michaelging

<p>Great little camera with a razor sharp lens. Mine,once I pulled it out and locked it did not wiggle, so I would say that this is not normal. If the lens is not parallel to the film plane you are going to have sharpness issues. I never worked on one before, but there are lots of videos on Youtube.</p>

<p>http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=rollei+35s+repair&oq=rollei+35s+repair&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=youtube-psuggest.3...2345.18026.0.20825.36.36.9.1.1.0.127.3014.0j26.26.0.</p>

<p>I believe that my lens, the 50mm F2 sonnar uses a 40.5 mm lens hood. I found these to be very good hoods and you can use a 52 lens cap on it. http://www.ebay.com/itm/For-Leica-M-40-5mm-40-5-mm-Metal-Vented-Lens-Hood-Shade-/190604324696?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c60e72f58#ht_1969wt_1398</p>

<p>The HP finder was made for people who wear glasses, not the other way around. Great cameras. </p>

<p>Mine is as smooth as silk. Did you set the body to infinity before mounting the lens. If I remember right that makes it stick when trying to focus the camera. I had Henry Scherer rebuild mine, it was expensive but its like new and the meter works fine. </p><div></div>

<p>It does not load now, so maybe someone removed it. </p>

<p>They are great cameras with a very sharp lens. </p>

<p>There is some subject movement in the speakers hand, so that would be part of the problem. Do you sharpen in PS? it also looks like you might be a little back focused on the tree. DOF is only apparent sharpness, which is not the same as being focused on a single point. I suspect there may be some camera movement as well. I would shoot with a little higher ASA and up the shutter speed a little. I hope this helps. </p>

<p>I shoot FF and have and use both those lenses. If I had to pick one it would be the 85 1.8, on a FF camera like the D3s I can shoot in almost candle light. Its sharp and quick to focus. Its a nice portrait lens for head shots and is a nice lens for volleyball or basketball in a dark Gym. The 35-70 is a great lens and very sharp, but with a small zoom range is not as useful for me. The 4 lenses I have in my bag all the time are the 17-35, 80-200, 35-70 all 2.8 lenses and the 85mm. </p>

<p>Nikon S2 and Contax IIIa</p><div></div>

<p>I have mounted cameras to planes, trains,boats and automobiles. If I am using something like suction cups, I also use lots of gaffer tape.I have shot photos using a remote cameras on the spreaders on the mast of a sailboat. I use a super clamp on most of my shoots as well as lots of gaffers tape. It does not come loose and does not take the paint off of the tail of a biplane. All the advice above it correct, make sure the surface is flat and clean. I shot this photo of a motor officer which the camera and a 15mm lens on one side of the cowling and the flash on the other. He hit a bump and both the camera and flash popped off, and the officer came back to where I was , with them dangling off of the flash cord that was between them. It was after this that I started using gaffers tape as a back up .</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/2795189</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<p>Funny, I have had a D3 for 3 yrs, and a D3s for a year and have not ever had this problem. I do live in Phoenix, so the cameras have been in heat, but never high humidity. I have been using Nikons since my first Nikon FTn in 1975 and never had the problem. We did have the problem with a couple of early Canon digital cameras at the paper, and used rubber cement to re-attach the panels. Just lucky I guess. </p>

Any photos of the Easter bunny.<div></div>

<p>I think the exposure looks about right for 2 stops pushed. I found that the very best results that I got from a 2 stop push was in Edwal FG7 at 1 to 15, with a film can of sodium sulfite added. It kept the shadow detail as high as possible and the highlights did not block up. Your negs here look a little over developed , and that is why you are getting the high contrast. I am not sure what the time and temp should be with Diafine, and if you developed them at that formula. I have pushed a lot of tri-x in my life and in dozens of different developer combinations and the FG7 was by far the best. Your negs actually look more like Acufine, than Diafine.By the way you camera is a great one, it used to be one of my sharpest. </p>

 

<p>I have and use a Domke vest. Large pockets, that I can put my 80-200 2.8 in.I like the mesh back that keeps it cooler than other vests I have used. Living in Phoenix, that is very important. I now use one of my old Domke vest as a fishing vest. </p>

<p>I have one of these , http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?oid=49164280, If you can find a used one, they are great scanners. I have only used it for 6x6 6x7 35mm and 4x5. But it will do up to 8 x10. </p>

<p>I can think of at least a dozen photo stores in Phoenix who have closed in the past 5 yrs, and there are hundred all over the US. When People want to buy a camera or lenses now they think of Best Buy or Circuit City not a photographic store. In order to be able to sell something you have to have it in stock and it would take hundreds of thousands of dollars to have a fully stocked photo store. I think you are about 30 yrs to late. Good Luck . </p>

<div></div>

<p>I upgrade my camera when and only when there is a real need, not a want. I am still using a few manual focus lenses from my film camera days, and all of my lenses are at least 10 yrs old. I bought quality lenses, take care of them, and they serve me well. If a photographer is on the merry-go-round of newer is better, you will get spend all your money on intangibles and not on taking photos. For me they are tools, not gadgets or status symbols. If you think a new camera or a lens is going to take great photos, you are looking in the wrong place for creativity. OK, my rant is over. </p>

<p>I agree that B&H is by far the best people to do business with, Adorama is ok, but no one is better than B&H. I ordered a lens years ago from Abe's of Maine and had a problem with it and even though they eventually did the right thing, it too a lot of work to get them to do it. </p>

<p>I found it to be very saturated and rich with color, so I would say the E100VS</p>

 

<p>I am tending to go with Tom's Idea that the back deforms enough to cause the light leak. </p>

Garlic<div></div>

<p>Drew, Lenses eventually do wear out but its a much higher number than how many shutter clicks that a camera can take. I bought a used 15 to 35mm 2.8 zoom lens about 10 yrs ago. I have no idea how many exposures that the lens had on it before me, but I used it for years as my primary working lens with film cameras, then more than 600,000 on a D3 full frame camera, and another 300,00 with a D3s. I did have to take the lens in last fall and have new aperture blades replaced on the lens as they had worn out, for the price of less than $100, and its a good as new. The posts above are not meant to make fun, just to inform. In my experience off brand lenses, other than Nikon lenses, are just as sharp as any nikon lens when new, but they seem to have less quality tolerances and seem to loose their sharpness quicker than a nikon lens over time. They also seem to be a little more fragile as far as weather and any little bumps. If you decide to go off brand and used, be sure to check the lens out for corner to corner sharpness. </p>

<p>Put your film only in your carry on luggage, and don't worry about it being damaged. You probably would not have any problems with putting your cameras in your checked luggage, but I always hand carry my cameras with me on the plane. If you bag is lost, so are your cameras. I have been to Amsterdam several times, and never had a problem with photographing the city. I especially like photographing the people on bikes, and never had a problem. You might encounter someone in the red light district who does not want you photographing them or their business. I always bring all my film with me on a trip ,so can't help you with places to buy film. If you look at my PN portfolio there are photos from Amsterdam in it. I hope this helps. </p>

Her royal highness<div></div>