Niels - NHSN

Wow! That is a generous and helpful write up. Although I don’t personally need the instructions, I’d like to thank you for this valuable contribution to the community!

Mine, above, has the metal focus ring.

The Brooks-Veriwide is really nice, but when I see them I always find them priced just a little above what I want to pay. I've had my share of folder disappointments over the years, thus I'd only consider rigid cameras at this point. A few years back I found this Fujica GL690 & Lens in Tokyo for the equivalent of less than 200 USD. It is visibly used and brassed but fully functional. The 100mm Fujinon lens (a lovely 4 element Tessar design) is like new but comes from an earlier G690BL. The lenses are interchangeable and the optical design the same, but the newer version had a rubberised focusing ring, which may account for the low price since the combination is not "original". Regardless; over the years I have seen the earliest Fujicas from the late 60's to the early 70's (G690/G690BL/GL690), show up from time to time at very low prices - if you are willing to accept cosmetic imperfections. These are solid and simple cameras, and if they work now, they will likely work for years to come. AND the 6x9 negatives are stunning.

I am not really sure if there is a question here or if it is a heads up? I am based in Europe where (just as an example) the Z6/24-70mm/FTZ kit has been sold with an instant discount for a while now - and including 25% VAT in my country - the kit is selling at the exact same price here as is offered above by Nikon USA. Looking at the Nikon USA offer; If I throw my old GH2+kit lens in, I get an additional 85USD discount - which may be fair, but isn't attractive to me as the GH2 would be of more value to me. With that said, I think the Z6/24-70mm/FTZ kit is attractively priced at the moment. It is on par with a Sony A7iii/24-70 kit -at least where I live. I think the Nikon kit has more going for it than the Sony - especially if you have Nikon glass laying around.

In the eyes of a teenager, a dad is not cool (sorry). She most certainly didn't catch an interest in film photography because of you - and any healthy teenager would hate their parents to have first look at their pictures. If you show too much interest, she'd likely loose interest. Just be supportive when invited - not over supportive :-)

That is a nice camera! Thanks for showing. I'll show you mine:

Secol Archival System appears to still be in production. When I was working in the museum world (in the 1990's), this was the preferred product. I was never super excited by their binder sheets for mounted slides (or rather the idea of having mounted slides in a binder), thus I (and several museums I knew of at the time) used Journal24 cassettes. They also seem to be alive as a company. I am still using off the stash of both products I bought back in the 90's - no signs of deterioration - so I can recommend these.

In the eyes of the Internet, there is always something wrong with a camera, but it is mostly just opinions. Any camera, regardless of version, can have manufacturing defects or weaknesses (as in; a repair is required). Only time will tell - but a new version may just introduce different defects. If something is obviously wrong with the Z7, it should be public knowledge by now and you should be able to evaluate if it has any significance on your use of the camera or your style of photography. Keep in mind that it is not Nikon's first camera, nor is it Nikon's first mirrorless camera. I support the idea of waiting buying something until you can afford to buy what you really want. Intermediate steps are almost always waste of money - and will delay the gratification of getting what you are really hoping to get.

Thanks for the heads up! If you have the time at some point, I’d love to see a closeup photo of the change made to the lens. /Niels

Without holding the negatives this is merely guessing, but what I see reminds me of early stages just prior to metallic crystallisation most commonly seen as an effect of residual fixation chemicals - but also possibly initiated by outside contamination such as from the sleeves - as mentioned already. This chemical reaction tend to evolve from the highest density of the negative which in this case would be the outer edges of the exposed frame (and not from the edges which are clear). If the above is the case, The Canadian Institute of Conservation recommends avoiding chemical cleaning unless special care has been taken: Do not attempt to clean negatives in aqueous solutions, including refixing and rewashing, unless extensive tests have been performed to confirm that the gelatin layer will survive such treatments. Do not attempt to remove yellow, brown, or blue metallic stains in the image, despite the many supposedly effective formulae for this purpose that have been found in photographic journals throughout the history of photography. Such stains are formed when a negative comes in contact with unstable or chemically aggressive materials such as newsprint, adhesives from filing enclosures, peroxides emanating from fresh oil-based paint layers, and residual processing chemicals (e.g. fixing salt, or hypo). Source: Care of Black-and-White Photographic Negatives on Film Short of spending the significant amounts of money required for professional restoration, I would personally transfer the negatives into storage where they can "breathe" and then scan them as soon as possible. If the theory is correct, you should know that the negatives may continue deterioration, but it isn't contagious, so you could just donate and let the receiving organisation decide if they want to restore/scan or wait-and-see.

iirc the FE will accommodate focusing screens from both the FE2 and FM3a. They are brighter and may possibly be an improvement. With more light coming through the screen, you will need to make a minor adjustment on the exposure compensation dial. Exactly how much was printed in the original instructions that came with the screens, but the information is probably easy to find online if you buy used.

If you Google 'Rangefinder Polarizer' you'll find many strange inventions designed to make up for the inherent problem; that you can't see what the lens sees on a rangefinder, which, if nothing else, illustrates that a polarizer isn't really practical for rangefinders. If the workarounds don't discourage you, then the search results will provide you with ideas for many different ways you can approach the rangefinder/polarizer challenge.

I use zip ties for another unrelated purpose in my home and notice that when exposed to micro movements over time they will break with 100% certainty. Not a problem in my specific application, but might be if attached to a camera.

Film: Around the end of last century everybody seemed to have embraced AF and I thought I had to get up to date. But, I hated my first autofocus camera, a Nikon F90 (N90), mostly because I felt I lost the immediate control I had with my previous cameras (FE/FE2/F3). The F90 quickly found another owner and I returned to manual focus and immediate setting read out. Digital: Everybody I respected loved the Panasonic LUMIX GF1 - I found it to be the worst camera I had ever used from the perspective of ergonomics/UI - I kept it as a backup for 9 years but never got to like it - I did like the contemporary GH-1 though. The most surprising positive experience was the Pentax K-01. Everybody seemed to ridicule the design (especially the yellow version), and from the looks I thought the same, but when I picked on up in Japan, it felt so natural and intuitive that I almost bought one on the spot. Only reason I didn't was my commitment to another mount. ....I still kind of regret I didn't get one. I think most of the criticism of this camera came from those who didn't actually handle it. Lesson learned from above - don't listen to "everybody" ;)

In this time and age information regarding import duty/tax should be easily available online from your tax authorities. I lived in Japan for years and bought quite a bit of used photo equipment from local Japanese auction sites. I was never disappointed with my purchases, and mostly the items turned out to be in better condition than the description let me to expect. Large parts of Japan are very humid during the warm rainy season and fungus can be a problem. Most people with a serious interest in the well being of their cameras will keep their equipment in controlled environments such as dry cases or dry cabinets. An experienced Japanese seller knows that fungus would be a natural concern of the buyer and would address this concern in the description. If not explicitly described, you must ask - and possibly think of this lacking information a mild warning sign! The good reputation of Japanese sellers is said to have given rise to non-Japanese sellers who sell (or pretend to sell) out of Japan - If you get the feeling the seller is wrongfully trying to give the impression of being Japanese you should probably walk away. As with all purchases, you buy the seller before the product.

Well, those VC tourbillons are best considered disposables. Excellent choice for moving around the Tarn, though. Next time you feel victimized, just let it out on your vallet. Mine kind of likes it - I think.

To answer my own question. I ordered a Hadley One from Billingham, and it arrived yesterday. As I had hoped, the side/bottom padding is relatively thin, so while providing some protection and structural support, it also appears to be more flexible than the Hadley Pro w insert. A laptop sleeve is built into the bag an serves as support/protection towards the body. With a laptop, the bag will be inflexible - of course- but without, the sleeve seems to be flexible enough to partially follow the shape of your hips. I am fairly sure it will suit my needs.

Brick and mortar shop in Copenhagen: www.Photografica.com. They do cater to collectors world wide, but I'm not sure if their homepage has an English version - maybe if viewed through Google Translate? Their return and warranty policies on second-hand are OK: 1 year warranty, 30 days exchange to something different (not refund) - and I assume that the 14 days return/refund privilege on Internet purchases according to EU consumer law also applies to second-hand. "Brugt" means used: https://www.photografica.com/brugt-51.html

Thanks. Maybe I was unclear: I own a Hadley Pro, so I am aware of the quality and operation of Billingham bags in general. I don't really like the structural integrity of the Pro model without the the insert (the Brady bags are very good in that regard). I want to know if owners of the Hadley One can comment on this specific model's ability to maintain its structure when the insert is removed. Protecting the equipment is another matter irrelevant to this question.

My current two favourite bags, Brady Arial Small and Brady Gelderburn are both so worn that my wife is displeased when I wear either in her company. I therefore currently use a Hadley Pro which I have owned for the past 11 years - but rarely use because I find it too stiff and boxy with the insert and too loose and shapeless without. In my research for a new alternative to replace the Brady bags*, I noticed that the (new?) Hadley One apparently has some back/side/bottom padding build into the bag. I'd imagine that improves on the structure when used without insert - Are there any owners here that could comment on that? *In case you you wonder; I am not going to buy a Brady bag again because they lifted a photo of mine from Flickr and used it in their marketing without permission or credit and gave me a hard time when I pointed it out.

I said cracked - intermittent functional. I had a similar problem as described by OP, and that was the professional's diagnosis.

<p>If you are certain that your batteries are fresh, then I think it is a cracked FRE resistor - a common problem in these now very old FE cameras - It can cause all kinds of intermittent problems related to open shutter/meter readings. This issue can drive you crazy as the problems can come and go for no apparent reasons. It is not a DIY fix - to my knowledge - and will most likely require a donor camera. I would return it and find another FE (I love that camera - worth pursuing :) )</p>

All is fine. No need to worry. Great lens, but you need to be ahead of the decisive moment - it is a slow reacting camera - best for still objects.

Simple to verify. Put it on a stable surface under a constant light source. Take a reading. Without moving the meter: Put a piece of material (moist paper for example) -the same size/color density of the buff- somewhere on the dome. Take another reading. If there is a difference in readings, it matters, otherwise it doesn't.