Jump to content

doubice

Members
  • Content Count

    2,127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About doubice

  • Rank
    Erfahrener Benutzer

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Country
    Canada

Converted

  • City
    Vancouver
  • Hobbies
    Travel, trains whether full size or model, and you guessed it.... photography
  • Job
    Happily retired!
  • Your Leica Products / Deine Leica Produkte
    Model I through IIIf, 2x M8-2, few kg's of lenses, V-Lux 114, Trinovid, Pradovit...... Insane!

Recent Profile Visitors

153 profile views
  1. It does make sense if you consider that the 4:3 format actually uses a greater area of the sensor than the 3:2 format, hence - more pixels. If you used the 16:9 format, pixel count would be even lower. Cheers, Jan
  2. If you have no luck finding the Leica manual, try to find the PDF file for its Panasonic equivalent - Lumix DMC-TZ22. The two cameras are identical. Good luck, Jan
  3. In response to David's post #8 above, and I am one of those 'old time' members ;-) - Mark Norton was the brave soul who disassembled the Digilux 2. I am quite certain a search of this forum will find the posts. There are also numerous videos available on line describing the process. The most difficult task will be obtaining the part.... Good luck, Jan
  4. During one of my weekly flea market hunts, I came upon a treasure…. There was a beaten up camera bag on the ground and as I started to open it (before I even had time to find out what was in it), the seller shouted at me “some photo stuff - that’s ten bucks!”. I briefly noticed the shape of a Leica body so, I quickly closed the bag, gave the man his $10.00 and hurried home to investigate. Most of the equipment looked as if pulled out of a hungry dog’s mouth but there was an interesting Leica IIIf RD ST. The shutter did not work but, the all the lens glass was clean and that is all that cou
  5. As the KE-7A was made at the Leitz Canada plant in Midland (Ontario), the seal should be a 'C'. As a side note - the 'C' seal was also used by the service dept. of Walter A. Carveth, who were the Leica agents in Canada when the KE-7A was produced. Cheers, Jan
  6. Wilson, With all respect to the very knowledgeable Roger Hicks, his (and probably yours too) TEWE finder focal length scale must have been re-positioned - this can be 'accomplished' by tightening the set-screws with the scale in an incorrect position. The scale should not turn past the 35mm at the long index mark and 200mm at the short index mark - that is how it was set up when new. In the attached photo you can see the scale at its outermost points of travel - 35mm at infinity and 200mm at 1m. The short index mark provides the reduced view at 1m (approximately…), whilst the long inde
  7. Luigi is correct, the TEWE range is 35-200mm. 28mm view was obtained by using a front optical attachment which 'increased' the angle to that of a 28mm lens. Same idea as the Leica 'goggles' for 35mm lenses. Most TEWE finders have lost their 28mm attachment over the years though.... Cheers, Jan Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
  8. Scott, Actually, the lid has clips for three film cans, not for a flash. In my case one of those clips is missing - I removed it so that when the case was closed, the lid would not collide with a lens mounted on he M7 body. Cheers, Jan Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
  9. This is indeed a case dating back to the M3. The inserts were interchangeable, with about 3 - 4 layout options available, including one for the Visoflex I outfit. If I recall correctly, Leitz original order number for the case used to be 14800. Few years ago I took some photos of the case for another thread here and managed to dig them out of the depths of my hard drive. The insert I have held two bodies, five lenses , film cans, filters and other paraphernalia. As far as I am concerned, it was the best case ever produced for the M series - solid, practical and versatile. Main advantage fo
  10. Colin, The one obvious sign that this is not an original LTM lens is the distance scale with 65cm closest focusing point. That is a dead giveaway. It could have been an M lens designed for the M2 or M4, which had the mount removed (M2 and M4 had finders with 35mm frames and did not need the goggles; only M3 models did). If that is the case, it will focus correctly on LTM cameras, from infinity to about 1m but not any closer. LTM cameras had a shorter rangefinder base than the later M bodies - this affected close focus accuracy. Because of this, closest focusing limit on LTM lenses was
  11. Andy, I fully agree, you are absolutely correct. I know I was 'sitting on a weak branch' when I made that statement - I should have added "... a lens with a 210#### serial number which focused to 65cm (1965-66 vintage) was never available is screw mount...". The only excuse I have is that it was past midnight my time when I wrote it. To Colin - a tell-tale sign of the lens having been a goggled version will be a small mark in or just above the thread area, at the 6 o'clock position. The goggled bayonet mount had a small 'grub' screw, which prevented it from turning accidentally; th
  12. I am the original 'culprit' of post no.6 which Luigi refers to above. And can confirm that there is no way a 35mm Thread Mount lens which originally started as a 'goggled' M Mount lens, will couple to the RF correctly at any other distance but infinity. The focusing helicoid and rangefinder cam are cut differently on goggled lenses - the only way to focus such a lens is by a 'guesstimate'....... The best way to check an 'ungoggled' lens is to mount the camera on tripod, setting the lens distance scale to 1m and measuring the distance to the subject with a tape measure to make sure that the
  13. Even though I sold my Digilux 2 close to 2 years ago, reading this thread brought back some memories…… My camera had the CCD replaced in 2007 (when Leica USA still did it for free). It worked fine after that, until one day in 2012, when it would not power on. So - I shipped it off to New Jersey and received a US$250.00 estimate to replace the motherboard. The camera came back in about a month, with a new motherboard and couple of notes: …1) Upgraded to current standard and …2) Checked and adjusted for good working order I checked the camera and found that the focusing was rathe
  14. It could also originate from the 'factory' of the engraver who turns FEDs and Zorkis into 'gold plated' Kriegsmarine, Luftwaffe and Bildberichter Leica cameras which never existed. A good engraver can duplicate the Leitz Wetzlar logo and the numbering very easily. I do recall seeing the KMZ finder engraved this way some time ago on fleabay, being offered by a seller from Russia (where else....). It would be actually very simple to use a milling machine to remove the KMZ signage, repaint the finder body and engrave it with a new logo. Best, Jan
  15. Carl, Yes, 'neveready' is the correct description of the case... I confess that none of the Leicas that I used over the many years have never resided in a case. You say that it may be of more use as a half case - is the case front removable? Cases for Leica Thread Mount cameras were always sewn together and the front and back section could not be separated. If your case can be separated into two halves, it was either modified or it is a case for a late IIIg or M model. It would be interesting to see a photo of your case. Best, Jan
×
×
  • Create New...