nicolas_renon

<p>The best test would be to use it and check if it matched your requirements.</p>

<p>I own I use a FED 3 (with I-26) and never has any problem. In regular use, I doubt you would notice any quality difference between I-26, I-26 or J-8.</p>

<p>Freestyle is my first choice not because they look highly dedicated to analog photography. They are not the cheapest but I can live with it. Too, the sell films, papers, chemistry and lab equipment under their brand (Arista) at a very resonable price and it is always a game to know who manufactured them: if you want Kodak Tri-x at half price get their Arista Premium 400...</p>

<p>Wha is the point? There are rude people on ebay (like in real life)??? So?</p>

<p>Not sure it has something to do with the original topic...</p>

<p>I would stick with Tri-X and D76.</p>

<p>Bought an OM10 in the '80. Used it for years until the shutter had some trouble (twice). Replaced it by an OM1. Never looked back.</p>

<p>Looks like a genuine Leica II, congratulations!</p>

<p>This is my favorite camera, not in terms of features as you noticed but it has everything you need to take pictures and nothing more. Set the Elmar lens to f/11 and you have a real streetshooter weapon. </p>

<p>High chance your camera needs a visit to the repairman due to age. Nothing exceptional after 60 years (who can live 60 years without going to the doctor?).<br>

CLA is not free nor cheap as these cameras are pretty complex and need some knowledge from the repairman and this is a fact buyers take into account when getting such cameras.<br>

To answer your question, I guess it could worth $200-500 depending on the camera real condition (not only cosmetic) and assuming that lenses are fine (no fungus, no separation or other optical flaw).</p>

 

<p>I fully agree with you that 1+4 is clearer but you have to deal with data as they are communicated and be prepared to understand what 1:4 means... </p>

<p>If you know the rules, you know what 1:1 means as well as any other dilution...</p>

<p>If you follow the chemistry notation rules, there is no ambiguity.</p>

 

<p>1:50 means 1 part of developer for a total volume of 50 (2% concentration). Said differently, it is 1+49.<br>

1:1 means no dilution, 100% concentration or 1+0.</p>

 

<p>1+50 and 1:50 are not the same to me but I doubt it would make a noticeable difference (2%) on your negatives in the real world...</p>

<p>If dilution is 1+50, in real life it should translate by 10ml of developer + 500ml of water for a grand total of 510ml.</p>

<p>If I remember well, workshops where FED cameras were built were under the NKVD responsability.</p>

<p>Marking looks genuine to me and consistent with the serial number.</p>

<p>A restored FED 1 can be a very efficient camera, as efficient as a Leica II or III. The only trouble I see with pre-war cameras is the find a matching lens or not to forget to shime the camera according to the lens. Of course, when you get a camera + lens combo, you can assume they match well but it is better to check as there is no indication you get the original lens...</p>

<p>Olympus OM1 - 2 serie (can't speak for 3 - 4) with there large viewfinder. </p>

<p>The Yashica TLR serie is a clear copy of the Rolleiflex with some pluses (price, Cds meter) and some minuses (long term reliability essentially). Unfortunately, Yashica cut corners with the most recent series (the MAT 124 G being one of these) and older series (the plain MAT for instance) are better built.</p>

<p>No need to flush it with whatever liquid or to "exercise" it. If it does not work correctly, it has to be fixed, this is the only cure. Ok. it will cost you something but it should last (almost...) a lifetime.</p>

 

<p>If you find your pleasure in using "challenging" cameras, it is anoher story, you have plenty of options!!!</p>

<p>I too use old cameras but I consider reliability as a must. Old does not mean delicate or unpredictable. Life is too short to be let down by equipment.</p>

<p>I like the picture with the dog.</p>

<p>Unless it is for nostalgy reason, I wonder if such camera system is a good investment... QC, frame uverlaping, bygone ergonomy... Since the rise of digital, MF film equipment is pretty affordable, even an Hassy does not cost an arm anymore.</p>

<p>Answer to #1 question: no problem at all, chemistry is chemistry regardless the brand.<br>

Answer to #2 question: you can use the tap water. What I would suggest is the use Photo-Flo and as it creates quite a lot of foam, I would rince ONCE again the film with distilled water. Advantage: it dilutes a bit Photo-Flo (less risk to get marks once dry) and you remove the unwanted stuff from your tap water. </p>

<p>75mm for a 6x6 and the equivalent (40-45mm?) for 35mm camera. The perspective is still rather natural but it gives some space to the pictures.</p>

<p>Still trim the 35mm film leader for my FED and Zorki 1.</p>