Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,926   Posts: 1,522,131   Online: 886
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41
  1. #21
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Rol_Lei Nut View Post
    *All* types of cameras will need CLAs every few decades or so.

    Most people who have actually used different kinds of cameras extensively will have had more electronic ones suddenly fail than mechanical ones.
    Mechanical ones may lose their adjustent slowly over decades (but then I have a 1968 Leicaflex SL, a 1969 Nikon F and a couple of other similar vintage cameras which are nearly spot on and probably never had a CLA).
    Electronic cameras will more often suddenly die and require proprietary circuit boards to fix (which are also likely to be what's wrong with any "parts" cameras as well).

    Re C.R.I.S. adapters: there are cheaper unbranded ones available and one can make one's own as well.

    Just a few points:
    1) The alternatives to mercury batteries are easy to use, accurate, dependable and can also be cheap.
    2) Electrronic cameras are not inherently better than mechanical ones and mechanical shutters definitely *can* accurately expose slides.
    3) For manually focusing a lens, AF focusing screens are almost always *not* better than screens desgined for manual focusing. They may be brighter, but don't snap into focus the same way. Especially with faster lenses.
    4) Newer cameras are not always better than old ones.

    Sorry for the rant....
    ZZZZzzzz. All cameras break. Equal opportunity. Neither type is inherently immune to breakdowns or malfunction.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    816
    Actually statistically speaking electronics will predictably have more chances of breaking/malfunctioning. However, what's even more important is that they are even less likely to be repairable. Of course we can wait another 52-54 years to see how electronic cams will fare . . .


  3. #23
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Sarile View Post
    Actually statistically speaking electronics will predictably have more chances of breaking/malfunctioning. However, what's even more important is that they are even less likely to be repairable. Of course we can wait another 52-54 years to see how electronic cams will fare . . .

    That "future" is just around the corner as parts supplies for mechanicals dry up along with the expertise to repair them. Without either, longevity doesn't matter. Nice paperweights those old F and Pentax bodies...

  4. #24
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,265
    I do not know why I cannot able to get Olympus(OM-1ns) out of my head.

    Nikon F, at-least on the picture(courtesy: Les Sarile) built like a pyramid.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    That "future" is just around the corner as parts supplies for mechanicals dry up along with the expertise to repair them. Without either, longevity doesn't matter. Nice paperweights those old F and Pentax bodies...
    Try to remanufacture an electronic part.
    Like I said, we will see 52-54 years from which ones are paperweights and which ones are fully . . . I'll even give you odds on that bet . . .

  6. #26
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Sarile View Post
    Try to remanufacture an electronic part.
    Like I said, we will see 52-54 years from which ones are paperweights and which ones are fully . . . I'll even give you odds on that bet . . .
    Moot point but if it amuses you, rock on.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,936
    If I have an OM-1 I would use it without the battery. I often use my OM-2 without meter although I do have to have the batteries in it.

  8. #28
    Rol_Lei Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hamburg
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,118
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    That "future" is just around the corner as parts supplies for mechanicals dry up along with the expertise to repair them. Without either, longevity doesn't matter. Nice paperweights those old F and Pentax bodies...
    It's quite simple:
    1) Most mechanical cameras normally don't need new "parts" (apart from grease and foam every few decades), unless they get dropped or otherwise smashed.
    2) When mechanical cameras do die, it's for a variety of reasons, so the "parts" cameras repairpersons keep handy can usually donate what's needed (unlike electronic cameras, where the "parts" camera probably died from the same electronic failure the camera to be repaired did).
    3) Expertise... I rather quickly taught myself to do some fairly complicated repairs on mechanical cameras. I wouldn't even try to reverse-engineer a circuit board!
    4) You evidently haven't used/handled many Nikon F or Spotmatic bodies (or a large number of other good mechanical cameras). Everytime I see one in a shop or flea market, I give it a quick check: the vast majority are in good working order (and my sample is probably well over on thousand). Most electronic cameras have a far lower percentage of "still-working" samples still around.

    But if you choose to stick to your obviously deeply cherished beliefs despite empirical evidence and many people's real-life experience to the contrary, go ahead....
    M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa

  9. #29
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,553
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Rol_Lei Nut View Post
    1) Most mechanical cameras normally don't need new "parts" (apart from grease and foam every few decades), unless they get dropped or otherwise smashed.
    This is usually correct. I used the same logic last week when someone asked about repairing an old clock.

    My answer was that all of the parts of the clock are still there and are very unlikely to have worn out or broken. The most likely cause of failure would be similar to cameras. i.e. lubrication getting too thick or gummed up with dust.

    EDIT: I'm an electronic engineer but I would choose a mechanical solution to something every time.


    Steve.

  10. #30
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,265
    I do not know, why they did not build a spot meter in OM-1n ;-)

    * OM-3(Ti) is rather expensive. :-(
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin