BrianS1664879711

For what weight range of camera?

Whatever you used over a decade ago was likely another film. Ektar 100 was released in 2008 if I recall correctly. But what John wrote above is my experience also.

Which Rollei? If a TLR why not get a Rolleifix QR and swap them out when you use the different cameras. If you want to do it quickly it might be easier to use two tripods, one with each QR head.

Steampunk monocle.

Shoot it!

<p>Heed these words from Edward, "Plan on getting a factory CLA, which will cost about $200 if no major repairs are needed. The same for each lens." Buy the best condition gear you can afford but remember that this is old gear and old gear generally (almost always, if not always) needs to be serviced for reliability. If everything works correctly then there is no fear of parts availability. But professional servicing is not inexpensive so plan that into your budget.</p> <p>I'd like to expand on these wise words from Edward, "It is far cheaper to clean and lubricate the gears than to replace them." Its not just the gears. There are other parts of the mechanism that may need to be cleaned, lubricated, or replaced. None of these are a major problem unless the gear gets used to the point of failure... which may seem like an economic advantage but may not be. Repair is always more costly and problematic than routine servicing.</p>

Sounds like the classic scam. But one important detail is missing from the story: did you cash the check and successfully get the money? If not, return the check. If yes, check with he bank regarding how you should refund their money.

A very cool old camera with backs and Waterhouse stops. Sliding focus?? What size are the plates? A pic of the front?

It may be too late for that since your attempt at "go away pricing" appears to have indicated that you have the images. Too bad that scheme failed but they sound shrewd enough to have anticipated such response. What means NDA in your vocabulary?

Have you thought about this language "After delivery and acceptance of the contracted service/product we do not maintain archival copies of the product. We are do not provide archival services. Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause."

<p>Not professional experience, but based on being present at several births: 1. Don't be surprised if the doctor/midwife or medical facility has rules that don't include photographers during the birthing. 2. Focus on the best parts of the birthing experience: entering the birthing center and family gathering with the new member of the family. The in-between parts may not be photographically interesting of depict the immediate participants at their best. 3. If birth occurs in a medical setting, expect 'competition" and potential resentment form a pro photographer who may have a contract with the facility as a "preferred supplier" of newborn infants. </p>

P. S. There really are people who don't like the look of their own face or body and can never be satisfied. But they shouldn't be hiring photographers! What say he groom?

I'd try to resolve this irrational situation before calling in the law. Does client know that full refund means no pictures at all? Can't have both; that's not fair. What may be going on is extortion rather than seeking restitution.

<p>Great stuff; thanks... again!</p> <p>I only wish I had read that Verichrome article way back when. I was a dedicated Plus-X shooter and rarely used Verichrome. In hindsight I realize that the little Verichrome I used resulted in some lovely images. I should have been shooting more of it. But at least my trusty Weston III still serves me well. I use it to this day!</p>

Oh, forgot to ask... The shutter speed correctly changes when aperture is adjusted and camera pointed at a constant source??

If it works in A I'd assume also that the metering is working. But M should show both + and - depending. What ASA are you using and is the counter >1? Is that the +80 "problem" you mention? It's not a problem; it's a feature. Check to make sure the tab on the body that connects to the Aperture ring on the lens is in the correct down position.

PS. There is nothing "simple to check" inside a Hassy lens or shutter.

Based on description alone (you described the symptoms good enough) the shutter either wasn't properly serviced or it is broken.

Sure, I know what the problem is: back is old and well used. It needs to be serviced. After that you won't get overlapping frames.

I'd also be reconsidering the term "trusted" in your first sentence.

If you open up the lens to fiddle with he shutter you will likely extinguish any possibility of returning it. If I were you I'd operate the camera without a back, pointed at a light, to see if the shitter is actuating or not.

There is also a repair forum archive at the rand finder forum site.

Looking at my camera which exhibits a crack, it appears to be a surface effect in the glare suppression coating. Not a crack that might leak light. I can't see any evidence of flaking so not worried about contamination at this point. Seems more like the effect from differential expansion/contraction rate between the shutter material and the light diffusion material. I'm not inspired with confidence regarding trying to "fix" it.

Verify this, but I think Bay-2.

<p>... and not to prolong the side discussion... having some rather extensive background in understanding the Canon Law of the Roman Church (which isn't too different from other Churches, as you said), you are correct but not completely right. Canon Law does not directly drive the more practical decisions such as we are discussing. An analogy in civil law would be to say that we (American's at least) have a First Amendment right to free speech, so yelling "Fire" in a movie theater is okay because we have the right to say anything we want.</p> <p>The Canon you cite is very interesting, and steeped in a lot of Church history. But let's discuss that over a cup of tea some day. :) Forgive me for getting a bit carried away here... but I feel a kindred spirit in you!</p> <p>The "public vs private" discussion was much more simple and practical: "public" = regularly scheduled communal worship service and "private" = irregularly scheduled Rite that occurs on an as-needed basis, generally to confer a sacrament on an individual/couple. Weddings stand alone as the irregularly scheduled Rite that occurs on an as-needed basis where professional photography DURING THE RITE is generally acceptable.</p> <p>Other irregularly scheduled Rite that occurs on an as-needed basis, such as First Eucharist and Confirmation are generally celebrated during a regularly scheduled communal worship service. Also, a wedding or funeral is generally celebrated specifically for an individual, whereas Baptism, First Eucharist, Confirmation, and Holy Orders is generally celebrated for groups of people.</p> <p>It isn't always that way, of course, as individual clergy and certain cultural aspects can create deviation from the norm. As a Church insider I could tell you many tales that would make your hair curl about exceptions, deviations, and violations of Canon Law and other rubrics that happen in the real Church.</p> <p>But to the point of this thread: "Equity" or "perceived equity" amongst the individuals receiving the sacrament is the issue I raised as a potential concern of the clergy, not Canon Law aspects of public vs private worship. I can assure you that this, and the practicality of photographers (professional or Uncle Bob's) crawling the aisles of the church and elbowing for a good shooting position during a sacred rite is the issue that drives restrictions on photography in churches during rites and sacraments more than Canon Law.</p>