matt_shimao

The black Minilux is painted, and the finish does wear off easily,

particularly at the corners of the camera. I've barely used mine, so

the finish has not worn off at the corners yet....I'm actually looking

foward to the finish wearing off because I think that will make the

camera look better not worse.....

<p>

Leica no longer manufactures these. I bought a new one about a year

ago. At that point, they had already been discontinued for a while,

and it was very hard to find a new one.

<p>

I think these were "discontinued" because they did a just a few

production runs. It is probably not cost-effective for Leica to do

any more production runs. As far as the price difference, I had to

pay full retail. You'll probably have a difficult time finding a

new one at a retail store. I got the second-to-last one from

Wall Street Camera, and I called about 20 places looking for the

painted black Minilux about a year ago. These come up on ebay

sometimes.

<p>

Good luck,

Hello,

<p>

I just purchased a new M6TTL. When I advance the film, I hear a distinct "tick" from the frame counter. This doesn't happen after frame 38, when the counter stops advancing. This happens with or without film.

<p>

Is this normal? The photos aren't affected, it is just a bit irritating. I don't remember hearing a tick when I played with the display model in the store. My serial number is 2550xxx. Maybe this is a new phenomenon?

<p>

Thanks for your help,

I've actually found an answer to *part* of my question on the Norton Camera Brackets website (www.nortoncamerabrackets.com). What I still don't understand is why using a bracket helps to eliminate red-eye....can anyone help with this? Based on the following advice, since my camera has the hot shoe centered over the lens, it seems that I should not use a bracket at all.??? Any comments?

One of the main reasons for using a camera bracket should be to place the flash unit directly above

the lens. If your flash unit is on one side or the other, the angle of the flash will create a shadow on

the opposite side of your subject. With the flash directly over the lens, the shadows will be below

the subject. This is why I recommend that you keep the flash height as low as possible. This goes

against the idea of keeping the flash as high as possible to throw the shadows down behind your

subject. If your flash is high, you will get more shadows below the nose and chin of your subject

and you will have to tilt your flash unit as you move from groups to three quarter shots. I believe in

keeping it as simple as possible. At weddings, particulary, you do not have time to remember where

your flash pointing. My recommendation is, and always has been, to keep your flash height about

9.5" to 10.5" from center of lens to center of flash head. This will give you good shadows under the

nose and chin and eliminate most red eye problems. It will also allow you to move from groups to

three quarter shots without changing your flash angle. You will also have a better balanced system

since your flash will not be so high.

Hello,

I am considering the purchase of an on-camera flash. My primary use

for the flash will be as fill, while taking pictures of people

(portraits/groups/candids). Most of the time, the subject to camera

distance will be within 15 feet. I know that using an on-camera flash

is

not ideal, but carrying around a lot of equipment

(umbrella/stand/reflectors/etc.) is not an option

for me.

I am using a Mamiya 7. My question is--will the use of a bracket that

raises the flash above

the lens significantly improve my results? Or will a Vivitar 285 in

the hot shoe work just fine? If a bracket will help, can someone

explain why? One of the things I have read is that rasing the height

of the flash will help to minimize red-eye; but I don't understand

why. Is there an "ideal" lens to flash distance?

By the way, I don't need a bracket in order to take flash pictures in

the vertical position--I'll just take horizontals.

Thank you,

Thanks for all of the great advice above. I had not thought of many of these points. I took Douglas' advice above and actually rented a Mamiya 7 and my impressions are: 1) I agree that it is much harder to focus on objects moving towards or away from you; 2) it is also harder to focus in general since the plane of focus does not "snap" into focus like with a SLR; 3)for me the size of the M7 actually makes it easier to hold and press the shutter--personally, I really like the ergonomics of the M7--it is easy for me to release the shutter smoothly and there is virtually zero shutter lag.

I also tried the Fuji GA645Zi in the store. I think only Fuji and Mamiya make rangefinders with built-in meters--this is an important convenience for me. I liked the small physical dimensions of the Fuji. However, the autofocus did not inspire my confidence--the focusing was a bit inconsistent, especially with dark objects. Also, the lens is slower than the M7 lens.

The Leica is very nice, but for me the holdability of the M7 is better.

Although I was impressed with the results I got from the M7, I also understand the limitations of this camera more fully. In the end I decided to buy a M7II. Since I will print 8x10s, I will use my 35mm on a tripod when I need a lot of DOF. I will also continue to use my 35mm for "street" photos, which I like to do occasionally. (I agree that I need to work on my "street" technique--I have a tendency to "zero-in" on my main subject and when I get my negatives back, I am surprised by all of the other stuff that I ended up with.) The M7II, will help me to get better results for posed people photos and other handheld photos that do not require a lot of DOF.

Best regards,

Matt

Hello,

I've searched the archives for the answer to this question without

success....I am considering a MF rangefinder for handheld people

pictures. I understand that the larger film size of MF is a definite

benefit. I also understand that a rangefinder will allow for better

sharpness, since the mirror and shutter in an SLR cause more

vibration. However, I also understand that using a tripod makes a

huge difference.

My question is: Does the significant decrease in sharpness caused by

shooting handheld make the choice of format negligible to the final

result?

If it matters, my 35mm SLR is a Contax Aria with 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4,

and 85mm 2.8 lenses. The MF rangefinder I am thinking about is a

Mamiya (either a 6 or 7). I will rarely print larger than 8x10.

However, I have found that I sometimes like to crop the negative quite

a bit (sometimes printing just a third of the frame).

Thank you very much,

Matt

Hello,

I am considering the purchase of a Mamiya 6. I plan to use this

camera primarily without a tripod to take pictures of people. I am

trying to be careful about this purchase and so I have read all of the

Mamiya threads--I am aware of possible problems with the rangefinder

focusing and the limitations of the built-in meter--having read these

criticisms, I still want the camera. However, I read one message from

a reputable person on another site that worries me:

"The Mamiya 6 did come with a white paper in which the 75mm was

described as an orthometer (if memory serves). It was described, by

Mamiya, as not reaching an optimum performance until 1.5-2 stops down,

primarily because of undercorrected sperical abberation and field

flatness wide open, to achieve near perfect distortion correction

(again from memory. If I run across the paper, I'll quote the

passage)....<snip>....Mamiya definitely 'fixed' the 80 on the 7 and in

comparison to the 6 75mm, the 7's 80 is just much better wide open.

Whatever Mamiya's reasoning for making the 6's 75 the way they did,

they did realise the error of their ways. The other 6 lenses, the 50

and 150, perform far better than the 6's 75 does full open and there's

not a lot else to be said about it."

Please, any comments from Mamiya 6 users? I like the "normal"

perspective, and so I was planning to purchase the Mamiya 6 and only

the 75mm!

Thank you,

Matt