Fiddlefye

The Jupiter 12 does work on the camera, yes. I gather there are some Canon models where it comes in contact with a baffle, but on this 7 it is apparently ok. It seems some work out, some don't? The design reminds me a bit of the lens in my Olympus XA, now I think of it!

I've been shooting with various rangefinder cameras "ever since I was knee-high to a grasshopper", the first at age eight having been a Kodak 35 (in company with a GE meter). Since then I've owned and used a variety - screw-mount and M-series Leicas, Contax II and IIa, Robot Royal and quite a few more. Recently I threw a low bid at a very nice-looking, properly functioning Canon 7 with two lenses - Jupiter 8 and 12. I should have everything shortly, but in the meantime - anything I should be looking out for or pondering when I put it into use?

Bannon Canyon, Algonquin Park. DSC_5187 by fiddlefye, on Flickr

I took three film cameras away on holiday - Rolleiflex 3.5 Xenotar, Retina IIc and Voightlander Vito III. I never had a chance to use the Rollei and the Retina jammed up a few frames in so that roll got moved over to the Voightlander most of the film shooting was with it. No harm done. It really is a wonderful folder, quirky but with great feel and the Ultron is the bee's knees.

The double stroke was smooth and FAST. Of my current cameras I'd agree with an earlier poster and go with the Leicaflex SL-2.

We're going out of town for the next week and I'll be taking my Rolleiflex 3.5 Xenotar and a digital kit with Nikon D750 and a few lenses. Should do the job without carrying too much. One of the many things I have always loved about the Rolleiflex is how compact and light it is to lug relative to the image quality. I might see if I have room to slip in the Retina IIa for a little 35mm as well. We'll just see how the bag packs...

I had my tech remove the prism, I boxed it up and sent it. I'm fortunate in having a tech who is also a close friend. We actually stole a prism from a Pentax ME or something small-Pentaxish to use in the meantime. It almost worked, but was just a titch shy of showing the information band at the bottom. The Leicaflex prism is a bit out of the ordinary in terms of design apparently. Still, I had use of the camera in the meantime.

Ok, finally found their emaill address. contact@vacuumcoatings.ltd.uk Website Welcome to VCSM

we have the Art Walk going on this weekend so I think I'll grab a combination of my digital (Nikon D750), the "baby" Speed Graphic and a few rolls of HP5. Something about the Graphic makes people want to get their picture taken... DSC_1079 by fiddlefye, on Flickr

This is a DX camera, right? Why not just got for the old Nikkor 18-70 and be done with it? I used one with my D200 for the entire time I had it (until going FX) and it was very good. 18-70 is a nice, useful range and the image quality was just fine, far more than the D90 sensor needs.

Something I need to rectify, though first I need to actually take a few more pics with it. I have a nice roll of HP5 that would do!

I'll look it up and post it. It is a little shop in London, UK. The only shortcoming is that they used aluminum rather than the original silver for the coating. I found reference to a place in Japan that does the silver, but nailing down contact info was elusive. Still, it looks good and the camera functions beautifully.

Spot on. I'm just glad I was a bit ahead of the curve and can assuage my curiosity about the SL series bodies. I didn't need either of them, but the prices were such that I could manage a purchase on a whim. Not now! I'd seen the Leicaflexes in shops back when they were new, but the prices were so high I didn't even ask to see them. So now I get to have the pleasure. Speaking of the effect digital bodies are having on the value of older lenses I have a wee tale to tell. Back thirty odd years ago I went to the estate sale of an old photo studio in Wyandotte, MI. There were plenty of interesting items to be had including a large original Ansel Adams print of the cemetery at the Taos pueblo with a price on it of $10. As I walked across the shop to get it someone ran through the door and snatched it from in front of me. Needless to say I was a bit bummed and bought myself a little consolation item in the form of a Meyer 105mm f2.7 Makro Plasmat for $5. I used it as a paperweight for a long time without ever being able to find much information on the lens. Then one day I started finding "hits" on them on the net and it turned out the digital folks were buying them for the gorgeous "bokeh". I ended up selling it on ebay for enough to finance a Nikon D750 body, a few lenses and a camera for my wife in the bargain. Needless to say they are now going for about twice what I got for mine!

If it were me it would be Velvia 50, my favourite colour film of all time....

Hard to go wrong with a F2!

I got lucky in that both my SL and SL-2 came with 50 Summicrons and leather cases, all in terrific condition apart from some desilvering in the SL-2. I was just perusing ebay listings for the Leicaflexes and came in for a bit of a shock. Somehow in the year and half since I bought my SL and SL-2 prices have gone through the roof. The cheapest listing was for a beater body (no lens or case) listed as "parts only" and the starting price was over twice what I paid for my mint "50 Jahre" SL-2 (with lens and case). Prices in general was between four and six times what they were 18 months ago. Yikes... what's with that?

I had a few of them, but the Royal was the one I really liked. I should have kept the thing (I've said that before)....

I get the impression that the differences in exactly how an autofocus system makes decisions can be pretty subtle. Sure, the manual tells one how it all works, but that never seems to quite convey what happens out in the field when working quickly and under a bit of duress. So many variables are involved including one's composition tendencies. Shooting habits resulting from cumulative experience come into play. A system that focuses based on where they eye is looking is a cool concept except that I am constantly looking at everything in a frame right up to and through the moment of exposure. My experience started out decades ago with a rangefinder camera and those habits have carried through to the present day, for good or ill. I have my camera set up with a single focus spot in the middle (like a rangefinder) and automatically pick up and focus where I want it in the process of composing an image. Am I getting all of the possibilities out of my camera? Absolutely not. On the other hand I get almost zero focus errors during a day of shooting. I still use manual focus lenses quite a bit and do the same with them with the same result. Sure, I'm just an old fuddy-duddy, but it works well for me. YMMV as always.

Back in the 80s I went on a bit of a camera collecting bender and bought and shot with cameras of a whole range of formats including a couple of very interesting old 5x7 cameras. Included in my explorations were a few sub-miniature formats including Minox (B and IIIS with Minox enlarger, tanks etc.), 110 (Minox 110S which I still have), half-frame (Pen F and FT) and Robot (those were gorgeous and I wish I'd kept the Royal Model III). All great fun and a fine learning experience, though I sold off most of them in the early 90s and bought a house. I didn't use the 110 very much, but the MinoxB was fun and made decent enough images if I used slower film. The Pens were great and easy to to work with, but the Robot was the star of the show, 24x24 images included.

I wasn't actually disagreeing at any point in time if you read my posts. The specs are what they are and the 500 is a bit better (by 1 EV I think?) than the 750 in that regard, most certainly. I never suggested otherwise. I was mentioning a situation which took place which was in fact a rather one-sided battle as my 750 had the assist light enabled and the 500 doesn't have one. At an EV of approximately 0.67 either camera should have had no problem focusing without an assist light, as far as that goes. I wish I'd thought to try my camera with the light turned off, but it was a party and you know how that goes! Not exactly a rigourous scientific experiment. I am rather familiar with how Nikon's autofocus system function in general, went into the menu and tried various options, so it wasn't just how my friend had his camera set up. Apart from that specific situation focus was snappy and accurate with the 500.

I've no doubt that the D500 has the better autofocus, never fear (though I've never had any complaints with my 750 on the level). BTW - gorgeous Contax in your avatar pic! I'd love one....

Depending upon how one does the calculations the EV when the photos were taken was about 0.67. Both cameras should be able to focus without difficulty without focus assist, but for some reason the 500 hunted and struggled. Sometime I will have to try the D750 with the focus assist with the focus assist off to see how it does. The situation is easily replicated any evening...

I dd finally manage to get my friend's D500 to lock focus (as you can see by that last pic) but it wasn't an instant thing and it wasn't happy about it.

The problem with using a variety of lenses with a Graphic of the vintage of mine is that the lens board is tiny. The later versions give considerably more room for mounting different options. I've used all manner of lenses on my 4x5 Speed Graphic, though!

Yes, I had guessed that the lever colour was related to the image dimensions, but never was sure that was the case. Good to know!