astral

June 19, 2012

I bought a used M9 a few weeks ago by mail-order from a top UK dealership (London Camera Exchange). On inspection it had a minor rangefinder misalignment at infinity which seemingly affected focus accuracy elsewhere. The dealer asked for it to be returned to them for attention; they immediately sent it on to Leica Camera AG in Solms.

The 'repair' took under 3 weeks from door to door. The Leica invoice shows they corrected the r/f, and focus issue, checked all camera functions and adjusted them where necessary, cleaned the sensor and finally provided a test certificate. The invoice (to the dealer) states "Please note that this is a guarantee repair. The repair costs without guarantee would amount to EUR 319.10".

That represents excellent, no-quibble service here in the UK/ Europe from both Leica Camera AG and London Camera Exchange (Bristol). My warm thanks go to both.

June 13, 2012

I appreciate that this question is pertinent principally to the USA and that the responses may be correct; but equally, the replies probably don't apply to any other country. There are different issues concerning warranties/guarantees in different countries, and some of these are major issues.

In The E.U. for example, consumer statutory rights make manufacturers' warranties quite superfluous or even null and void: this is because the 'contract' is between the purchaser and the seller, not the purchaser and manufacturer. Also in the E.U., sending a camera direct to Leica for warranty repairs (regardless of what Leica suggests or offers) risks diminishing the customer's statutory rights, especially to make any claim against the seller such as obtaining refunds or replacements.

In other countries all you may have is a manufacturer's warranty and few other safeguards. The question of 'second users' complicates matters in either situation and also varies country to country. In other words, even the best advice is only relevant within its correct context.

Post script: It seems that Leica tries to meet all of the obligations of E.U. law itself, without involving the seller (i.e. shop), but 'rolling-out' an international, universal one-size-fits-all warranty that meets the stautory requirements of any and all jurisdictions is a particularly tall order. Thankfully, Leica generally has a very 'mature' approach to after-sales service.

May 30, 2012

John - I think it was a last minute decison - papers in an envelope and gadgets in a box. They were apparently posted together. But he forgot that they would not necessarily arrive here at the same time - maybe even a week apart - allowing for UK Customs delays. Or maybe he fully understands the customs delays and wanted to get the documents here a.s.a.p. (Fairly slow email turnaround hasn't helped).

Maybe I'm gonna get an early birthday present in the box . . . . I'm trying to persuade him to give me his unused 'Hasselblad . . . Huh, sadly rather unlikely.

May 30, 2012

Ha-ha . . He's coming over here next Spring for a l-o-n-g Euro trip together: he is definitely gonna pay for this . . . washing pots for weeks, etc . . . . . :-)

May 30, 2012

Darn it . . . I just got an email from my friend who says:

"Oops, I forgot to tell you, I am sending the paperwork now, but there's anothe parcel coming with some more bits in it - last minute decision. I forgot to tell you". And that's after I received several "I sent it" confirmation emails!

So, major embarassment here (and over in San Diego, CA) . . . Oh well, we are both getting older by the day and sometimes forget things.

Sorry folks - this was a wild goose chase and Agatha Christie mystery rolled into one. AC.

May 30, 2012

Well, it is a salutory lesson for anyone buying or selling (internationally): it is not worth gambling on skimpy packaging and uninsured delivery, both are asking for trouble.

"Ultimately it should never have been mailed in the way it was" [John H] is spot on. And although the purchase price was only $20, by the time I paid all the additional costs the 'price' had doubled.

The envelope - while clearly not satisfactory - was received undamaged and with no marks, message or sticker (etc) to say what had happened. That is suspicious and disconcerting. I have bought many items at auction where I have been lucky to receive anything but a brown paper bag marked 'Contents Damaged in Transit' . . . mysterious Agatha Christie 'empty envelope' disappearances are a different matter.

Ho hum!

May 30, 2012

Thanks David. I always use an insured or recorded delivery service wherever I send stuff., but it quickly becomes uneconomic to buy, or send, lower-value items via international mail. In particular, some stores overcharge significantly for insured 'courier' services: I have been selling books online for over 10 years and I know the actual costs involved.

Jerry - definitely stolen: envelope pristine and the re-sealable KEH plastic bag is was present and sealed - it sort of says "Tough *** Dumbo. I have helped myself to your xyz, na-na nah na-na"

May 30, 2012

A warning about UP Postal Service:

I recently purchased an inexpensive viewfinder screen for a vintage SLR from KEH. I am in the United Kingdom, and KEH's $60 charge for Fedex delivery was disproportionate to the value, so a friend on the US west coast actually purchased it and forwarded it to me with the aim of saving $40 or more.

The viewfinder screen was small enough to go in a standard letter envelope with a minimum of packaging, so he sent it by US Post regular mail.

The envelope arrived in 5 days, complete with all paperwork and packaging but without the screen: the envelope has been opened and re-sealed. The screen has been stolen. Unfortunately my friend apparently did not insure the item.

The absence of any marks that normally happen to a packet in transit suggests that the theft took place in the USA. While this cannot be proved, in my experience empty envelopes travel better than full ones. There was no indication on the envelope about its contents, so this appears to be 'blanket' theft from easily opened envelopes and packets, that is happening within the postal system.

The most annoying part is that the screen is particularly hard to find in the UK. (Nikon 'K' screen for F2 if anyone has one).

I appreciate that thefts from mail are pretty common in some countries - and exceptionally rare in the UK - but in the USA?

May 22, 2012

I have used the chromed dome caps that are fitted to mirror screws. In the UK they are called 'dome coverheads' but names vary: however, they are pretty commonplace around the world. They will fit some cameras, but not all (just like the 'OEM' ones). It's worth a try for a few pennies if you have a hardware store nearby.

If you need to visualise these, they appear on <a href="http://www.hart-wholesale.com/mirror.htm">this</a> (UK) web page.

May 22, 2012

Nice scenes. I do like the 28/3.5 in any version. My ultimate "grab and go camera" is a Nikkormat FT2 with 24mm 2.8 'K', but the 28 comes a very close second, alongside any 50mm f2. The top meter window on the Nikkormats is great for setting up candid shots.

May 22, 2012

Aw, stop it Rick! You are tempting me into (even more) wicked ways! But yes, a nice collection of desirable and useful items - well spotted. I have stopped looking for Miranda gear here in the UK because so much of it is in poor 'found in attic' condition. My Miranda collection is a tribte to a dear departed friend who used one for many years: at the time I didn't understand his attachment to his Sensomat, but now I have one I use it regularly.

May 21, 2012

"It's hard to have every version of a particular focal length." Yes, Jeff - it's neither easy, nor cheap. That said, there was a time when many older Nikkors (right back to the Nippon Kogaku 'Tick Mark' versions) were more common and 'affordable' than appears the case nowadays. Like you, over the years I have picked up many versions of the commoner lenses: 50mm f2, 28mm, 24mm and 35mm. Most are good performers if their characteristics are understood and are used within their (known) limitations. Sadly, some of the lenses I would now like to own are out of my price range, but fortune occasionally smiles. I broadly agree with your comments on the early coatings - in some cases it is difficult to tell by eye just what coatings there are on many lenses; and manufacturers at the time were often rather vague about this for marketing and possibly patent reasons, etc. While modern coatings are so much better than in 'the olden days' I no longer care very much what the coatings are, or how many, as long as the lens works ok. The epithet "Many a good tune is played on an old fiddle" comes to mind. This new F2 is my 'top dog' Nikon at present, having displaced my F2AS. I also use a Canon F1n (also FTBn and EF) at times , but have so far largely resisted any temptation to get an earlier Canon F1, or any more cameras or lenses . . . More travel, more photography and less G.A.S. is the pledge . . . . .

May 21, 2012

Thanks gents. Well, the price for the whole kit was about the same as usual cost of an 'exc++' F2A body with working meter, but with a good lens and motordrive 'thrown in' . . . a "no-brainer!" John: I may have a 50/1.4 on a Nikkormat FT2 which is currently with Ed Trzoska at Birstall for a service - though it could just be a Nikkor-HC 50/2. I may sell these later in the year. I have an inside contact at Mount St Bernard, and can probably arrange a morning behind the scenes if you're interested. Thanks Rick - images were shot a few days ago in quite variable weather . . . we're still waiting for Spring 'up' here in the UK. Some colour shots later if/when the sun ever shines - plus I have a few more old lenses to re-discover.

May 21, 2012

Good Nikon F and F2 cameras are becoming a little difficult to find; so, this F2 with plain prism and Nikkor-S 50mm f1.4, plus MD-2 motordrive, was a 'done deal' as soon as I saw it. It is in excellent condition, very clean, complete, and looks like it was owned by an enthusiast rather than being an ex-pro workhorse, so everything works as it should. All that was needed was to renew the light seals and blow some dust off it.

A roll of Kodak BW400 was the first test, with a quick (and not very good) dev-and-scan at a local emporium. The test was also an opportunity to use two of my favourite contemporary non-AI lenses - a Nikkor-HC 28mm f3.5 and a Nikkor-N 24mm f2.8 (see my portfolio). The big surprise was the single coated 50mm f1.4 Nikkor-H lens. I expected it to be noticeably different from my much later multic-coated AI Nikkor, especially at wider apertures. However, while the test shots were not demanding, especially regarding flare, the old Nikkor-S is evidently a solid performer with smooth o-o-f rendition ('bokeh') at full aperture. Stopped down I can't see any unpleasantness in the bokeh that often occurs in other fast 'standard' lenses. Sharpness is fine at 'normal' apertures, while at full aperture any unsharpness is, for me, usually a function of the shallow depth of field and long shutter speeds, rather than inherrent lens issues. Maybe there is a hint of a more 'classic' (i.e. not overly contrasty) look to images taken at f1.4 - f4, but at medium apertures it is a sharp, well-behaved lens, without any bad traits - what more do you want? So far, I have no reason to complain about the old 50/1.4 (except to myself for not carrying a monopod more regularly). Shots taken with the Nikkor-HC 28mm f3.5 and Nikkor-N 24mm f2.8 are much as expected - that is, nothing to complain about. has always pleased me. Although there is some illumination fall-off at f3.5 with the 28mm, but it has gone by around f5.6. The Nikkor-N 24mm f2.8 simply turns out excellent images, just as it has for the past 40 years.

So, to sum up: despite the lack of a TTL meter of later F2s, and more modern multi-coated lenses, a basic Nikon F2 is in my opinion still as good a tool as it was way back in the 1970s. But mostly it is fun and satisfying to use. A couple of images follow. Sadly the scans, done by a local photo booth are pretty awful, but at small sizes this is not especially noticeable. More images taken with the 3 lenses mentioned above can be seen in my <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=1032697">photo.net portfolio </a>and 'mirrored' on <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nikkormat">Flickr </a>.

AC

Tearful, sightless Bacchus toasts passers by at Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire, England

Nikkor-S 50mm f1.4 @ f5.6

Hardwick Hall "More glass than wall" - Derbyshire, England <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=1032697"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/15755944-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="486" /></a>

Nikkor-HC 28mm f3.5 @ f11

This 'Happy Chappie' guards the main door at Mount St Bernard Abbey, Leicestershire, England <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=1032697"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/15755948-lg.jpg" alt="" width="527" height="600" /></a>

Nikkor-S 50mm f1.4 @ f11

"Gospels" at Mount St Bernard Abbey, Leicestershire, England <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=1032697"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/15756133-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="557" /></a>

Nikkor-S 50mm f1.4 @ f1.4

April 17, 2012

An aquaintance of mine who is an optical technician recommends only using hydrogen peroxide, repeatedly applied with on a 'cotton bud'/Q-tip, etc. I tried it a long time ago and it was effective, but the biggest problem was in dissembling and reassembling the lens and retaining the correct collimation.

April 11, 2012

Leica IIIf RD . . . I am saying nothing more. Nothing!. . . . . OK one word - Yabbadabbadooooo!

March 15, 2012

Good question. They will probably produce another replica of something that is pretty unusable as a camera, but looks good behind glass. Maybe even something in titanium or black paint with kitsch leather and commemorative engraving for double the price of a regular camera. Or how about one hundred 24k gold plated MPs (with matching lenses of course), for only Eur24k?

Rather than the commemorative collectors' editions that Leica have traditionally produced I would like to see a sensible money off offer for a new camera and/or lens that real Leica users would buy. Alternatively, for poor Leica users like me, a good quality, limited edition Oscar Barnack coffee mug for $10-20 or thereabouts . . .

March 7, 2012

Although it is not a particularly photogenic vehicle, my Land Rover Discovery regularly takes me to many photogenic - and often remote - places, such as the Isle of Skye, Scotland (photo). In fact, I'd say it is my ultimate photo accessory.

February 3, 2012

Thanks Jason, I know someone who I believe can replace the plastic spool if needed. And I have a spare metal mount lock in case the red tab breaks. However, the SL MOT has disappeared without trace. The seller can't find it - possibly his business partner has sold it, we don't know . . . Ho hum! I'm sure I can make do with my SL2 and R7 . .

January 29, 2012

1951 Summitar S/N 856xxx - no click stops, silent smooth operation.

January 29, 2012

"Lightweight mirrorless camera" with interchangeable lenses? First first developed 1913 by Herr Barnack . . . :-) But, indeed, the new 'electronical' ones are pretty good.

I started using a second-hand Lumix G1 as a casual-use camera last year,. I have since added 'bits' to it, and now it is in use every day. Results are plenty good enough for my purposes, although using manual focus lenses on it was not very successful. In fact, am taking a Lumix G1 (or possibly a G3) to northern India shortly. I simply cannot take a Leicaflex SL or R7 with zoom lens and a few primes without the expense of a sherpa, however much I would like to use them.

January 27, 2012

Thanks Doug - Mmmmmmm, I'm not keen on a plain groundglass screen, in conjunction with vari-focal spectacles it is a recipe for fuzzy pics. The SL2 viewfinder is perfect for me, and the SL one is a close second.

Arthur, I haven't contemplated an "eye-patch" Leicaflex: I'd have to see one in the flesh to see if there is any 'chemistry' there. However, the seller has 'lost' the SL Mot . . . when (if) it turns up, he'll check the finder.

January 26, 2012

Well, just in case there is a 'run' on SL MOTs, I have emailed the seller, whom I know well, and provisionally reserved it. I know a top Leica restorer here in the UK - I'm sure he'll check it for any 'issues'.

<ul>

<li>Stephen & Bill - I agree, the SL2 is a true gem. Mine has never failed me, even if I have moaned loudly about the weight.</li>

<li>Paul - the original Leicaflex always reminds me of a pirate with an eye-patch! </li>

</ul>

I was concerned that the meter was only switched on/off via the motor drive unit - I have no intention of getting a hernia by using one of those. Thanks gents.

January 26, 2012

I am wondering exactly what is the difference between the Leicafelx SL Mot and the original SL - apart from the obvious motor capability? I read that the SL Mot doesn't have a self-timer, and the meter switch is not on the wind lever - so how is it switched on and off?

Rather more broadly, is the SL Mot without a motor attached any less useable than a 'straight' SL? I have been offered a black paint (not black chrome) SL Mot for $300 in good condition (and a warranty) and it could make a useful addition to the 'heavy armor' part of the arsenal.

Thanks for your advice.

January 15, 2012

As well as the old 'Continental' (European) aperture values, many classic cameras have old 'Continental' shutter speeds as well. While it is not very difficult to convert a 'modern' meter read-out to these old combinations, it can be inconvenient. My solution is a Sekonic L-308s meter which can be set to give read-outs in 1/2 or 1/3rd increments which makes it perfect for use with quirky old cameras and lenses. It also offers incident or reflected metering: highly recommended.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by astral