jrschlauch

<p>"By the way, isn't 75 the new 35? I and Bernie are certainly hoping so. ;)"<br>

Apparently not for me. : ) I'll try George if nothing turns up on this and the other sites I posted on. He just seems to be so busy. He's worked on several viewers for me in the past. Thanks</p>

<p>After an 8 year lapse, I wish to get back to my first love, Stereo slides. I have 9 vintage stereo cameras in various stages of "need." I know Dr. T works on various Realists, but is there someone that still works on the others? At age 75 it's time, as my mother would have put it, to "do it, or get off the pot." I have those and a ton of other stereo gear that I need to either use or "lose." Thank you, Richard Schlauch</p>

<p>Thanks again to everyone that helped me. I decided to start putting them up here in the classifieds under classic cameras first. I will describe them as best I can and provide as many photos as possible. <br>

I guess I'll proceed from there. Thanks again, Richard</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks to everyone who have responded so far, I really appreciate it. I am in the process of putting up the Bessa here in the classifieds and see no place to add photos. Is it permissable to direct people in the add to my smugmug site to view it? There I could put up an unlimited number of pics and update them as necessary.<br>

JR Schlauch</p>

<p>I have a large selection of classic folders that I have decided to sell. KEH made what appears to me a nice offer on my Voitlander Bessa II with Heliar lens. I have to send it to them for better evaluation and pay for shipping and insurance. If they decide its worth considerably less, they will deduct that from their offer. If I am unsatisfied with the final offering, I will most likely have to pay shipping and handling to get it back. My question is: Is this procedure worthwhile? In short, I will be out $30 if the offer holds and $60 if I need to get it back and try to sell. I have no worries about Keh's reliability or the process, just the cost effectiveness of it. Has anyone else faced this dilemma and if so what would you suggest?</p>

 

I batted .500. Rebate for first 2 lenses led to the usual UPC rejection. (Phone call fixed that) Rebate for second 2 lenses went without a hitch and I received my check within 4-5 weeks. Of course I sent the second one certified, with return receipt request.

Not sure why my previous photo did not open. I'll try one last time.

http://www.photo.net/photo/5782448<div></div>

The photo in my previous post was taken hand held with the 100-400 at 400mm, as is the photo below. Again, both were shot at the Bronx zoo through dirty, smudged and scratched Plexiglass. Canon 30d, iso 800, 1/200 f.5.6<div></div>

This photo was taken at the Bronx zoo. He was behind a sheet of plexiglass, so it isn't as sharp as it could be.

http://www.photo.net/photo/5782308

Besides Ebay, are there any better sites or ways of selling Classic Cameras?

Dealing with Ebay and all their different fees is annoying.

Is there a site that specializes in these cameras?

Most camera stores profess not to be "too" interested in film cameras any

more and offer ten cents on the dollar.

It is hard enough to part with Zeiss, Voigtlander, Certo and company

without adding insult to injury.

Richard (NY)

I sometimes shoot both raw and jpeg when I am away from my own computer with CS2 on it. I am then able to at least look through what I have shot on someone elses computer, even if they do not have Photoshop CS2. All photo programs can handle jpegs.

I will be in Montana for three weeks and will most likely not be able to carry all my photo gear AND my Laptop. If so, I'll switch to raw+jpeg to examine what I have shot while I am there, and then work on the raws when I get back. Last time I was in Montana I worked this way and it was fine. Also allowed me to email some shots back home.

I bit the bullet and picked up the 1.4 TC Thanks for all the suggestions. In preliminary test shots between the two set ups, the 70-200 2.8 with tc seems noticeably sharper than the 70-300 Is. This is not even remotely scientific. Each set up was used to shoot the same subject from the same distance with the same ASA. speed, f-stop, etc. and compared in photoshop at 100%. They were shot on a 30D

"Slightly different way of framing the problem:

How important is quality and speed at 300mm to you? How important is money? How important is convenience?"

 

 

In the short term, money is very important because I have already dropped $1300 on the 70-200L is lens. This time next year I might better afford quality and speed.

I am leaving for Montana in a couple of days and can't decide whether to take both the 70-300 is AND the 70-200. The 70-200 is a vastly superior lens, but out west, I might want that little extra reach. If there is little or no drop off in quality with the 1.4 tc added to the 70-200, I can leave the 70-300 home and that's one less piece of equipment to shlog through the airports.

I just lucked into a 70-200L 2.8 IS lens. I already have the 70-300 IS lens.

Were I to add the Canon 1.4 TC to the 70-200, would the sharpness and contrast

of the photos be better or equal to those taken with the 70-300?

I am shooting with the 30d.

I know the quality of the 70-200, that is why I broke the bank to get it, I

am just trying to decide whether to keep the 70-300IS for the longer reach or

sell it and get the 1.4 TC. I have read reviews comparing the 70-200+ tc to the

100-400L, 300L F4, etc and they all seemed ot indicate that that combination

was not quite as good as those leneses. Appreciate and observations or opinions.

I had a Brownie Hawkeye in the 50's. I bought a +1 lens at the local camera store around 1958. It was a Kodak, and it sliped over the taking lens. As I recall it was pretty good from about 3-5 feet. You could not aim it using the viewing lens because of the parallax error. Had to aim it by guesstimate. Took several very good portraits with that set-up. My favorite photo of all time was one of my Grandma which was taken that way. I still have the photo and the negative. I only wish I hadn't kept them in a a box with other photos for 35 years. Even photo shop doesn't seem to help. Looks like someone went Ice skating on them. Richard, NY

Ran Norton 2006 AntiVirus and Webroot's Spy Sweeper and neither program came up with anything.

The copy of CS 2 on my laptop does not have the problem.

Three weeks ago I started getting the above error message.

"This application has failed to start because qt-mt333.dll was not found."

It suggests re-installing the software as a possible fix. I have done so

twice without luck. I have also tried Window Xp's "System Restore."

I still get the message. When I get the message and click "OK," the CS 2

opens up and seems to work fine. The only thing I notice is that xmp files do

not open.

I have attempted to find something on the Adobe site as well as searches on

Google without much luck.

Anyone have a similar problem or better yet, solution?

I have this lens, but am embarassed to say, I can't find the serial number for it on the lens. I checked the front of the lens and the barrel and I also removed the rear lens cap. (where I found the serial #'s for the 16-35 and the 24-105) I have not found it. What am I doing wrong? I seem to have run out of places to look.

I downloaded LaserSoft for the Nikon scanner and used it in demo mode for over an hour. It never crashed. I would assume from that that my crashes are a software problem, and one Nikon is failing or refusing to fix. Any Ideas?

As I mentioned in my question, it does the same thing in Nikon Scan as well as Photoshop 7

I should have mentioned I have a pentium 4, 3.4ghz processor with 2 gig of ram. Seems it should be enough.

I left out a zero, it should be the 4000 model. Sorry.

My Nikon 4000 scanner crashes, taking Photoshop 7 with it, every 2-4

scans. It even does this when I scan using Nikon Scan. I have up

dated the driver but the problem still persists. Could it be a

physical problem with the scanner and if so, where can it be repaired?

Richard (NY)

Thanks Ken. Running aroll through it was what I did first. Like the TDC Colorists, The Wirgins apparently only fully operate with film. I received an email from Ken Ruth, though expensive, that seems my best bet.

Still would be good to find there are others out there repairing classic cameras. It would appear that eventually those who repair them will expire before the cameras do. Richard

Came into pocession of Wirgin Edixa stereo camera. Its a rangefinder

with a built in light meter, probably selenium. I know the Steinheil

Munchen Cassar lenses are excellent, based on my experience with the

Realist 45 which also has them.

Problem is it is not functioning, particuarly the shutter.

Anyone know of a reliable camera repair person or company that

could restore it to full functionality? (Not including the light

meter, which is irrelevant to me)

Thank you, Richard<div></div>

One of the greatest things I have ever seen, were stereo slides of myself, my parents and my grandparents from 1952. To be able to step into the past with such exceptional realism, to see myself at age 11 and my family as I remembered them, in our old 3 room apartment,is a thrill that can not be equaled. Not just the people , but the rooms, furniture,bric a brac, etc. I made copies of some of them and printed various stereo cards and anaglyphs, and although they were interesting, they still did not equal the original slides.