denny_rane

I tried to create the best title i could. Anyway........it seems like with the Breech-Lock lens, i can move the (one of, i guess there are two) aperture levers to a position that holds the lens "Wide Open". The lever will stay in that position So if i look through the lens, front to back, the lens will stay at its biggest setting.......2.8 2.0 1.8 or whatever it might be. But with the FDn, the bayonet style, i cannot do that. That same lever, on the lens, will not open the lens to its max aperture until it is mounted on a body. Is there a trick to doing that with the bayonet style, FDn lens? So i can hold the lens in my hand, and look through it at maximum aperture? thank you

He has been doing it for 60 years.? His 100 year old camera was only 40 years old when he started.

Yeah, there is just something about the "Intimacy" of a lever gun. I suppose it is no more "primitive" than a bolt gun, but you do feel a lot more involved when you stand (instead of sit) and hold the rifle in your hands and then to shoulder (rather then having the rifle sitting in a rest) ...... two completely different things i guess. Like comparing a Ford GT350 to a Toyota 4-Runner. They are both cars. I guess what happened to me was, i stopped caring about OA Length of the cartridge and trying different powders and weights.... turning necks... breathing. It just became more fun for me to fill (just about) the case with black powder, seat the bullet and go have fun.:) No right or wrong.......

257 Weatherby.? I am in process of moving, and moving my guns. I had forgotten i had a Win-70 chambered in .257 Roberts. I shot from a bench for 15-20 years i guess.... mostly 22-250 and 220 Swift. Then about 25 years ago i got into Cowboy Stuff, and all my bolt guns just sat in the safe. It was A LOT More Fun (for me) to shot off-hand, at 50 yards with black powder in a 44-40 lever gun, than at 200 yards from a comfortable bench, with my smokeless stuff..

You must care..... you replied.:)

.257 Weatherby.? I am in process of moving, and moving my guns. I had forgotten i had a Win-70 chambered in .257 Roberts. I shot from a bench for 15-20 years i guess.... mostly 22-250 and 220 Swift. Then about 25 years ago i got into Cowboy Stuff, and all my bolt guns just sat in the safe. It was A LOT More Fun (for me) to shot off-hand, at 50 yards with black powder in a 44-40 lever gun, than at 200 yards from a comfortable bench, with my smokeless stuff.. :)

Good Grief, better late than never..... 7k was quite a bit of money back then. I would imagine they sell for a bit more than that, circa 2020. :)

IMHO...... this is the Very Definition of, a solution for a problem that does not exist.

You did a good job of catching them while in discussion. :) BTW....... I shoot the F1 New. I never used the older models. Have you shot both, just wondering what you prefer or if there is much difference? Thanks

In the future, there is no need to go through all of that for the door. Get a pair of needle nose, and grab the long hinge pin VERY Tightly, and pull it out. Remove the Old/Broken door, insert new door, and Slide/Shove that long hinge pin back in.

Wow..... a 16 cylinder.? :)

Sharp Tack Sharp Edge To Edge Sharp :( Etc etc etc. Who gives a kcuF. Congratulations.....your lousy photos, that you shot with your super expensive f/1.2, razor sharp lens, are still crummy. :)

Well, there is no definitive answer. There is more to consider than just age. "Film".......they are not all the same where longevity is concerned, and then there is the variable of how and where it was stored. I started shooting in 1977. There i still a lot i do not know, but my Experience/Opinion....... unless there is a real reason to shoot this stuff, you would be less "wasteful" if you simply used this as dead film, which are actually handy to have around for a few reasons. If you are a "Newbie" regards old film.... OK. There is all kinds of info at the tips of your keyboard If you are new to photography..... forget this stuff and shoot with a Known/New film and developer. Good Luck

:)

Guarantee of what.? All my CLA come with a guarantee, but not for forever. I am the original owner of one of my Nikon and Canon. In the last 30 years i have had a CLA done 3-4 times. A CLA is not a guarantee that the rewind crank will not break, or that a hot shoe wire wont break. How long does an oil change last in your car. If you change it, is there any guarantee.? SURE there is, but not against the brakes going out or the waiter pump breaking. You do not want to CLA a 30 year old camera, but your answer is to buy Another 30 Year Old camera.? What guarantee is that.? If the camera you own is in good order, CLA THAT one. I have never had the seller of a used camera guarantee that the camera would be trouble free for years to come. Unless it has been done "recently" , you should simply assume they will ALL need At Least a CLA. You also need to be aware of who is performing the "CLA". :)

What i really like about the Bogen is the way they cantilever the head. That is great for Dodge/Burn. :) I have a Beseler and the focus rail gets in the way sometimes.

Like with all these scenarios, it is most often a placebo. I wish i still had the video. Guitar players obsess over a few things to the point of it being asinine. One of those things is the Color/Style/Physical compound of capacitors. LOTS of players swear they can hear a difference between a Polyester or a oil capacitor. They can't. A guy built a phony decade box that used 5-6 different caps......so the players thought. You could see the different caps, but the rotary switch was wired to the SAME cap on all settings. Players swore they preferred one position over another. The point is.......if somebody put an I-Phone camera in the body of a Sony Mirrorless and compared it to a visible I-Phone camera...... People would SWEAR they preferred the photos from the "Sony" instead of those from the (same) visible I-Phone.

My newest camera is an F-1 New or Minolta X-570. I also have a F2-S and OM-1n. I just had the Oly and Canon in for Repair/CLA. It was about 150 bux for each camera..... plus shipping. Yes, it is frequently "cheaper" to buy another one, but those will also need (most likely) a similar scenario. I want my cameras to work properly, i do not give a zhit if the CLA exceeds the resale value of the camera. I have never understood why people play that mind-game. Why not just sell all of your cameras..... think of how much cheaper THAT would be.

It depends on your definition of "equivalent" Other than the final print, nothing about the two process are the same. Just the fact that a digital lab (and paper) operates in "normal" room light negates any similarity. Digital cameras have much more in common with film cameras, and even look "the same". At first look, a digital lab and a red-light darkroom do not appear to have anything in common at all. The equipment looks completely different and the position of the operators is at extremes..... sitting Vs standing, etc etc etc.

THE Biggest reason to shoot film is that it allows you to print. There is no red-light, darkroom, equivalent in the digital realm. For THAT scenario, it is film or nothing.

Awesome... what car are you running.? I wrenched on a Formula Ford for the 1978 and 1979 seasons at Sears Point and Laguna Seca. :)

You are creating things to worry about. And, these "things" have (or should have) Zero importance and validity.

I cannot give you a definitive answer. I am not a landscape photographer (not saying you are) and i have not done any real tests with those filters. I HAVE used both, and my opinion would be that no..... your specific concerns are not going to be realized with one of those over the other. I would think they will have similar shadow effect. Not much help, but as no other answers were posted, i thought i would just offer my opinion. Maybe shoot an email to B&W... Hoya... or any of the major filter makers.? Goo Luck

I have always thought it was, kind of, silly to name a picture, but.....i would think that any skin color in similar clothes and similar looking scenario would be "Judged" to be in some kind of a less than happy situation.

What on Earth are you talking about..??? I never said film cameras were or were not in any category. Obsolete. How many 40 year old Digital SLR will be in use 20-30 years from now.? I use cameras that are 40-100 years old. I do not have any cameras with an AF lens. I never said anything like..... "Oh no! You can't play the "digitisation and computerisation is responsible for all the world's ills" card"..... You did. :) IF..????? :rolleyes: " if everyone today was shooting their pictures on film (and scanning them to share) there would be a far, far greater environmental impact than the use of a miniscule amount of electricity required to shoot a digital picture" IF..????? Good Grief.. Where to begin.? Digital cameras, printers, papers, accessories, and the mining, labor abuse, manufacture and transportation.and reclamation of said technology is WAY MORE invasive than the use of film cameras. For one thing, they already exist.! Plus film cameras are just a TINY, niche market. ALL consumers goods have some kind of negative impact on the world we live in. But the fact that a 1968 Mustang was less safe and got worse gas mileage than a circa 2020 Mustang is not indicative of which Mustang has a bigger impact on the World Of Today. Are you upset about something.? You seem to want to turn this into a..... Film is better than Digital - Digital is better than Film argument.. Digital Photography is the way 99% (more?) of the photography of the modern world is accomplished. Film will NEVER be anywhere near the dominate force it once was.. Digital is "Better and Easier" than film in many ways. There, i said it. Good Luck :)