sait_akkirman

As already mentioned, it looks like camera shake, but so what,

you have captured a lovely moment. Nice cat too. I'd keep it.

We should stop criticizing the contents of the shots and thank Al

Smith for debunking another Leica myth. What beats me is why

would anyone want to spend thousands of dollars, carry around

all that unbalanced weight, and put up with all the abberations

and light fall-off at the edges, for the sake of 1 stop? Thanks very

much Al Smith

Further to my earlier posting, some of the best art books,

advertising campaigns and editorial work is now shot on neg

film and scanned either from hand made prints or directly from

negs.

When slides/transparencies are scanned for mechanical print

work, contrast is reduced or stays the same. When you get

photographic prints from slides, there is no effective contrast

control, therefore results are usually dissapointing. Professional

labs can make contrast reducing lith-film masks, but this is very

time consuming and thus expensive, and results are a bit more

satisfying though not perfect.

Years ago, I had a brand new M6 classic straight out of the box

that had 1/1000 deliver 1/500; 1/500 deliver 1/350; 1/250 deliver

1/ 150, etc. Sent back to LeicaGermany for repair under

warranty. Camera came back with 1/1000 delivering 1/650, with

the slower speeds also slightly out. I have sold it immeadiatly

and bought a second hand M4-P. 1/1000 was slightly slow which

has been locally adjusted and delivers all the shutter speeds as

marked. By conrast I still own 2 Nikon F2's and 1 Nikon F they

have never needed any CLA and deliver correct shutter speeds.

Further to my earlier posting I also have 2x Nikon F2, an FE2, an

FA, F3, and 20, 24, 28, 35, various 50's,55, 85, 105, 200, 300

lenses, I use them all professionally. Also had 2x F4's but sold

them - too heavy. Never had a shutter problem. Only service

neeeded was re collimation on 2x F3's and 1x F4.

Brand new Leica M6 "classic" purchased Dec94, from local

distributor. Faults straight out of the box: a) Shutter slow by 1

stop @ 1/1000, 1/2 stop @ 1/500, 1/2 stop @ 1/60 b) Two shots

in rapid succession (at the same setting) results in second shot

being 1/2 to 2/3 stop lighter; c) Parallax not working with 35 &

135mm lenses. d) Uneven exposure across frame. Camera

sent twice to Australia by local distributor for repair. Parallax

problem remedied, shutter problems not. Camera sent back to

Germany with a note from the supplier, recommending

replacement. Camera returned from Germany re-built and with

a note saying that it should never have left the factory in its

original condition. Whole process took 6 months. All work done

free of charge under the warranty and during this time the local

agent kindly lent me a "demo" camera. This camera was fine

apart from 1/1000 sec being 1/2 stop slow, which is the norm.

<p>

Brand new 50/2 purchased with the camera. Found to be slightly

short focusing compared to 21, 28, 35, 90 and 135/4. Adjusted

in local repair shop.

<p>

Brand new Elmarit-M 28/2.8 purchased from local distributor.

Micro streamer like bubbles in lens. Sent to Germany, returned,

having been repaired under warranty, after 3 months.

<p>

Brand new Elmarit-M 90/2.8, the red dot fell off as I took it out of

its box for the first time.

<p>

Brand new 35/2(last non-aspheric) 1/2 stop under exposure at

all f-stops. Returned. Since bought a second hand mint one, no

problems.

<p>

Sold the original M6, and bought 2x mint- M2's (1 button, 1

lever rewind) shutter accuracy & travel problems even after CLA.

Sold both at profit.

<p>

M4-P (current camera) purchased in mint- condition.

Rangefinder fine tuned, 1/1000 speed adjusted. Have to be

careful when changing lenses in bright sun outdoors, light leak

problems (twice) through the bottom of the shutter curtains.

Otherwise happy.

<p>

Since my problem with the original M6, I know test even brand

new equipment before I buy.

<p>

I think, when they work properly, Leica equipment are the most

tectile of all photographic equipment, that is why I still use them.

I use the same 28mm lenses (latest Elmarit 2.8 and Nikkor 2.8

Ais that focuses to 20cm). Both are very nice lenses. I get the

same feel as you do that when I shoot off centre HEADS ( or 3

dimentional round objects), at near distances, off centre, Nikkor

produces slightly more distortion (stretch) than the Elmarit. This

is just a feeling, I haven't actually done any tests.

Paul I have been doing very similar tests for the last five years

(everytime I buy a new body and/or lens). My tests are done at

1.8m (each time the same row of antique cans in my kitchen -

these are covered in all sort and size of intricate typography and

lines), and exactly at 50m (always the same building with signs

on it and in open shadow). I scan a 5mm square portion of the

film (at centre and at edge) at 2700dpi (Nikon LS-1000). At pixel

size, as you have pointed out it indeed corresponds to about x40

magnification producing 950000K to 1mb files - saved

uncompressed.

<p>

Having analysed your test results thoroughly and compared

them with my results, may I suggest the following:

<p>

1)If you haven't already done so please check both your Leica

and Nikon F3 to see whether they focus correctly or not. I find the

best method for this is to first shoot a frame at the best focus

point as indicated by the camera rangefinder, then take further

2-3 shots at TINY increments turning the focusing ring first

clockwise, then anti-clockwise from the camera indicated point.

With Leica you will have to do this test with every lens at 1.5m

and 50m. Don't be shocked with the results. With an SLR I

would recommend a wide and a tele lens again at 1.5m and

50m. ( I have owned 2 F3 bodies - both bought brand new, and

although technically within factory tolerances, both needed

personal tweeking to focus spot on). Then scan and analyse the

film as below.

<p>

2)I would recommend using Fuji Reale 100 Neg film for this type

of testing. I have used Velvia, Ektachrome E100VS, Kodak neg

films and find that neg films scan better and Reale scans best.

<p>

3)For scanning test negs set the scanner gamma to 1.5. Do all

colour and density corrections on the scanner and then - MOST

IMPORTANT - focus the scanner manually at the exact spot you

are going to scan for EACH SCAN.

<p>

4)Once the scan is in Photoshop, I would recommend 2x 100

(not 1x 200) unsharp mask. I apply 3x100 but you might find the

result too gritty. The result will be similar to what one would get if

one was using a good enlarger/lens combination with a

CONDENSER, for the tests. I save the file uncompressed.

Compression makes a bit of difference but only if you look at the

compressed and uncompressed files side by side. To evaluate

the scans when comparing, look at them at both at 100% and

50%.

<p>

I am hoping that you will find the above suggestions, made with

the best intentions, constructive and try them. Please do not

hesitate to contact me directly if you wish.

<p>

All the best

My apologies, in my earlier posting I stated that, Nikon and Leica

viewfinders were -1 diopter. That should have read -0.5. It is

interesting that I need +1 diopter adjustment for Nikon & Hexar

RF but can use Leica comfortably without any corrections.

sorry for the spelling and other mistakes in my previous posting,

it should read: "I am 95% certain that Nikon manual cameras

(F, F2, F3, FM2, etc), Leica M's, and Hexar RF viewfinders have

values of -1 diopter. For example if you need a +1 diopter

correction for these cameras and want to purchase the makers

correction lenses, you order a "0" diopter viewfinder correction

eyepiece. If on the other hand, you want to get your optician to cut

you a diopter correction lens to add to the viewfinder assembly

then you ask your optician for +1 diopter lens. "

<p>

Best method is to take the camera with you to the optician and

find what sort of diopter adjustment makes you happy. If you

want the camera manufaturer's viewfinder correction than you

have to take the viewfinder's original diopter measurement into

account as I have explained above. On another note, If your

perscription glasses are "progressive" that is no correction on

the top and getting more correction towards the bottom of the

glass frame then it is easy to use the camera + new diopter

combination without having to take your glasses off. However , if

you getting standard glasses then you might have to take them

off to look through your camera + new diopter combo. I hope this

all makes sense.

I am 95% certain that Nikon manual cameras (F, F2, F3, FM2,

etc), Leica M's, and Hexar RF viewfinders have values of -1

diopter. For example if you need a +1 diopter correction for these

cameras and want purchase the makers correction lenses, you

order a "0" diopter viewfinder correction eyepiece. If on the other

hand, you want to get your option to cut you a diopter correction

lens to add to the viewfinder assembly then you ask your optician

for +1 diopter lens.

Dear Martin Tai, I don't see the relevance of your answer to my

question. I am trying to find out what is the said rangefinder

worth before Monday, when it is coming up for auction.

Seperate rangefinder made by Leitz of the same kind as used by

Leica 1, but has no mounting bracket to attach it to camera.

Serial no: 24236. Brassing on the edges but accurate. Black

body with chrome dial. Any info including value would be greatly

received. (The Leica Collectors Guide at the local library is out

for 3 weeks !!)

Thank you to all those concerned regarding my technical abilites.

Meanwhile I am still waiting for a technical reply.

Does any one know how to take the top cover of hexar off. Need

to fine tune the rangefinder, and the small hole access hole on

the top is not good enough. Thanks !

As far as I know, the camera and a Leica enlarger was specially

imported for my grandad, new, into Turkey. He was a doctor and

very interested in gadgets. He apparently also had the first

"wireless" radio in his town. He would not have been in a

position to first purchase a Type 1 and then had it converted to

type II (D). Unfortunately this is all my dad can tell me ( I am 54

and he is 88, my grandad died when I was 4!). I have been

using the camera and the enlarger until recently. The shutter

curtains have finally perished. I am hoping to get them rebuilt

soon. Thanks for all the trying.

Thanks for all the replies re Leica II d. There is no asterics after

the number. The camera had an interchangable hektor 50mm

f2.5 as original lens. Top of the camera has the "Leica" script,

then No 57552 beside it. Below the script line 1 "Ernst Leitz", line

2 "Wetzlar", line 3 "D.R.P".

Regarding the serial no's quoted above, how about a Leica II (D)

with serial no 57552, inherited from my grandad through my

father.

I had both 135/2.8 and 135/4 at the same time. Comparing them

side by side I decided that 135/2.8 was too heavy & awkward to

use, specially if you are working from a bag. The goggles snag

on everything and anything. I have since sold it . The 135/4 by

contrast is a very usable lens and produces fab results specially

if your range finder is spot on and worth the one stop loss.

Having done side by side tests of all major colour transparency

films for my prolab & Kodak NZ (except the Kodachromes -

neither clients nor I like to wait for a week while they processed

in Australia), E100VS would be the next best film, specially if

greens are important. However, if you shoot the same scene on

both RVP & E100VS, you will see that nothing matches the depth

of Velvia in highlights, midtones or shadows. Beware of pink

asphalt though, specially if you shoot through Nikon glass.

Serial number is under the aperture ring. Turn the lens so that

aperture index is away from you, then look from the camera end

of the lens to the underside of the aperture ring.

15 sec, including turning the take up prongs to the right angle for

guaranteed load. 3 consecutive succesful loads. Any other trivia

requests !!

jay, the brochure mentioned was from late 80's or early 90's, if

and when I find it I will let you know, 1997 leica fotografie special

issue leica M6 quotes 100,000 cycles, and goes on to say that it

is not uncommon for a camera to come back for "inspection"

after 200,000 or more exposures.