craig_christensen

Best: Olympus 35 LC picked up at an antique store for $13. Cleaned the front lens elements inside and out, popped a hearing aid battery in, and have had a lot of fun with a few rolls of Tri-X. What a nice lens!

 

Worst: Canonet GIII QL17 picked up on eBay for $50 (described as "mint"), that turned out to have a stuck shutter and needed a good CLA. Not only will the repair bill be more than it's worth, but the shop has been sitting on it for 10 weeks! The only good news out of it is that the situation gave me an excuse to buy the Oly and enjoy it while the Canonet was in the shop.

Just a reference for you Matthew - a local pro down here in Littleton who specializes in infants, children, and family portraits charges approx. $50 for a sitting fee (more for more than 1 person, so could be up to 3x that, I think). Her print prices border on the absurd - 5x7 = $70 8x10 = $100, just for examples. Of course, most of her prints get sold in "package" deals that make the pain somewhat less sharp.

 

She did all her work in digital (Contax 645 + dig back, I believe), then provides the client with a review / slideshow a week or so later, where they select the poses / prints.

 

Of course, this pro has been doing this for 15 + years and has about 14 employees, so take this for whatever it's worth for you.

 

Being new parents, we'd pay just about anything for very high-quality images of our daughter, and apparently we're not the only ones. Of course, after seeing what an 8x10 goes for these days, I have been inspired to shake the dust off of my own equipment and see if I can do as well.

 

Let us know how the shoot goes, and good luck!

 

Craig

Amen, amen, and amen, Dan. Thank you for giving me another reason to laugh through my tears. In the past three days, I've acquired an Argus brick and an Olympus 35 LC to match the No. 2 Hawk-eye Jr. and Canonet GIII 17 of last month. The Argus is primarily meant to hold down a shelf next to some B&W photos - thank goodness, I wouldn't wish that un-ergonomic thing on anyone's hands - along with the Hawk-Eye. The others should take some pretty good shots, once the Canonet gets its shutter overhauled and the Oly gets a battery.

 

For the past 2 months, I've been too busy looking for semi-ugly rangefinders that are older than me. The rest of the year will be spent making pictures. I hope.

 

A warning, Dan. If you haven't visited the Medium Format Digest forum lately, don't. Next thing you know, you'll be chasing a mint Rolleiflex Automat. And if you already have one, is it for sale?

 

Craig

Thank you for the advice, everyone. Glen, that's a good tip - if my Father in-law decides to let me take a shot at it, at least I'll know where to start. I'll check out the sites mentioned here and see what more I can learn. If he takes it back, at least he'll have an idea of what he may need to pay for.

 

In the meantime, I picked up an Argus C3 (I think) at an antique store today for $12. It seems to be working great, and at that price I'd be happy with it even if it just sat on a shelf looking like, well, a brick!

My wife was recently given her grandmother's No. 2 Hawk-Eye Junior

box camera. After searching through this forum and some linked

websites we were able to figure out how to open it, and the interior

is as immaculate as the exterior. However, the VF mirror appears to

have become de-silvered over time, or is just extremely dirty, and

there is some dust on the lens I'd like to clean up.

 

How can I get the viewfinder open to clean / replace the mirror, and

what's the best way to clean the lens?

Very nice, Gene! I'm curious about the bottom image you show - what's the story with the diagonal patterns in the siding on the building? Was the siding really as wavy as the picture seems to show, or are these jpeg artifacts? It's kind of a cool effect, but it's distracting.

 

Anyway, congratulations on the Rollei. I'm looking for one myself, and hope to find as nice a specimen as that.

I borrowed my father-in-law's Petri rangefinder to see if my local

repairman might take a look at its various issues. There doesn't

appear to be a model number, other than a sticker on the front

reading "Petri 2.8 Color Corrected Super". It was purchased at the P-

X in Okinawa in about 1958 or so. My repairman wouldn't touch it -

he's busy enough without investing a lot of my money in fishing

around in what he considers to be an uncommon and not very valuable

camera. I guess I can appreciate his honesty, if not his helpfulness.

 

Anyway, it's chief problem is this - the shutter button is very

stiff. Pressing it does NOT operate the shutter. However, if you

then operate the film advance lever, after it goes past about 180

degrees, there's a click and the lever gives way to the end of its

arc without any resistance. When you release the lever, the sound of

the self-timer is heard, and the shutter then fires as the lever is

returning to it's start position.

 

Is anyone familiar with this problem? Is this maybe a do-it-yourself

project for someone who's somewhat mechanically-inclined, or should I

just forget it, clean it up, and put it on a shelf ("the tools of art

become art")?

 

It seems a shame to just shelve the camera. It may not be

particularly collectible, but it has told a lot of stories and

covered a lot of miles. However, I have better uses for a couple

hundred bucks than fixing up a camera worth $50.

 

Any advice is appreciated.

One of my favorite scrapbook shots is when I was in the "American West" or "Westworld" part of the park (whatever it's called, I think I was suffering from over-Disneyfication at the time, a common problem if you're over 10), in a fort-type building with telescopes to look over the park. I had a CBP (cheab black plastic) Pentax 35mm fixed-lens camera that day, as the EOS was too dang heavy for an all-day hike. Held the lens up to the telescope, and pointed it towards Tomorrowland and all its funky architecture. It's not the clearest image, but certainly the most unique one I have, and it makes my wife laugh.

 

You're at Disney, indulge your sense of whimsy frequently, and you'll come up with a few winners to go with the obligatory family / tourist shots. Have fun, and ignore the price of anything until you get home and get the credit card bill. It's the only real way to enjoy yourself. And it's what Walt would have wanted...

From the tone of this last one, are we to assume the dog wasn't so lucky?

 

Craig

 

Never been to N.O. (my loss), but have partaken of the blessed pie in nearly every other place mentioned, even those of a slightly sacreligious persuasion, and they're all good compared to the ones dear old mama makes...

No offense gents, but I would really expect some four-footed wildlife shots from names like "Deer" and "Hart".

 

Nice, um, rooster shots tho'.

Thanks Mike and David. My addiction seems to be advancing rapidly, as I just purchased a Canonet GIII QL-17, and have a line on an FTb-N body. My camera budget for this year may be blown by the time I track down a lens for the FTb. However, if all else fails, I'm looking forward to having a lot of fun with the Canonet for rest of the year, and if I decide I don't like it, I'm pretty sure I can unload it for what I'll have into it.

 

In the meantime, I've been reading through the manuals again for my EOS 630 and re-discovering features that I forgot it had. Thankfully, my wife doesn't mind paying for film development, as long as I get some decent shots of our 3 month-old girl and our beagle.

 

I thought caffeine and nicotine were addictive... Curses, Photo.net! You've led me down another path of no return!

Thanks, Aaron and Robert. I love hearing others' stories almost as much as going out and making my own. Same with looking through some of the great portfolios on this site.

 

I spent some time today browsing a couple of local shops. One turned out to stock mostly telescopes and some new / used Leica equipment and medium and large format stuff, but I wound up having a great conversation with an "experienced" gentleman there. I was thankful he was willing to chat, in spite of the fact that there was no way I could afford anything in the store without a winning lottery ticket in my pocket. I learned a lot in 15 minutes, and was "forced" to handle some very nice equipment.

 

The other store had much more variety, and some very interesting stuff. A few Canon F-1's ($400 - $650) which were nice and solid, but a bit more than I want or need, and a number of decent FD lenses ($95 for a 50 f/1.8 and $125 for a 50 f/1.4 SSC, for example).

 

Release the hounds! To the hunt!

Peter - excellent suggestions, and I do generally carry a spare battery for the EOS. Thankfully, you can buy them just about anywhere nowadays. I agree that two different systems would be inefficient and cumbersome. On the other hand, I'll rarely, if ever, take both (theoretical) sets of gear anywhere at the same time.

 

Rob - I've also looked at the Canonet GIII QL-17, and read some good things about it. I think I'll wait until I can get another look at my father-in-law's rangefinder, and will keep this in mind as another option.

 

Mike, Gerry, Rob - good suggestions all. I have a suspicion that I'll eventually wind up chasing down a "classic" SLR, a "vintage" rangefinder, and a lens or two for each, as well as a decent prime or two (50mm and 28 mm, minimum) for my EOS, before all is said and done. At least with either the additional SLR or RF I'll have something I can carry around for spontaneous shots without risking any equipment my wife might miss if I drop / lose / break it.

 

I guess I'm leaning towards getting another body / lens first, then a new Prime for the EOS, then...?

I think I'm just looking for someone to talk me down from a ledge

here...

 

I currently own a Canon PS G1 digital and Canon EOS 630 with Canon

35 - 80 and 75-300 consumer (slow) zoom lenses. My wife and I have

always been frustrated with the AF lag in both of these cameras, and

with their size / weight. I have managed to get some nice images

out of them over the years, in spite of my inexperience and any

shortcomings with the equipment. The EOS has been used rarely in

the past few years since buying into the digital medium.

 

I had been looking at a newer digital P&S, like a Digital Elph, that

perhaps my wife would find easier / faster to use. However, thanks

to some wonderful articles here on older / manual SLR's, I'm

considering whether to invest in some "old school" equipment, such

as a Canon FTb or AT-1, Nikkormat FTn, or Konica T3n with 2 or 3

nice prime lenses, such as 28, 50 and 135 mm. My reasons are:

 

- Would like to have an extra body around to keep loaded with B&W,

since the EOS is generally loaded with color.

 

- Would be nice to not have to rely on batteries for EVERYTHING.

Without power, my current equip. is dead in the water.

 

- Would like to improve my skills. I know I can use Manual mode on

the EOS and, to some extent, on the G1, but why would I when I might

miss the shot?

 

- Would like some fast(er) lenses to alleviate the low-light

focusing issues. Also, I need a decent wide-angle to fill in the

gaps in what I currently have. I like landscape / architecture /

nature shots when I'm not wrapped up in family snapshots.

 

- Let's face it, I have a jones for collecting old,

mechanical "stuff". Wristwatches, fountain pens, etc. It's just

cool to me to use things that aren't just disposable, and don't need

batteries or a power cord to work. Ironic, since my day job is

working with computers and databases but perhaps this is just

escapism from work...

 

So, what would you do? Invest a couple hundred $ in some decent

prime lenses for the EOS and learn to use it better? Invest in an

older, manual body and a couple of prime lenses to have as backup or

as a strictly B&W setup? Sell the whole EOS outfit and go with

strictly old-school equipment? This last isn't much of an option,

as it was a wedding present from my wife, and she needs an automated

camera around.

 

As another option, my father-in-law has a 45 year-old Yashica

rangefinder that needs some fixing and TLC. I may be able to talk

him into letting me get it fixed up and use that for awhile to

satisfy this jones for old equipment. I just have no idea what the

problems with this camera may be, and how expensive they'll be to

fix.

 

I'd love to hear from anyone else that's been down this road, and

how it was sorted out for you. Thanks, Craig

As it turns out, I did have a piece of stainless lying around - a small size picture hanger / hook appeared to be about the right thickness (flat piece of stainless bent into a triangle at the top to put the nail through, and bent in a hook at the bottom). I straightened it out with pliers, a bench vise, and hammer, cut it to length with wire snippers, and shaped and smoothed it with a file.

 

All I need is a drop of super glue and I'm good to go. It will be so nice to be able to take shots without that cover flapping in the way.

 

Thanks to all for contributing, and for getting my creative juices flowing. It's nice to learn that I'm not quite as un-handy as my wife believes me to be.

Perhaps you're right, Tom. I was hoping for a good idea of what type of metal to use. I don't have a lot of very small pieces of stainless lying around, so I was hoping someone would have an idea of what will fit without a lot of fabrication. I'll go through my scrap drawer again to see what I might make work.

I have a 12 year-old EOS 630 which has had a loose switch cover on

the back for several years (the little door covering the rewind /

AF / batt check buttons). The metal plate that was supposed to be

glued into a recess in the cover was never attached well, and has

finally disappeared altogether.

 

Since this appears to be a rather poorly-engineered feature (along

with the disintegrating rubber bumpers in front of the shutter which

I just read about here), I'm guessing several of you have had this

issue. Does anyone have a suggestion for a replacement for this

little piece of metal? Barring that, what other ideas are out there

for how to keep this annoying little cover closed?

 

Thanks for any assistance,

 

Craig