Farkle-Mpls

<p>Konrad -- thanks for the research and writing up your findings! I think the non-sequential serial #s is pretty unintuitive but maybe Leica thinks people won't research these things very thoroughly.</p>

<p>I just checked it out and the item is no longer on eBay ... I wasn't watching it closely since my original post so I don't know when it was sold or removed.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>John -- I have passed on it. It's a bit too fishy. I have a M6TTL LHSA which I use as a shooter -- I thought it would be nice to have another collectible one.</p>

<p>I also noticed my LHSA M6TTL has a serial # of 2733974 so the one I posted about is hardly one of the final 1000 ... really odd.</p>

<p>Hello.</p>

<p>Found this on eBay and was intrigued and did a bit more digging:</p>

<p>http://www.ebay.com/itm/191108284810?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649</p>

<p>The listing claims this camera, serial # 2595670, is one of the last 1000 M6TTLs built. I checked what I could online to validate the build date and came upon this at:<br /> http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Serial_Numbers_Leica_Cameras</p>

<p>If this source is correct, the camera was built in 2000, not 2002. Barring the oddity of the 674/999 inscribed on the top plate, what do you think about this camera? The seller has a perfect rating which imparts some trust on the auction but I'm stumped on the serial #.</p>

<p>The referenced site lists the final serial # range of M6TTL production to end at 2760000 (assuming the source is correct) in 2001.</p>

<p>I have not asked the seller about it -- I plan to do that -- but I wanted to cast the question out here first.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Girls playing on the beach ... Monkey River, Belize (Feb 2014)</p><div></div>

<p>Red hair during "the golden hour" of the evening sun in Thailand.</p><div></div>

<p>Here's another shot.</p><div></div>

<p>Dennis -- you may want to invest in a hood for your 85/F1.5 as well. I use the Canon T60-2 successfully, although it's not technically the correct hood for the lens. As mentioned previously, these older lenses are prone to flare and the hood "helps".</p>

<p>Plus, it looks cool.</p><div></div>

<p>... and Dennis. In your opening post, you said you returned to Minnesota. I live in Edina. Are you in the Twin Cities? There are many photographers in the area who share my interest in older cameras and lenses so if you're interested in going out on a shoot with that wonderful new lens of yours, drop me a message. But be warned: this is an addicting hobby. Not so good for your wallet to hang out with the likes of us ... </p>

<p>Dennis -- I agree that discussing a 55+ year old lens on a state-of-the-art digital body gets a bit iffy on these topical forums but I figure it all supports an interest in preserving -- AND USING! -- these wonderful vintage lenses. My copy of the 85/F1.5, according to Kitchingman, is a late 1958/early 1959 type 4 version.</p>

<p>As a sidebar, when I take some photos of models, I like to use some of my vintage glass just to support a point of how you don't need modern Canon "L"-series glass to take some very technically sharp and artistically appealing photos! Many people -- converts to digital SLRs in the past decade -- absolutely cannot believe some of my photos are from 60 year old lenses. But I digress ...</p>

<p>You asked about the NEX-7. It is a great camera for using adapted lenses on (you need to buy an adaptor to use them, see Fotodiox as a example). I don't own any Sony lenses for the NEX-7, I just use it with my vintage Canon (FD and LTM) and Leica glass. You have to shoot the camera without a great deal of automation and manually adjust focus and aperture on the lens but, for me, that's not an issue.</p>

<p>Joining the thread a little late here. Heck of a find! Congrats. I have that same lens and here is a shot of my wife which I made with it. Probably shot at F2.0 ... maybe F2.8 ... on a Sony NEX-7.</p><div></div>

<p>I will be arriving by airplane in Dublin with my family in mid July. We will be traveling by rental car while in Ireland. They will stay 8 nights, then return home via a flight out of Dublin's International airport. I will remain for an additional 4 nights. The extra days I will devote to rural landscape photography. I will keep the small rental car with me for those extra days.</p>

<p>I'd like to bring an extra piece of large luggage containing my Hasselblad kit, which I plan to shoot after my family returns to the USA (this will be a sturdy roller bag which can be checked for flight). As we will have limited space in our rental car, I would like to store the luggage with the 'Blad in it for the days I'm traveling with my family and reclaim it after I drop them off at the airport for their return flight. Most airports I've visited do not offer extended, secure storage. Does anyone know a safe, secure, accessible place for me to store my extra camera gear (for about 8 days) in the Dublin area?</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

<p>Ian -- those India photos are absolutely stunning! I am impressed beyond words. </p>

Walter --121 cameras?! All which are 1.35v wired? Holy Smokes ... how many cameras do you own? (I realize this

could be a dangerous question on any photo.net collector forum).

 

To your point about the expense of converting that many cameras, I have to ask: how many of those 121 cameras do you

use? Obviously you only need to convert the ones you use -- is that a more manageable number?

<p>As my older cameras have needed CLAs to keep them running, I've asked the tech to convert their 1.35v meter circuitry to 1.5v -- I've converted three of the five I own now. Nominal charge -- or none at all -- when completed with a CLA (my experience).</p>

<p>I even had a warranty issue on an old Canon F1n with KEH. When I sent in it for repair, I asked them nicely (with a note) to please convert the light meter to run on 1.5v. They did at no charge!</p>

<p>Oh ... on a different note. I did send three cameras to Ken O: an F1N, an F1n and an EF and he did a fantastic job with all of them. I forgot what a little gem the EF is too. His prices were reasonable and turn-around time was pretty good.</p>

<p>I did get my camera back from KEH. It took awhile -- probably three weeks -- but I wasn't in a hurry so it didn't make much of a difference. They seem to have provided the required service for it (I'm still testing a roll of film through it). The light meter now works consistently and they converted it to 1.5v per my request (I need to check it against a gray card but their note indicated the service had been performed). If everything checks out, I'll be pretty happy with my "user" 1980 Olympic F1n. </p>

<p>(Sorry for the re-post. The postings are now in reverse order -- sorry!)<br /> Here's one I found when I was scanning Dad's Kodachromes -- likely taken in 1956 or so. The camera is his Canon IID1 rangefinder which he bought new in Korea in 1952. I had it CLA'd by Gerry @ Kindermann's and still use it. He would've been 27 or so when he took it.</p><div></div>

<p>... and here is one of me and Dad taken just a couple years ago. This was a complete accident. I thought my iPhone was shooting from the other lens (back, not front) but it was too bright to see on the screen so I just took the picture. It ended up as a wonderfully impromptu shot of me and Dad at the beach.</p><div></div>

<p>Here's one I found when I was scanning Dad's Kodachromes -- likely taken in 1959 or 1960. The camera is his Canon IID1 rangefinder which he bought new in Korea in 1952. I had it CLA'd by Gerry @ Kindermann's and still use it. He would've been 30 or so when he took it.</p>

<p>Ben,</p>

<p>I think the presumption in Canon's original -30C claim is that the camera and winder have been maintained regularly and specifically with Canon-spec lubricant. This camera has seen 30 years of life and a CLA a few years back but I don't know whether the technician followed Canon's requirements on lubricant (does it even exist any more)? Regardless, I have the camera in to Ken O currently getting "re-CLA'd" and I know Ken will do the right thing and I bet it WILL work fine down to -30C.</p>

<p>My Leica M4-P (1981) which was CLA'd around the same time as my F1N was out in more severe cold the following weekend and performed perfectly. That camera was serviced by a guy who religiously follows Leica's maintenance recommendations (Gus Lazzari, a frequent contributor on the Leica and Rangefinders thread on Photo.Net).</p>

<p>My Leica experience reinforces my belief that if the Canon technician (Ken O) follows the manufacturer's recommended maintenance procedures and products (e.g. lubricants), my F1N will perform just as reliably as my Leica.</p>

Thanks C Barey for the info. That's a real loss if Kindermann won't do Canon RFs anymore. Gerry did three cameras for

me, the last one about two years ago. The cameras continue to work like new.

 

Youxin Ye was mentioned by Brian. I used him for a Canon 7s and he did a great job, converting the light meter to work

on 1.5v batteries at the same time I had the CLA performed.

<p>Hello (again!) Mr. Barey. I've had several of my Canon rangefinders CLA'd by Gerry @ Kindermann's in Canada. </p>

<p>http://www.kindermann.ca/service</p>

<p>Gerry typically works on Leica rangefinders but he was happy to work on my Canon (of course, they are very similar, mechanically). His work was outstanding and I've had him do a IID1, IIS2 and a IVSB2 for me. I sold one but regularly use the others.</p>

<p>The price about four years ago was around $275US + shipping to Canada. His turn around was just a few weeks.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>Mr Barey -- A year or so ago, I sent two T90s to Steve for CLAs and he did an outstanding job but he referred me elsewhere for my F1s. For the T90s, I'd look no further than Steve. BTW, I'm selling one of those T90s. If anyone is interested, please contact me off-list.</p>

<p>Steven, thanks for the link. Seems so-so at best. Well, they have my camera by now so we'll see how it performs when I get it back. I did get a hold of Ken O (he returned my call) and I sent three other FD bodies to him for service (F1n, F1N, EF). I'm very anxious to see how he does -- based on member experience I'm optimistic. If KEH botches it, I'll send it on to Ken. I'll post my experience with KEH back to this thread.</p>