajara home phone is (33)3620-6853, my mobile is 4525260600. It's based in Uruapan so from Guadalajara you have to dial long distance.

 

OTOH, I'll try to ring Al K. for a coffee or beer while in Miami.

Guys, you've given me a ton of advice and a lot of thought food. I think I'll settle on four lenses and two bodies, plus maybe a small flash, all crammed in either a Billingham L2 or a Hadley. Both are well worn out and fairly soiled so as not to cause lust from a thief.

 

Lenses will be 21/4, 35/2, fast 50, and 75/2.5 (unfortunately I don't own a 90 although I have an 85/1.5 Summarex but it's humongous).

 

Of course I plan on taking them ashore.

 

Thanks again for the feedback. I promise to post pics on my return.

Andrew, that was the thread I was trying to find. Just eluded me.

 

Tom, sounds enticing. I'll give it due consideration... ;-)

 

S., Just found the RCI site. It seems that my stateroom will have a safe. Thanks for the suggestion.

Contax T3? My wife already grabbed that... :-)

I apologize beforehand because I know there's a previous thread on

this matter; I even participated on it. However, I cannot find it

for my life.

 

My wife and I will be sailing next week from Miami on the Voyager of

the Seas to Nassau, St. Thomas, Hispaniola and San Juan P.R. I had

thought of taking my Nikonos in case I managed to hook up some

diving and also for it's water resistance but that (diving) is

beginning to seem unlikely.

 

Would you advise taking one or two M bodies plus two or three lenses

for topside shooting, mainly people and scenery? I'd like the

flexibility of having the choice of B&W and color. On the matter of

lenses I think I might do with a 35 and a 50, maybe a 21. Should I

take a 75 instead of the 50, or additionally? By experience I know

that 95% of my pics will be made with the "middle" lengths, 35 and

50.

 

Last but not least, are cruise ship cabins safe for leaving photo

gear in, when going ashore?

 

Opinions? Any feedback will be appreciated.

You might want to read <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009Cdl">this thread</a>

Hi Jeff,

 

As Richard said, I really like this lens. It's perfect for a LTM Leica and its build and performance are quite good. I agree with Richard on the color matter; the one roll of color film I shot with this lens came quite contrasty, although that didn't bother me, as I'm no longer doing RA4 printing and it scanned quite well and printed perfectly on the 2200.

 

As many will tell you, this is not a hypersharp lens, but it's very even, all the way to the corners, from f/4 onwards. Don't stop it below f/8 unless it's unavoidable because it starts to get some diffraction.

 

Among the Cosina lenses I've tried, this is the one with best bokeh, which probably doesn't mean much (I don't know about the new 40/1.4). It's pretty flare resistant even with the ridiculous shade and I don't find any decentering on my sample, something that a few folks have complained about.

 

As you know from pics, it's almost a dead ringer for the Summitar 35, in case looks worry you. Focusing is quite smooth, I'd say almost par to Leica, and the aperture ring is also smooth, albeit with much more positive clicks that the L variety. In any case, it shames *all* my Nikkors and many of my old Pentax Takumars in perceived build quality. Having other CV lenses, I think this is one of the best in that respect.

Get a small piece of a 00 Variable Contrast printing filter. Many folks cut them to fit their enlarger filter holders. You only need a square about 1cm by side. Remove the right bezel (as seen from the front) by unscrewing it. If it's stuck, use a piece of rubber to help you get it off. Cut a round piece of the filter to fit inside the bezel and replace it. It will work like a charm.

 

You can see here my IIIf with a piece cut out of a 40M acetate CC filter. I have since replaced it with the above suggestion.<div></div>

<i>>>some of my body parts such as my knees are actually 75<<</i>

<br><br>

That's what bikes do for you, specially off-road ones. I wrenched my right knee twice while riding enduros and had the menisci removed. I have a hell of a time when I try to do downhill ski.

Oops! ...Reed George...

Second what Geaorge said. The Sekonic 208 is great, except for the low light sensitivity which is about two stops less than it should.

Bill,

 

Budget considerations aside, film scanners beat flatbeds (for film scanning) hands down. I've seen 3200 ppi scans from a flatbed that are inferior in resolution to a dedicated 2700 ppi film scanner.

 

I own a Minolta 5400 and an Epson 2450 that I use exclusively for medium and large format negatives. The Minolta scans at 2700 ppi are light years ahead in terms of resolution, dynamic range, tonality and apparent sharpness from the 2400 ppi scans of the Epson.

 

If a flatbed is all you can afford, then get one. It's way better than paying $1 a frame to your lab for a Photo CD; but if you can get -say- a refurbished Minolta 5400, by all means go for it. BTW, now that the 5400-II is about to hit the dealers shelves, the older model (better for B&W in the opinion of some early testers) is at basement prices at some dealers. Not $100 for sure but about 60% of the original price.

A.,

 

Beautiful camera! It's really something to behold. What did you use to strip the chrome?

 

Best,

 

--Jorge.

PS, actually, I was originally fishing for a comparison between the 5400 and the Nikon V. If any one would like to try the scans, Lutz has the negative and slide, and the CD with my scans.

Guys, awesome thread! I would never have believed the simple experiment Lutz & I started would have provoked such enthusiasm. All I can say is that I'm very pleased with the results I'm getting from my 5400 and that it should serve me well (hopefully) for many years. I believe there's not much going up from here.

I have a Jobo tank and it's great in many ways (I have a Jobo CPE-2 so I don't have to roll it by hand). $175 sounds way too expensive. My tank complete with entrails cost me about $85 (in Guadalajara Mexico where photo hardware tends to be 50% more expensive than the US).

 

However, for many years before I made the jump for the Jobo tank, I used successfully a very old (ca. 1974) "Color by Beseler" daylight tank intended for 8x10 prints. It came with some well designed separators for 4 4x5 prints and takes just as well 4 4x5 film sheets face up. It has small ridges along the walls that allow chemistry to flow behind the film although it's not essential.

 

One of the marvels of this tank is that it can work with just 80cc of chemistry, so I just calculate the minimum amount of developer required by the film and pour it. Another great issue is that it can hold about 200cc of chemistry ready to work when the tank is vertical until you turn it on its side and start rolling back & forth.

 

I'd heartily recommend that you look for one of these.

Frank, can you post a picture or at least describe it? Sounds like a great deal.

I have the Leica crank. Before I put it on my (black) MP, I found a small piece of plastic that fitted between the screw and knob. The finish is great and matches the MP.

 

My camera is all scratched now and so is the crank but I don't mind. I bought it to use it and most probably will be my last camera if film holds until I'm no longer able to shoot.

Travis, you've got enough tips and smart alec comments. I can only offer my congrats to you and significant...