wendell_kelly

No difficulty calibrating a Focomat Ic with the most recent version of the El Nikkor 50mm either

which is a terrific camera (my third in my life) The R6 is prone to shutter lag, which can be annoying. DAG told me this was due to a damper in the mirror mechanism and can be corrected by cleaning.

This isn't much of a problem- You can have the meter adjusted for a silver oxide cell when the camera is in for a CLA or just use a CRIS-type battery adaptor. I wouldn't bother using a hearing aid battery, their life is too shor.

If you are seeking the undeniable advantages of a large negative, a sound alternative is one of the Fuji 690 cameras. When considering alternative 690 offerings, look for the lowest shutter actuation count (the counter is on the bottom of the camera) and the best (least wear) cosmetics. If you find the smaller negative dimensions of a Fuji645 acceptable, then also consider a late model Rolleiflex. You will not surpass build quality/construction quality of the mechanicals in another camera and the late model Xenotars and Planars are fine optics, indeed. No shame,ever, in shooting with a Rollei. My preference is making large (16x20 and, on occasion larger) B&W prints in my darkroom and prefer a Fuji690 when circumstances require using a handheld MF camera.

My own experience with the Russian lenses is that the Jupiter 8 and Jupiter 12 are the pick of the lot. The J-8 is a good, sharp lens in both the earlier silver version and the later black ones. In checking about twenty J-8.s I found only one that didn't focus properly. The major issue with the silver J-8's is that the helicoid lubricant becomes tar with age; it is possible to DIY a cleaning and relube. The J-12 is a good performer, a credible alternative, IMHO, to the Leitz and Japanese glass of that era. The J-3 1.5/50mm lenses vary all over the place in focus accuracy, I had three out of four copies that needed shimming to be at all useable. Once shimmed, by a fellow who, happily, knew what he was doing, they became sharp fast lenses. I've run qualitative testing on about fifteen of the Russian collapsible 50mm/f3.5 lenses; Industar-22, Industar-50, and one labeled just "FED". All were good serviceable lenses with the best build quality I've encountered in a FSU lens, but in testing with newspaper want ads at 3 feet as my target, none of the Russian glass was equal to any of the Elmar 50/3.5 lenses I used as a comparison standard. I have one J-9 that works properly and have returned several to vendor for focus issues. My J-11 works fine but is not really anything remarkable.

A good reference on Patton and his cameras (and Patton in WWII for that matter) is: "Patton's Photographs - War As He Saw It" by Kevin MHymel ; Potomac Books 2006, ISBN 1-57488-871-4 or 1-57488-872-2 The book cover has the photograph of Patton with his revolver and wearing a black Leica III (or IIIa) with an f2/50mm Summar.

Ditto on an X-Pro1 or X-Pro2 as the right gear for welcoming/recording your new family member. The indoor/lowlight sensitivity of these cameras is just right for the task at hand. I used a Spotmatic F in the delivery room when my daughter was born. A fine tool for the job in the 1970's and I have the negatives to prove it. My wife, on the delivery table, took some shots of me as I held our newborn. Flash forward. For my grandson's early hours, 90 minutes into his new life, I used an M6 with a Hexanon 50mm/f2. Even better tool for a similar job (Tri-X at 400). Having used my X-Pro1 and X-Pro2 indoors more recently with (not very intense) lighting, I heartily recommend the Fujis, with Fuji primes, for indoor baby coverage. No senior woman in your family, and the new mother after a couple of months, will ever say you took too many baby photographs. If this isn't the appropriate event in your life to add some new capable gear what will be the right time.

Two possibilities for me here- 1) Leica M3 or M4 with a V3 or V4 Summicron. Hand held meter - a digital Luna Pro is just fine. Tri-X to be processed in 1:1 Mytol 2) Leica IIIF with a Canon Serenar 50mm/1.8 (silver body). I used (had only) this gear for 15 years back in the 1960's and 1970's Meter, emulsion, and processing the same as above.

I have a fair amount of direct experience with most of the Zorki series, the earlier Feds, and Kievs.These all proved to be a disappointment to me and I wouldn't consider another (in particular the later manufactured Kievs). The later model cameras, especially, were so shabbily built that they are not worth the effort/expense to fix one - others here will disagree with me. It is more than disappointing to attempt to use a freshly serviced Zorki and to find it has multiple light leaks. It all comes down to camera condition and service history. Unless you are buying from someone trustworthy who can assure you that the camera has had a CLA in the past few years, you must assume that the camera will require service to clean the shutter. It will cost just as much to service a Russian Leica copy as for a genuine Leica (or an LTM Canon). My suggestion is to buy a IIIc or IIc Leica` and have it serviced (a Canon LTM is just as nice - consider the Canon P) and economize by using a Russian lens. The Jupiter 8's are quite good lenses - try to find a black one. The earlier silver-colored ones (aluminum barrels actually) have fine glass but sometimes have congealed (read petrified) lubricant in the helicoid which makes them stiff to focus.

You might contact Al at Cameraworks in Latham, NY. He repairs most mechanical cameras.

The last time I visited Florence, there was second decent camera shop about six blocks from the Duomo, next door to the (now closed) American express office. The had some Leica gear in the window, and perhaps more importantly, they stocked film. Ask at your hotel.

Can anyone say if this is a legitimate posting? I sent a message to the cited address and have had no reply. I'd like to send John some work if he is still in business.

Robot made their own cassettes to be used on the take-up side. I use the Robot type "N" cassette in my Robot Royal 36.

I'm quite a fan of the post-war Retinas, myself. I've carried Retinas, usually IIIc's, with me on many trips in Europe and North America. As a practice, I had the cameras serviced before relying on them in the field; gummy shutters are common here, and I generally shot mostly Kodachrome then. Often when circumstances would dictate that only a single, compact camera, and single lens could accompany me on the trip, my choice was, invariably, a Retina IIIc over the Barnack Leicas that I also had in my kit. I was never unhappy with this choice. The Retina suited me well when my travel was for business and my photographic pursuits were, of necessity, on a "where possible" and "when possible" and, sometimes, "if possible" basis. The 50mm f2 Xenon is a fine lens and I was particularly pleased with the results of shooting after dark in Rome. I often still carry a Retina IIIc, tucked in a corner of my 5x7 LF bag.

<p>"I don't think gratuitously insulting me or my replies here is profitable to this conversation"</p> <p>I can't see where any such insult was offered and suggesting otherwise would seem to be rather off-topic.</p> <p>The obvious alternative of only shipping darkroom materials by ground transport was offered.</p> <p>A type of reasoned reply, IMHO, would be to explain why a "ground shipment only" policy for darkroom chemicals is not acceptable to B&H. </p>

<p>"Either they are trucked to us, avoiding the air restrictions or the people sending them have taken the painful complicated steps of having them cleared for delivery to us. That does not extend to clearing delivery from us. I am not an expert on this but we are confident that at least one of the "others" being mentioned is not in compliance with these regulations. We prefer to comport ourselves otherwise."</p> <p>Thank you for continuing to engage in discussion on this topic. Gentlemen can differ.</p> <p>B&H is rightly concerned about the safety of its shipments when/if sent by air.</p> <p>But it seems obvious that B&H need not ship the darkroom chemicals by air if air shipment is the problem. Use ground shipment and charge your customer what it cost you to ship his order legally and safely.</p> <p>It seems to me, at least, that the difficulty disappears once air shipment is removed from the discussion.</p>

<p>"And I suggest that because of its size and consequence dominance of the market, B&H has some responsibility to comport itself ethically and with integrity and to comply with required federal safety regulations. YMMV"</p> <p>By all means, behave ethically and integrity, and when you ship the darkroom chemistry, BY GROUND ONLY, do so in a legally prescribed and safe way.<br /> <br /> These materials are shipped safely and legally by others every day. So far as I know, the materials that we are discussing weren't made by B&H in New York, were shipped to B&H from the their manufacturers.<br /> <br /> I'd hoped for a more reasoned reply. This sounds as if B&H isn't trying, or interested in trying.</p>

<p><br /> Mr Posner wrote:<br /> <br /> "In the wake of the ValuJet Flight 592 crash on May 11, 1996, the federal government began cracking down on safety regulations for many different chemicals in airplane cargo holds. We don't ship ground so every order has to conform. We elected to observe the safety restrictions scrupulously and the result is a range of chemicals and similar items we cannot ship. Compressed air products like Beseler Duster fall under the same restrictions. More recently there have been similar issues with lithium batteries."</p> <p>Some of this doesn't seem to make sense. Of course B&H ships ground. All of the gear and supplies that I have purchased from B&H has come to me UPS ground.</p> <p>It would seem to me, at least, that B&H could simply adopt a policy of shipping ALL process chemistry by ground carrier, no exceptions. Customers that require air transport would not be served.</p> <p>I suggest, the because of its size and consequence dominance of the market, B&H has some responsibility to be a (the) reliable source of supply to those working in a darkroom.</p> <p>I further suggest that B&H make darkroom chemistry exempt from their free shipping policy. Charge the buyer what it costs to use ground shipping to send a chemistry order but make it possible for a user away from New York City to receive needed material.<br /> <br /> I hope that Mr. Posner will read this and respond.</p>

<p>By all accounts, there seems to be no question that Chris Sherlock provides exemplary service on Retina cameras.<br> I do point out, however, that a Retina is not a particularly complex bit of hardware. If the rack gear is not broken, then a routine service would be a thorough cleaning and lubrication of the leaf shutter and a cleaning of the RF/VF (how does that muck get in there?). If the rack gear does require replacement, new ones are evidently available within the US (Microtools) and any shop can find one for you.<br> I suggest here that there may be no reason to send a camera halfway around the planet when nearby alternatives exist.<br> My point is that most any competent camera tech in the US can clean/lube a leaf shutter and clean a dirty viewfinder at a cost about equal to the round-trip postage charge to New Zealand, alone, and without the Customs complications discussed in this thread at some length.<br> As an example, I comment that I've had work done, recently and more than once, and quite satisfactorily, at CameraWorks in Latham, NY. The charge has been $85(US) for a basic "tuneup" on a working camera (gummy leaf shutter at the low speeds).<br> I'm within reasonable driving distance of that shop and plan to drop of a pretty, but gummy, IIc there soon. (I rather enjoy chatting with the man who services my cameras). Cameraworks is a general camera repair shop doing its work largely by mail. Cameraworks has a website.</p> <p>FWIW all.</p>

<p>If memory serves, there was a nature photography book extant in the 1960's in the US (I obtained my copy from my local (Yonkers) public library) in which the author primarly used this lens with a Kalimar 2 1/4 square single lens reflex.<br> A (high school) schoolboy at the time, I recall thinking that the author was as short on funds as was I. At the time, I hadn't a clue where to obtain a Kalimar reflex.<br> Has anyone else seen the book which I mentioned?</p> <p> </p>

<p>A iiif is quite a nice user camera and a good introduction to the Barnack Leicas.<br> When you purchase one, I recommend budgeting for a CLA. Barnack Leicas have often been in storage for quite a while and have gummy, or soon to be gummy, shutters.<br> You should be just fine with the Russian 50mm/2.8 lens; if it is the Industar, the lens has a reputation as a good performer The Jupiter 3 50mm/1.5 is well known to often have focus problems but the other Russian 50mm are usually OK. I have used quite a number Jupiter 8 50mm/2 lenses on a iiif without problems.<br> Another lens to consider is the Canon (aka Serenar) 50mm/1.8. This is an inexpensive lens with perfect compatibility with a Leica and rivals the first generation Summicron 50mm/2 in performance.</p> <p> </p>

The Leica R6 has a built in variable diopter correction. You can fabricate your own add on correction diopter lenses by cutting them out of the plastic lenses reading glasses from a dollar store. I use a jewelers saw and get at least two diopter lenses per dollar pair of glasses. I file these to fit the viewfinder window and secure the correction lens in place with black gaffer's tape. The tape seems to last two years for me.

<p>According to the serial number list on L-camera forum, cameras 309116 and 309118 were part of a sgroup of Leica Standards manufactured in 1938. As most here know, Leica Standards did not have rangefinders.</p>

<p>I shoot with a Stereo Realist myself.</p> <p>Nothing special about film and processing, just any good quality color transparency film processed in the usual way. I used Dwaynes most recently but there are plenty of other places that handle slide film.</p> <p>I have the film returned uncut and mount the slides myself; plastic mounts are readily available the last time I checked. Mounting the transparencies is quite simple.</p>

<p>You might also try Cameraworks in Latham NY. This is a competent, general camera repair shop.</p>