mervyn_wilmington

<p>Thanks Mag and John. </p> <p>'Interestingly' after I'd posted, a tried another search. There was a string on another forum. In essence, a D1X had been working perfectly, then started doing what mine is, ie everything working other than the shutter. The battery seemed to be fully charged. However, a new one was used, and the shutter worked again. A subsequent posting said that was not unknown, and not to rely on the battery appearing to be fully charged.</p> <p>So, it might be the card, the battery or both - or something quite different!</p> <p>I suspect the battery is the original. I have a new battery on the way: should be here tomorrow. I suppose I should try that before looking for another card...</p> <p>Thanks.</p>

<p>I've just bought one of these very cheap, but in super cosmetic condition. I bought without warranty (not working) to display in my representative collection of Nikons. The dealer could not get the battery to charge.</p> <p>I've got the battery charged. The lcd is working and the lens will focus, but the shutter will not fire. The lcd indicates a card error. I only have a 8gb card. Some information says the camera will not work with an above 2gb card. Other information says that it will treat a larger one as 2gb.</p> <p>However, I can't think that no card or the wrong card will cause the shutter not to fire, and suggests a more fundamental fault.</p> <p>Advice/comments would be appreciated!</p>

<p>Please can I record my appreciation for all the help that members have given.</p> <p>I now have near mint SC 50mm f1.4, P 105mm f2.5 and a QC 200mm f4, and a film in the F2. Fuji converter arrived yesterday, and I was able to have a very quick 'go' with the 200mm. Contrast a little down but easily improved in Lightroom.</p> <p>I am looking forward to further 'experiments'. If a really good 85mm f1.8 comes along, I may well acquire that too.</p> <p>Thanks again to everyone.</p>

<p>Thanks for that information Sandy.</p> <p>I thought I had found a -3 with a German dealer - that is what the listing says. However, when I looked at the illustrations, the one with it on the camera said it was +3!</p> <p>I'm waiting for a reply from him on something else. I'll then ask him about the '-3'.</p>

<p>As Jim intimates, one of the problems with this is that Nikon uses different part numbers even though they will fit more cameras than the indicated application. It is also clear that dealers (on the web) will say it is for what is on the box, unless they are more knowledgeable and also indicate the other cameras the item will fit. I think the F2 takes 19mm (?), whilst other Nikons take 22mm.</p> <p>I am still hunting and also looking toward a dioptre correction lens. I think that I am -3. I have three cameras with built in dioptre adjustment, but, of course, you are not told what the adjustment is. An educated guess might be good enough...</p>

<p>Many thanks for that Jim. There are charts of this kind in the Nikon Compendium, but not for viewfinder accessories.</p>

<p>Much appreciated Sandy. I've just been watching Sherlock Holmes on tv. I'll see if I can emulate his skills in finding one! But I may be back to you.....</p>

<p>Thanks for that Sandy. Only last week I sent a Nikkormat with quite a bit of other equipment to a dealer. Why didn't I check first?!</p> <p>Thanks for your kind offer. You may be in the USA? I'm in the UK. There's no panic. I'll see what else there may be about...</p>

<p>Thanks RJ for another very helpful contribution.</p> <p>The eyepiece on my F2 is female thread. It seems, as you infer, that the ring is missing.</p> <p>I may have to swallow my pride and open my wallet and get the DK4 that has the ring with it. At £20, it half the cost of a lens!</p> <p>Thanks again.</p>

<p>Thanks for that RJ. Wex stocks the DK-3, but it seems it doesn't include the metal screw-in ring.</p> <p>I've now looked at my Nikon Compendium. It says DK-4, which fits the F2 and F3. I've found one of those in the UK, but at an arm and a leg price!</p>

<p>I'd like to find a rubber eyecup for my F2, but extensive searches have discovered nothing certain as to the type number.</p> <p>There are reference to the DK3 fitting, although that is not shown in application lists. Elsewhere it suggested that one for a Nikkormat fits.</p> <p>Help would be appreciated!</p>

<p>Thanks Andy. That is very helpful. I thought it might be the case. I suppose, if the object were static, there is the option of focussing at full aperture and then stop down.</p> <p>Having regard to the possible problems with the 'cheap' prisms on a D3200 etc, I wonder how bright the viewfinder would be at f1.4 on that camera, and the same lens stopped down to, say, f8 on a Nikon/Fuji set-up?</p>

<p>Andy - please could you take me through your last posting about when the lens stops down and the consequences? Is it not potentially major issue, or am I missing something?</p> <p>Many thanks for the other helpful contributions. It is not unusual for experienced amateurs to have better knowledge than some professionals or makers. You don't have to struggle on some occasions to see that the makers guidance is simply not correct or has been simplified.</p>

<p>Andy - your comment about terrible focussing. Perhaps wrongly, I had the impression that green spot or rangefinder type focussing was available because that doesn't rely on coupling. As I say, I may be wrong. Any other views on the point?</p> <p>I already have a Fuji XT1 and could get a mount/converter for that. </p>

<p>Paul - I do not think I am incorrect.</p> <p>It is true that pre ai and ai lenses will not mount on many dslrs, but I do not think that is the case with the models I have mentioned. There are several pages on the web saying that there is no problem.</p> <p>For example, Thom Hogan, in his chart, says that both pre ai and ai mount on the D40 etc, but with no meter.</p> <p>No doubt other members will have knowledge of this issue.</p>

<p>From other postings, some members may have seen my interest in 'earlier' lenses mainly for use on my recently acquired F2.</p> <p>I have bought two such type lenses for it. Both are in excellent condition and from dealers who offer good warranties. However, other dealers provide only very limited 'quick return' arrangements, especially when a lens may be at a bargain price. Being able to check the lens immediately can be very important. If very speedy film processing is available, that can be an answer. It isn't available to me.</p> <p>With limited functions, these lenses can be mounted on the D40, 60, 3000, etc. Such bodies can be had for next to nothing. This would seem to provide a ready check on the performance of a lens.</p> <p>Views and experiences would be much appreciated.</p>

<p>Thanks Sandy, but I am in the UK. There is a company here that was doing this work. I've emailed to see if they still are.</p>

<p>A very speedy update.</p> <p>A dealer that I have bought from for many years, just listed a 105mm f2.5 auto P (pre ai) in quite superb condition, and complete with full keeper, lens cap and hood. A quick trawl on the web indicated that it is very worth trying, and I have ordered it. The condition made it too good to miss.</p> <p>I would still very much welcome responses to my original posting, and on the P version I have just bought. Thanks for the two responses already.</p>

<p>I've just bought a very clean F2 with 50mm lens. I now want something a little longer for general use, but portrait in particular.</p> <p>Ai or Ai-d versions of these seem strong contenders. The 105mm f2.5 has universal praise. So does the micro with the added close-up ability. However, some say that it is too sharp for portrait work. </p> <p>The 85mm has a good deal of praise saying it is as sharp as the 105 f2.5. Others say that some examples can have sharpness issues. It would have an advantage to me though in that I could use it for portrait work on my D300, while the two 105 lenses might be considered a bit 'long', although generally useable in ai or ai-d form.</p> <p>Advice and comments would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>Try getting a metric ruler and measure across the diameter where the filter would screw in. Some D70s were sold with a 'cheaper' 35-70 lens rather than the f2.8.</p>

<p>Thanks for that Wouter: very helpful.</p> <p>I've been using Lightroom for my digital work for around 8 years. I've never had a dust problem, and have never had to clean a sensor.</p>

<p>Many thanks for the helpful comments. Two questions arise, please.</p> <p>First, I have looked at scanners several times over the years, but never proceeded to buy one. The issue of dust always seems to raise its head. What is the difference between scanning and conventional darkroom enlarging? I always made sure my negatives were totally dust free, and rarely had a problem. Spotting pens were not needed - or hardly!</p> <p>Second, I take the point that results are much down to the user. However - and generally with scanners - there often seems to be concern about the quality of the instructions that come with the device. If it is the case, it seems very unfortunate.</p>

<p>I may wish occasionally to scan 35mm black and white negatives. High quality results are more important than speed of process.</p> <p>The Plustek 8200i SE has some good reviews. However, elsewhere there is mention of the Reflecta ProScan 10T being better, but finding user reviews of the latter has proved difficult.</p> <p>Might any members be able to help, please?</p>

<p>I am very grateful for the further interesting contributions.</p> <p>David Harris suggested I look for a contemporary copy of Amateur Photographer. Two years ago, I actually threw-away around 200 copies of AP and the like, some going back to the 1950s. Not even the charity shops would take them, and they went to waste disposal.</p> <p>However, what David said reminded me that I have a compendium book of AP Nikon test reports, and sure enough there is a report undertaken in May 1972. The price, including f2 lens, was £334. It is possible that dealers might be selling for less, but discounts were not very common at that time for this sort of equipment.</p> <p>Two years earlier, we had bought our first house for almost exactly three times that price.</p>

<p>No need to apologise RJ, there are always bargains, and then better bargains!</p>