straw_man

My dominant right eye was a victim of macular edema, for which there is no cure. When my left eye lens became

clouded, I had cataract surgery about 18 months ago. I can know drive and use a viewfinder quite well. I had spent a lot

of time and money acquiring diopter lense corrections. The downside to cataract surgery is that reading classes are

required for everything closer than about 12-18 inches, so I need them to modify aperture and shutter speeds on all of my

film cameras, and for chimping with digital. I am color blind so no difference there. The U of Washington is doing

research on a cure for color blindness, so there is hope there although I am approaching age 80. The best way I know

how to describe my color blindness is to say that caution and red stop traffic lights have the same hue to me.

Louis M, your photography speaks for itself, and your photos using a Sony nex 7 with Canon FD lenses convinced me

that I needed the same camera. I have adapters for Leica lenses, M and screw mount, Pentax lenses, Minolta, Nikon and

Canon FD. Works great. I love the Canon Screwmount camera you showed, and ergonomically, they are superior to

Leica. I have a few. The Canon P is a favorite.

Patrick S, I live in the Pacific NW, I will be 79 in August, I have rheumatoid arthritis, and my medical school charges

average $50K/year. Luckily, my Uncle Sam picks up the tab. As far as garage sales are advertised, usually people just

hang a sign on a telephone pole. In my case, I gave my wife of two camera salesmen of my vintage, who are eBay

savvy, and I am sure that they would handle sales for a reasonable fee or percentage. We are talking like 200 cameras.

Having been stationed at Dobbins AFB in Marietta, a suburb of Atlanta, I would shoot anything that got me back to Seattle

post haste.

I rarely part with any cameras, but I traded in a Leica M2 and IIIf for a used Nikon D700, my first and only full frame digital

camera. the very next day I couldn't stand it, so I bought back the two Leicas at the same price and kept the D700. I think

the used D700 was the most expensive camera I ever bought. At my age, it will last me the rest of my life. My primary

concern is how to dispose of a huge number of wonderful classical film cameras. My children have no interest in them.

My wife threatens that upon my demise she have a huge garage sale with every camera going for $5, including my Like

New Leica M6.

Great results!

What the hell are scooped and whipped ices?

I live in Seattle.

Here in the Seattle region, Costco stopped developing film 2-3 years ago, but the Costcos I frequent seem to be active in

printing digital photos. We are fortunate to have at least two fully functional camera stores, one the largest on the west

coast, and many places to get film developed. I will be checking out how well Fred Myer functions. My problem with

drugstores is that when they copy the film photos to a CD, the file sizes are small compared with Costco. I feel for you

living in Sequim. The Olympic peninsula is beautiful and I have a son and grandchildren living in Port Townsend, but i

don't like being dependent on ferry boats. I live in Bellevue. We have traffic problems depending on time of day, but

nothing like Seattle.

The following quote is from Thom Hogan. I wish Thom had given more specific details on why Galen disliked the camera. I have a Nikon

4 and it does have some neat attributes. It can use just about all Nikon F mount lenses. It uses dials and knobs rather than cryptic

menus. It has autofocus, but not state of the art. I believe Thom once characterized the F4 as the best manual film SLR ever built by

Nikon. I have an F4s also, but the F4 is much easier to handle. I would love to hear some of your thoughts on this camera.

"Galen Rowell bought a Nikon F5 and flew off to Fiji to do a commercial shoot. I also remember his [expletive deleted] comments about

the F5 when he got back. From batteries to lens support to controls and configuration, Galen had a long litany of things he didn't like

about the F5. He immediately went back to using his F4. A few years later he got his F100. I was with him hiking the Bay Area Ridge Trail

with his new F100: it had the early rewind problem that plagued a few early samples. Galen was so upset he was going to abandon the

hike and go back to Emeryville to get his F4, so I lent him my (working correctly) F100 and mostly just used my Olympus XA compact.

Those two experiences put Galen off of "modern" film bodies for quite some time, especially the F5, which he never really used again.

Eventually he came to grips with the F100 and some of the low-end consumer bodies he used on his runs and climbs, but he never fell

out of love with his F4. He's not the only one. It was the epitome of Nikon's traditional film SLR designs. Post F4, things got more

electronic, more feature-laden, and more like what eventually became the DSLR."

Neat shot. That poor old vehicle looks the way I feel in my old age. I don't think there is any other camera that fits my

hand so well.

The FTb, F-1 and F-1n use Mercury batteries. The F-1N uses a modern battery and the T90 uses AA batteries. I had my

FTb and F-1n modified to use 1.5v batteries.

I am a Nikon fan. I have every Nikon pro film SLR from the F to the F5, all bought used for a small fraction of the original price. I have

most of the 2nd string also, the Nikkormats, FMs, FEs, F100, n80, n90, etc. I doubt if I will ever see an F6 in the $500 range. Is there any

overwhelming reason to crave an F6? I have never seen one, let alone handle one. I am sure it is a super camera, but can it be that

much better than an F5 or F100?

The D200 is an excellent camera to convert to infrared. According to Thom Hogan, a reviewer I respect, the D90 is pretty

close in performance to a D7000, but maybe not in movie mode or live view, two features I rarely use.

I have a Nikon F4 and also an F4s. I find the F4 much more pleasant to use. I appreciate some bulk in a camera to

dampen my old age shakes. The Nikon F5 is perhaps the best of the Nikons (I have never seen an F6), but nearing age

80, I simply can't carry one for too long. In any case, great kudos to Nikon for upward and downward compatibility with

the F mount. I will never forgive Canon for orphaning the FD mount. The Canon F-1N is another great camera.

I am a big fan of Nikon SLRs, but the Nikon 5 (great camera) is about as light as an anvil. Even the F100 is quite heavy. I am pure

amateur and don't do sports so frame rate is not important to me, nor is weather sealing. My picks are the N80 for autofocus lenses,

great metering, the FE for non-AI lenses and the FE2 for AI lenses. I consider the Nikkormats as passé and heavy, with unreliable

metering.

Good performer in the hands of a master, but I wouldn't give it high marks In terms of esthetic appeal. The last thing I

need is another camera, but if someone spots an ex++ Nikon SP...

I was glancing through Moose Peterson's Nikon summary today, Vol. 6, all film. I know he is a total cheerleader for Nikon,

but his tables are very handy, e.g., which lens hood goes with lens, etc. in his review of the Nikon F5, he claims its matrix

metering is totally fool-proof. I usually always use matrix, but with digital, I like the histogram in the viewfinder to guard

against blown out highlights. When shooting film with meterless cameras, I use an app on my iPhone 5, which emulates

matrix metering. Of course, print film is ver forgiving.

If you google "Nikon FE", there is a good wiki article that pretty much agrees with. One must use stop down metering

with non-AI lenses.

I have never owned an FG but I have the FE and FE2, and they are fine cameras. I am pretty sure the E lenses will

meter with either. The FE has the nice feature that it can meter with both AI and non-AI lenses, whereas the FE2 requires

AI lenses. I hope some of the more knowledgable folks here will either confirm or correct this post.

I am merely an enthusiastic amateur with no special skill. My first SLR was a Canon FT-QL in 1967, a nice system.

Later, I invested in a LN F1. Nikon and Canon are fine systems, but the tie breaker was that Canon orphaned the FD line,

while Nikon was very good at maintaining compatibility. I have zero experience with Canon EF, but the Nikon F5 and

F100 are hard to beat. I think it all boils down to personal preference.

Based on the discussion here, I went to Amazon and bought the 10th edition, 1997-98, at an affordable price. I marvel at

the effort expended to compile this gigantic recorded.

My profession has been in engineering and physics from age 21 to 69, and given all the advantages that digital has over

film, I consider myself looney tunes to still pursue film cameras. I have an Spotmatic F enroute from that auction site

scheduled to arrive next week.

Perhaps it is the fact that our better made film cameras will still be operable till the end of time, and long after all my digital

cameras have burned out. I visited the UK in 1985 and my camera of cliche was the immortal Retina IIa, and using

sunny-16 and negative color film, nearly all exposures were acceptable. When I visited Spain in 2003 and 2003, I had

swung to digital and used a Fuji 6900Z for the first trip and Fuji 602A for the second with good results. They are still

operable but little used.

I was deeply involved In the late 60s and early 70s with what may have been the most expensive film cameras of all time.

Their names were not household names, in fact very hush-hush, and were called Corona, Gambit and Hexagon. They

were all designed to self destruct after about 4 weeks. You can read all about them, view them and their output at

www.nro.gov. B&W and stereo.

I looked up MeKeown on Amazon, and the prices are astronomical. I have one of his books, ca 2000, purchased at a

reasonable price and it is a wealth of information.

I believe McKeown often posts here and I value his insights,