This says something about me, I guess -- non-digital content guaranteed.

[summicron1]

I've got a little pt and sht digital, of course. Piece of crap. One of the Panasonics that are rebadged as Leicas, but I didn't buy the Leica. OK camera but it has a spec of internal dust that, these cameras essentially being pinhole cameras, shows up on the image at times, especially when I zoom.

OK, I can deal with that...never zoom. It's mostly a grandkid shooter, and travel notebook, so what the heck, keep saying I should get a good one, keep delaying, even the $80 a small digi on a blister pack feels like too much.

OK ... so this weekend I was out at Bonneville Salt Flats shooting with that thing and my Leica CL, shooting Pan F in the Leica, but as I was shooting I noticed that at the end of a roll, or near it, I'd wind and the camera would feel funny and make a brrrrr type sound and feel rough and I went

"Hmmmm?"

So I got home and took the film out and looked and, silly thing, the drive gear, that toothy thingy, is broken. Unlike every other Leica on the planet, in which that thing is machined out of solid brass, this one is metal core with the teeth put on around it like a tire, made of plastic, and on one of the two toothy thingies (is there a name for those?) the tire had broken, there's a small little gap there, so the tire is not gripping the hub, and if you push it moves.

Hmmmmm.

So I pondered -- this is my favorite travel camera, it is also my first Leica. Get it serviced?

Wow. $200 for starters, plus parts, can you imagine what the part would cost? I can: A lot. Plus this camera has had 38 years of hard labor -- lots of wear, a coupla bumps, the odd ding, the usual.

So I looked at KEH, which had one in Exc on their ebay store (also on their listings, I suspect) for $430, shipping included.

Pondered for a whole five minutes and hit "buy."

So I guess what this says is I'd rather drop $430 on a real camera that will probably last another 38 years, than even 1/4th that much on a digital camera that will turn to crap overnight, practically.

I like to think this is a good thing.

Here's an image from the CL. Still works, but it's overlapping pics if it slips. Not good.



And one showing the slip--actually a kinda cool double exp:



my blog: http://charlestrentelman.blogspot.com/2013/08/of-cheap-cameras-expensive-digits-and.html

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Don't worry. You're not the only one. If my Nikon F2 (I'm the original owner, from the early 70s) finally bit the dust, I'd be on KEH like lightening to find an identical model. That camera has become like an extension of my hand. Change even one millimeter on it and I would probably trip, fall, and crash and burn from the resulting instability.

A fun question I've asked others before: If you suddenly look up and find yourself being charged by a rhino... QUICK!... which way do you rotate the manual focus ring??

If the person answers only with words, that camera is not a hand-extension for them. But if they answer by first raising their hands to their face and pausing momentarily to see what their fingers tell them, you'll know you've found your answer.



Ken

 

[stevenje]

Don't worry. You're not the only one. If my Nikon F2 (I'm the original owner, from the early 70s) finally bit the dust, I'd be on KEH like lightening to find an identical model. That camera has become like an extension of my hand.

Ken

I know the feeling. I bought my Canon F-1 in 1973. Forty years later and it still fits like a glove.

f/8 and be there.

Steven

 

[clayne]

A fun question I've asked others before: If you suddenly look up and find yourself being charged by a rhino... QUICK!... which way do you rotate the manual focus ring??

This only works if you predominantly shoot Nikon, Ken.

I shoot other cameras like Minoltas, Pentax, Leica, etc. and the switching back and forth usually has me cursing Nikon's "alternative" directions. The real answer is ill allow you to attempt focus while I shoot the rhino charging you.

That being said I love all my Nikon gear, of which I have more than any other manufacturer.

 

[lxdude]

This only works if you predominantly shoot Nikon, Ken.

I shoot other cameras like Minoltas, Pentax, Leica, etc. and the switching back and forth usually has me cursing Nikon's "alternative" directions.

Just to clarify, Pentax is the same as Nikon, both focus and f-stop. I started with Fujica ST (also the same), went to Nikon, then to Pentax, then to Bronica, (same, plus lenses mount the same direction as Nikon). I still have all four makes. After 39 years, I suppose I'd go nuts trying to adjust to a Canon, Minolta, etc, now.

I do have two lenses which focus opposite: a 17mm Tokina in Pentax mount (would it have killed them to have made reverse helicoids for their Pentax and Nikon mounts?), and a Tamron Adaptall 500mm mirror. I always start the wrong way and have to correct myself.

 

[Steve Smith]

and on one of the two toothy thingies (is there a name for those?)

Yes... Teeth!


Steve.

 

[clayne]

Just to clarify, Pentax is the same as Nikon, both focus and f-stop

See, you know the pain. We just focus and correct based on whatever camera is in our hands. I wish there were a standard for this. I'd like to think PULL means bring it closer, and PUSH means move the focus further out. Since it's almost always left-hand driven for focus it doesn't seem like a de facto standard wasn't apparent somewhere in the last 100 years or so. I guess that depends on if one thinks their thumb is dominant or not. Don't get me wrong, I use Nikon stuff all the time and I'm a big proponent, but I think their focus direction choice is intuitively/kinesthetically backwards. That being said it's usually a localized adaptation thing - after a few shots one gets in the flow.

http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00SRkx?start=0

 

[lxdude]

And for me the focusing direction has always felt right. Just one of those things, I guess.

 

[clayne]

Is there still some way we can turn this into a 20 page thread where one or all of us storms off, though?

 

[paul_c5x4]

Is there still some way we can turn this into a 20 page thread where one or all of us storms off,

Sure.. My huff has just pulled up outside, so I'm leaving

 

[jmccl@yahoo.com]

Send broken camera to me

I'll fix it for free, and then keep it for myself :

My brother-in-law is a dentist. I guess he can repair the teethy thingy.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Yes... Teeth!


Steve.

No... "Sprocket".

 

[Steve Smith]

So I guess what this says is I'd rather drop $430 on a real camera that will probably last another 38 years, than even 1/4th that much on a digital camera that will turn to crap overnight

I don't think there's any guessing involved. I think it's definitely the case.


Steve.

 

[Steve Smith]

Sure.. My huff has just pulled up outside, so I'm leaving

"you can leave in a huff. If that's too soon, you can leave in a minute and a huff" - Groucho.


Steve.

 

[John Koehrer]

Steve.
Ya beat me to it!

 

[Laurent]

I just dropped some good money on a M4, does it say something about me? The damn thing doesn't even have a battery

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I just dropped some good money on a M4, does it say something about me? The @#!*% thing doesn't even have a battery

It says you're a man of taste, discernment, and slightly insane.

 

[ROL]

I've got a little pt and sht digital, of course. Piece of crap. One of the Panasonics that are rebadged as Leicas, but I didn't buy the Leica.

I guess I have one of those. It took an unplanned swim with me on the Middle Fork of the Salmon River last year. I took the battery and card out to dry overnight. Works fine (for a D) after that. Probably washed out the dirt . Yeah, it's definitely you.

 

[Laurent]

It says you're a man of taste, discernment, and slightly insane.

I'm used to tell people that my passion for Photography is no longer a passion, but a mental condition

I think the Leica will make a nice companion to the Rolleiflex (but am afraid the EOS3 may see even less use...)

 

[Steve Smith]

No... "Sprocket".

Surely the whole assembly is a speocket but the toothy things are teeth!


Steve,

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I'm used to tell people that my passion for Photography is no longer a passion, but a mental condition

I think the Leica will make a nice companion to the Rolleiflex (but am afraid the EOS3 may see even less use...)

Leica, Rollei, Linhof. That's the progression. Get a Minox too, Bs are going begging it seems.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Surely the whole assembly is a speocket but the toothy things are teeth!


Steve,

There must be a more abstruse technical term, "teeth" is so... common.

 

[cliveh]

Surely the whole assembly is a speocket but the toothy things are teeth!


Steve,

As we refer to sprocket holes in film, surely sprocket is correct.

 

[lxdude]

As we refer to sprocket holes in film, surely sprocket is correct.

In all toothfulness...

 

[Laurent]

Leica, Rollei, Linhof. That's the progression. Get a Minox too, Bs are going begging it seems.

Sorry, I'm less predictable... I got out of LF because this is not for me, but a Minox doesn't have real appeal to me.