rajmohan.

<p>Thank you for the suggestions, <strong>Rick</strong> and <strong>JDM</strong>!<br> And thank you very much, <strong>Donald</strong>, for your generous offer to dig into your inventory.</p>

<p><strong>Laura</strong> - may I ask what it was about the Fuji you hated? Was it ergonomics or results, or both? Could you please elaborate? I'm not being critical, just curious - I don't have a Fuji digital camera, but I've heard good things about them.</p>

<p>Hi John,<br> I'm in New York.</p>

<p>Hi folks,<br> Does anyone have broken cameras containing 620 film spools that they might be willing to part with (just the spools, not the cameras)?<br> Many thanks,<br />Raj</p>

<p>Thank you very much, David - I'll keep an eye out for these units.</p>

<p>Thank you, Charles! I think this is exactly what I need. :)</p>

<p>Hello folks,<br> I'm looking for an enlarger column - I hope I'm using the correct term - essentially a flat board in which a metal column is affixed, with a provision on the column to mount a camera via its tripod socket. The purpose I intend for this is to mount my DSLR+macro lens on the column, place a lightbox on the base with film negatives (35mm, 6x45, 6x6 and 6x9) in holders, and to move the camera up/down depending on the negative size, and to digitally 'scan' the negatives. I've tried doing it with a tripod, but it is a painful process, and I think the column arrangement would work better for me.<br> I'd be most grateful for any help/advice you could offer in terms of where I could get the column plus holders for 35mm, 6x45, 6x6 and 6x9 negatives. I'm in New York.<br> Thank you,<br />Raj</p>

<p>Thanks, JDM! Apple products I can take or leave, but a bit of Zeiss irresistible! </p>

<p>I drove from Rome to Napoli and then to the Amalfi coast, staying in Amalfi. It was stupendous, and remains one of the highlights of our 5 week Italian sojourn. <br> The driving was crazy, but with a bit of care (expecting everyone else to be totally insane), it's survivable, and indeed in retrospect, it was a great adventure.<br> Parking however, was a %$#&^@%$, as others have mentioned. It was either non-existent, or if it did exist, we had to pay a king's ransom. But was a few Euros worth some amazing vistas and towns? For me, it was.<br> Also as others mentioned, you can't avoid the tourists and tour buses (which were a major hazard on the curves!) - shrug, focus on what you came to visit, and blot them from your consciousness.<br> Whatever you decide, have a wonderful trip. Italy is gorgeous!</p>

<p>Retinas II-III of different types are excellent - compact with superb optics. Zeiss Contessa is also lovely.<br> But in my hands, the Vitessa with an Ultron lens produces results that are just a little more special than the former (I have Retina IIa and IIIc, and Contessa). And those barn doors and plunger mechanism are extra cool!</p>

<p>Hi Glenn,<br> I might be interested in the Omega B8 - would it be okay if I messaged you?<br> Thank you,<br />Raj</p>

<p>Thanks JDM - I wanted one with a RF, and the Tenax looks so cool! :)</p>

<p>Thank you, Raghu - I'll keep an eye out.</p>

<p>Does anyone have a Zeiss Ikon Tenax II camera that they are thingking of moving on? I'm fascinated by the square format and the look of this camera, and I'm a Zeiss camera junkie, so I'd love to try it.<br> Thank you,<br />Raj</p>

<p>Hi Steve,<br> Thank you for following up. Unfortunately during the kerfuffle, I didn't see your message. <br> I did manage to get the back off after some (wince!) twisting. As it turned out, the knob on the outside was not properly engaging the latch mechanism on the inside, and so I tightened the screws holding it in place. The back was slightly warped at the edge near the knob, and I straightened this out, and now it mounts okay. The only issue is that the plate covering the wind mechanism in the base of the back, which is normally attached by 2 small screws, is missing those screws and was floating free! I need to find screws to affix it in place (suggestions for where I might find these screws would be very helpful). And then it will be ready to shoot!<br> Thanks for your help,<br />Raj</p>

<p>Michael and Subbarayan - thank you very much for your rapid response. I suspect that the repairman did indeed assemble it from the wrong entry point, so I'll ask him to readjust the lens for infinity focus. <br> Thank you very much,<br> Raj</p>

<p>Thank you for all your efforts, Glenn and the photo.net team. I saw that a lot of anger and frustration was directed at you and the others who worked on V2, which must have been hard to take, given the effort you and the team undoubtedly put into it. While there were some nice stylistic touches in V2, unfortunately there were a few functional problems, which, while frustrating, are not unexpected when a major overhaul is done. No doubt you and the team are working to rectify the issues. I look forward to seeing the fruits of your labor, and to continue to participate in this wonderful site and community.</p>

<p>Hi everyone,<br> I just had a lovely Carl Zeiss Tessar 80mm f2.8 lens (which I understand to be somewhat uncommon) overhauled. As with all my old lenses, the first test I do to make sure that there are no major issues is on a digital body, so that I can get rapid feedback. This lens has an M42 mount, and I used a stack of M42-to-EOS plus EOS-to-Sony E adapters to mount it on my Sony mirrorless camera. But the lens when focused on infinity per the barrel markings, only focuses at around 100 meters.<br> I then tested the lens on a Pentax MX body, and again, the lens fails to reach focus at infinity. <br> Is this a problem with the lens helicoid adjustment, or is it possible that this lens is of another mount type that has an M42-like thread but the wrong flange to sensor/film plane distance? (does such a mount exist?)<br> Thanks in advance for your help,<br />Raj</p>

<p>I have the 150 3.5N and the 80mm f1.9 - fantastic lenses!</p>

<p><strong>Paul</strong>, <strong>Joe</strong> and <strong>Chris</strong>,<br> Just some quick follow-up. I cleaned the contacts gently with a tiny bit of alcohol, and when dry, with a pencil eraser. Popped new batteries in, and the meter seems to be working nicely. I've left it on to charge the capacitor, per Paul's recommendation. Thankfully I didn't need to try any more involved manoeuvres.<br> Thank you for your help! :)</p>

<p>Ebay, but make sure to check the completed sales (and then also read the item description to see the condition), not listing prices - the latter vary wildly.<br> Also the antiquecameras site - they have prices on many of the cameras (and some lenses) mentioned on this page</p>

<p>Hi Josh,<br> I presume from your choice of currency that you're in the UK, and I don't know what the prices are like there.<br> In the US, I was able to get a M3 body in good condition for <$500, and a Summitar (50mm f2) screwmount lens for $300. I also have a Canon Serenar (50mm f1.8) and Nikkor HC (50mm f2) screwmount lenses, each of which was ~$200. With a simple adapter, screwmount lenses work fine on the M3 (or other M mount bodies). If you're set on an M-mount lens, you'll probably have to go for something like an early collapsible Summicron or Summarit, but the problem might be that the condition may not be great if the prices are low. <br> The G2 plus 45mm lens is probably in the ballpark of your budget, subject to condition of course.<br> When you say copies, I presume you're asking about the manual Zeiss Ikon Contax copies versus the manual Zeiss Ikon Contax original. The Contax G2 is a completely different animal, made in Japan. The manual Contax cameras and their Russian copies, when in good condition, are fine cameras, although the workmanship on the copies can be hit and miss; I've been lucky in that the 2 Kievs I've had were both pretty good. But although I enjoy using them, I think the M3 offers a more pleasurable experience.<br> I wonder if (as others have suggested) you might not be better served by starting with a cheap and simple fixed-lens rangefinder like a Ricoh 500 or an Olympus 35RC (there are many others), just to get a feel for rangefinder shooting. These will set you back just a few 10s of pounds. The 35RC is one of my favorites - small, very quick to use, quiet, and easily pocketable, with a very good lens. Try something like this, and if the rangefinder bug bites you, then you can think about sinking hundreds of pounds into the next camera. After shooting for a while you'll also have a better idea of the things you'd like in your upgraded rangefinder camera/system, and can make a more informed choice. If rangefinders prove not to be your thing, your initial investment will only have been modest, and you can move on.<br> Hope this helps!</p>

<p>Great - I wish you every success. Please let us know how it works out :)</p>

<p>On a related note, I tried to be clever with my DSLR some time ago, and decided I only wanted to use the screen to evaluate composition and tonal values, so I shot in RAW, but set the camera style to 'Monochrome', so that the image review would be in B&W. I could still process the negative into color with Lightroom.<br> Then came the New Year's day fireworks, and I happily shot a few videos, including some abstract ones about which I was very excited. When I opened the video files, of course they had been recorded in the camera's 'Monochrome' setting that I had previously selected. Monochrome videos of the fireworks, sad to say, did not do it for me, and so out went the clever idea! Nowadays, I have my screen turned off :)</p>

<p>To each his own, Daniel, but if I were to keep such a camera, I would also prefer that it worked reliably and reasonably well. After a $300 service to get the camera to its former glory, you'd probably still be in the black, financially.<br> But if it is a fun project to try the manual crank method, good luck - I hope you have success with it.<br> Alternatively, since you already have many Rollei TLRs, you could give this one away to a young film enthusiast who can have it serviced and get a functioning Rolleiflex for a reasonable price.</p>