Developed film today. By a process of elimination, I found that the shutter on my most used camera isn't working properly. I will have to send it back for repairs. It will cost a few hundred dollars but that is a fraction of the value. Problem is that it will take months and I am heading to the PNW in less than a month.

Of course, the thing is 47 years old. Still I have come to expect more reliability from the Germans. *<)))

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2001

Answers

Correction:

Not that you care, but that should be 44 years old. One thing about Leica equipment, you can find the year and month that it was produced. This one was made in June 1957. It is another kind of cult mostly centered in Japan where these things are traded as commodities. :)

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2001

Z,

Good camera. I've never owned one (I make do with the little cheap disposable thingies; you'd probably consider me an Etruscan[g]), but I know that they're well-made.

I had another photographer friend who swore by Hasselblad(sp?).

I DID own a nice Minolta once. Got into some money trouble and sold it to my brother.

-- Anonymous, August 11, 2001

Z, could you fix it yourself? Hate to see you miss the opportunity to record pictures that you may not have an opportunity to take again.

Do you have a backup camera?

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2001

Cherri:

Z, could you fix it yourself? Don't think so. It is amazing that you can still get something this old fixed. One guy repairs them from the beginning; 1926.

I do have other cameras. Four Nikons, some Rollei's, Mamiyas, Hasselblad, Linhof, etc. Still, you get used to something and it is hard to change. Very hard after a few decades.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2001

Z, we would like to take pictures of the harvest moon rising over a particular (recognizable to locals) landmark. Do shots like this require a certain type of lense?

-- Anonymous, August 13, 2001

Howdy Helen:

Doesn't require a special kind of lens, but you can get better results [depending on what you want] with something other than a normal lens.

I am just guessing at what you want to do and guessing that you will use 35 mm or similar. First, take the photo with the moon as near the horizon as possible [it will appear bigger]. Second, for the best effect, use the longest telephoto that will include the objects that you want. Now for exposure; the bright full moon is the same as bright sun on a 13% gray card. Exposure for the surface of the moon would be 1/film ISO [ASA] at f 16. That will show all of the detail on the moon. A moon near the horizon won't be that bright. If you read exposure off of the moon everything else would be very dark. You will need to do that and then bracket towards overexposure to properly expose things on earth [your well known land mark]. Since exposure would be somewhat of a guess, take several different ones and chose the one you like. I would recommend color print film [I'm assuming you want color] as it has good lattitude toward overexposure. Effect: If the are is somewhat clear where you are a Tiffen enhancing filter helps. Most places you see a harvest moon there is enough dust or smog that this isn't necessary.

Much as I can do with the information.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, August 14, 2001

By-the-by Helen:

Add a tripod to that. Pardon the typing. I work on a computer 8-10 ten per day. I have "mouse wrist". I am now wearing a splint. Makes typing a sometimes thing.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, August 14, 2001