rod_larson

<p>The Nikon F series seem to be legendary and it was hard to understand why without ever having used<br>

one but about two weeks ago I found this one at an estate sale and for the princely sum of $65 that<br>

also included a Nikkor 1.4/50 and a Nikkor 2.5/105. There was also a Soligor 35-240mm zoom that is<br>

pretty dirty inside and the focus ring needs some cleaning. The previous owner used the 1.4/50 and the<br>

Soligor heavily but hardly ever used the 2.5/105.</p>

<p>There is also some evidence that it has been dropped but no serious damage other than a small dent and<br>

some scratches.</p>

<p>So after checking it out it was time for a spin. The camera is heavy but a delight to use. It seems to jump<br>

into your hands and because of its large size seems very stable. For some reason it seems easier to find<br>

the aperture ring. Some lenses I have trouble finding the ring without looking at it. Everthing else seems<br>

easy to reach also. The elevated shutter speed knob on the photomic makes it easy to change shutter<br>

speeds without taking your eye from the camera.</p><div></div>

<p>Nice looking camera and from your photos it is doing a great job. I picked up a F2A a couple<br>

of weeks ago and just got the first roll of film back so I'll post them soon. Nice set of lenses<br>

also. I would like to get a 35 or 28 but they seem to be getting pricey. Thanks for posting.</p>

<p>I hope it keeps on raining if it keeps you posting. The grass is a very nice, peaceful photo.<br>

Keep up the good work.</p>

<p>And then there was the Anscomark M which had to be styled after a 1960 Ford Edsel. It did<br>

have interchangeable lens though and is a really nice camera.</p><div></div>

<p>Great photos, Tony. Especially the Still Waters. The b&w film really does justice to the scenes.<br>

I have a Retina Reflex also and have run a roll of film thru it and was very pleased. I've<br>

only used it that one time but will have to take it for a spin again.</p>

<p>Thanks for posting.</p>

<p>Sputnik influenced everything. Even the little decoration on top of the windshield had to have<br>

a fake antenna sticking out of it.</p>

<p>Great find, Gene. And thanks for preserving those 50 year old memories for us.</p><div></div>

<p>James - Not steelhead, smallmouth bass in the Mississippi River. The northerns kept cutting<br>

my line that day.</p>

<p>Gene - I have a Retina Reflex III that I fixed up and ran a roll of film through it and it was<br>

great. Picked it up the other day and it had quit working, all by itself.</p>

<p>Steve - this one has a nice, bright focus patch and it is nice to shoot.</p>

<p>Now for the obligatory photos. Like all Retina's it does and excellent job. I took it fishing one<br>

day. No fish were caught.</p>

<div></div>

<p>For anyone who is unfamiliar with the Kodak Retina cameras they were made in a Kodak<br>

owned German plant and are the only very high quality camera Kodak sold. The standard<br>

f1:20/50mm front lens element could be replaced with a 35mm or 85mm element. For the<br>

standard 50mm lens the little numbered tag to the immediate left of lens should match the<br>

serial number on the face of the lens.</p>

<p>I have always loved the quality of the ever ready case for the Retina's. That chrome trim<br>

on the bottom really sets it off.</p><div></div>

<p>Usually Retina IIIc's are more expensive than the IIc but this one was found at an estate sale at a<br>

reasonable price. It is basically the same camera as the IIc except it has a light meter added. Everything<br>

on this camera was operational including the lightmeter. There were not any problems with the cocking<br>

rack or the low shutter speeds so the only thing to do was put some film in it and take it for a run.</p>

<p>All of the Kodak Retina folding cameras are a pleasure to use although I prefer either the IIc or the IIIc.<br>

The IIc and IIIc are just a little bit bigger than the II or IIa thus they fit in the hand a little better and they<br>

still fold into a pocketable size. The only complaint I have about any of the Retinas is the engraved<br>

numbers for shutter speed and aperture are small enough so I have to put my glasses on to change any-<br>

thing and then take them off again to look through the viewfinder.</p>

<p>Here is a photo of the Retina IIIc.</p><div></div>

<p>Rob, just make sure you get it or you will hate yourself and be consumed by self doubt the<br>

rest of your life.</p>

<p>Also, we would like to see some pictures of it.</p>

<p>Great find. Those SRT 101's and 201's are great cameras but even better are the lenses and<br>

it looks like you got some good ones. Don't worry about the batteries, sunny 16 works great.</p>

<p>Sounds like you will be doing some bedtime reading.</p>

<p>One comment on the Nikon F2. It has as many buttons to push, levers to pull, and knobs to<br>

turn as an Exakta VX and it's a lot heavier.</p>

<p>Found these at estate sales for a combined cost of $100. The Kodak Retina IIIc even works. No stripped<br>

cocking rack or sticky low shutter speeds. It has already had a roll of film run thru it but not developed<br>

yet.</p>

<p>The Nikon F2 came with a Nikkor 1.4/50, a Nikkor 2.5/105, and not pictured a Soligor 35-140mm Zoom<br>

that needs some cleaning. The 2.5/105 looked like it had hardly been used. Gave it some new light seals<br>

and put in a roll of film and took the first pics this morning with the 2.5/105.</p><div></div>

<p>Rick-Sorry, but maybe the digital crowd don't read this forum.</p>

<p>Rob- I didn't get too close with the Takumar. It's just a crappy scan of a print. The only<br>

thing to compare is the relative size of the subject in the two photos. Color and resolution<br>

in the scans are nothing compared to the original prints. Maybe someday I will break down<br>

and get a decent scanner that can scan the negatives.</p>

<p>Thanks for the comments.</p>

<p>Give 1,000 people a camera, let them click away, and eventually they will produce a photo<br>

that will be as artful as the chimp's.</p>

<p>The next day with the Oreston I took another close-up just to compare since the Oreston will<br>

focus down to less than 1 foot. I was quite amazed at the difference.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Before I put on the Oreston lens I had taken a close-up of a Sweet White Violet with the<br>

Super-Takumar 1.4/50 mounted on the Spotmatic and focused at its minimum distance.</p><div></div>