ph.

Not easy to find this proper email, but if Brett Rogers would like some specific pages of Alpa service manual copied, I may be able to help. I only have the version for the later type11, but since Pignons were quite conservative their designs for the Alnea might be similar. p.

If asking about the very rare 15mm Hologon with M bayonet, I have only used it on film . Interesting perspective. entirely distortion free, reasonable contrast but not all that sharp in the corners Vignetting is taken care of by the concentrically graduated "Verlauffilter" accompanying it together with the special viewfinder.. The more common 16mm Hologon was made for the Contax G and does not have an M bayonet, but on some copies surgery has apparently been performed replacing the Gmount with an M mount. With the very short focus the mount needs to be extremely precise. No experience with digital use, but I would presume that Leicas sensor would be more forgiving than sensors not adapted to light from the rear element coming in at a steep angle. p.

Sirs, I did not easily discover any method for sending a PM to the administrators, hence this public thread. I have changed computers and not had any urge to log in and reply to a thread before now. I discovered that my pseudonym has changed, but my mail&password still works. Please restore. p.

<p>I sold some stuff at Christies some years ago. Steep charges was OK, but in one case they did not pay attention to my reserve price, and their descriptions were not entirely accurate, so I do not wish to deal with them.<br> p.</p>

<p>Usefulness depens on use. I bought a Pen F a few days ago to replace my 2009 version of this versatile camera. It is useful for all sorts of manual optics -and can double as a portable autofocus snapshot device.<br> For my purposes, WiFi, filter knobs, JPEG, menus and screen have very limited use. Raw files are developed in the computer. A leica M3 with digital sensor would be a good start, but current Ms are fatter and very much more expensive. The electronic viewinder of the PenF eliminates the need for high precision mechanical parts beyond sensor and lens mount alignment, but does not need the extra hump that some cameras have. Stabilized sensor is very useful.<br> In practice, the viewfinder makes the camera function like an SLR with the bonus of focus peaking (plus enlargement if needed) and fairly constant brightness even when stopping down. The light meter & auto shutter is accurate enough. The adjustment knob of 3 stops up or down gives plenty of correction possibility if the (spot/center weighted/evaluating) metering should be mistaken. The screen can be reversed so there is no chance of the touch-controls accidentally starting (pictures can be reviewed through the viewfinder). Picture quality is good, but I have been photographing oddly angled tiled roofs in good light, not Siemens stars. (iso 200, and reasonably good lenses: 100mm and a 21-35 zoom, hand held)<br> Only problem so far is occasional unwanted filming though some button being accidenally pushed. I trust that Olympus in time will launch a firmware update that has one optional "entirely off" setting for each and every button and function except the shutter release and that the front button can be programmed to adjust for stabilising different focal lengths so as to avoid faffing around with menus.<br> p.</p> <p> </p>

<p>And which battery do they recommend for the Riga Minox? the AA size perhaps?</p> <p>p.</p>

Discussions on fair distribution of costs, responsibility and spesific time limits seems to be called for.: IF through specs, literature study+deduction and their lab tests, Leitz could and should have known that the spots would have developed, then they should replace or repair free of cost throughout a reasonable lifetime for the product. But what is a reasonable product life 10years? 50 years? Digital devices of all kinds are after all usually consigned to the wastebin after a few years. So if a maker has taken all precautions, some of the burden, after some years have passed, should perhaps fall on buyers aquiring a new, untried product, even if it comes from a reputable vendor. The question then becomes: more buyer responsibility for covering costs after 3years? 5 years? 30%? 50%.of costs? Look at more ancient troubles: a Leicaflex SL may have a slight beginning yellow cast to the viewfinder due to the prism coatings used and its meter may be sluggish, but customers will probably agree that it is not fair to ask Leica\ Leitz to take care of that for free. A CL may have very slow slow speeds, and like any ancient shutter will need maintenance, but free repairs?. I recently had my 35-70\4 -R suddenly stick. Solms repaired it and I paid and was happy that it was fixed. No idea whether the cause was an unlikely coincidence or if the internal cams had worn too fast due to the turn of the century engineers being too optimistic. I did appreciate that there still is a service that can keep R-optics alive- even if one has to pay. What one should demand, however, is total repairability of all products that they have made in-house. DMR parts and out of production ICs excepted ( but much can be designed anew. After all, vintage and classic cars still have modern pieces put in. ) Canon and Nikon make excuses "not feasible to keep spares after 10years". Aspiring to be world leading, Leitz\Leica should be able to make bespoke pieces to repair anything they make. and keep the skilled workforce to do so. p.