Thinking of new Leica film camera

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I got the Plustek 8100 recently and I'm very happy with it. It is sharper than my Epson, and vuescan gives me better colours with the Plustek than it does with the Epson V700.

I found the shutter dial on my (long gone) M6 and MP very firm. The dials on my 2 M2s are very smooth and easy to turn with one finger. I put the stiffness of the M6 down to steel components, and that of the MP down to it being rather newer than my older companions. Probably wrong on both counts. I bought an M3 recently to see what all the fuss was about. It was also very smooth but it had no advantage over the M2s and has now been sold. The M2 is perfect for me.

Pete

[colonel]

I got the Plustek 8100 recently and I'm very happy with it. It is sharper than my Epson, and vuescan gives me better colours with the Plustek than it does with the Epson V700.

I found the shutter dial on my (long gone) M6 and MP very firm. The dials on my 2 M2s are very smooth and easy to turn with one finger. I put the stiffness of the M6 down to steel components, and that of the MP down to it being rather newer than my older companions. Probably wrong on both counts. I bought an M3 recently to see what all the fuss was about. It was also very smooth but it had no advantage over the M2s and has now been sold. The M2 is perfect for me.

Pete

 

from the samples I have held, the M6 TTL definitely has a smoother shutter dial then the M6 classic.

 

comforted to hear about the 8100, it has good reviews.

[antistatic]

Our tap water is quite hard which probably explained the regular water marks. I now use distilled water only for the final rinse and tap water for everything else. I add a homeopathic drop of photoflow. I don't touch my negs with anything and I don't get watermarks.

 

As you can see, this cat can be skinned many ways. Part of the fun is seeing what works for you.

[mmradman]

Hi Mike, dry paper towell, fold it into a long strip and double it over to make 'tongs' and run it down the negs applying almost no pressure (just so the paper makes contact with the film).

 

Works a treat and thanks to whoever it was (on here) that originally suggested it!

 

James,

 

As a matter of interest, do you run paper on smooth side (no emulsion) of the film only or both sides.

 

Reason I ask is to compare notes, I used to do similar procedure to yours in my film DIY days back in 1980s; drop of fairy liquid for last rinse and wipe with dry tissue paper along smooth side of the stretched film in one steady sweep with some contact pressure applied. All films came spotless when dried.

[hepcat]

Hi Mike, dry paper towell, fold it into a long strip and double it over to make 'tongs' and run it down the negs applying almost no pressure (just so the paper makes contact with the film).

 

 

That makes me shudder just thinking about the paper going over the surface of the film. I know I'm really old school ('cause, frankly, i'm getting old...) but when I learned my darkroom skills, paper towels were like sand paper. I know they've gotten softer over the years, but still...

 

I dip my film in a photo-flo bath, and then just run the roll through two fingers as squeegees. I do that a couple of times and, presto-chango, dry unscratched and unspotted negatives. If you're careful, you'll feel anything that might be on the film surface that would scratch, and your skin is softer and less abrasive than just about anything else you can use as a squeegee. Just another way to skin that cat.

[Les_Sismore]

I haven't got this on my TTL. Could it be that it is due to the shorter distance between the 30, 45 and 60 shutter speeds?

 

Electronic flash sync on M6 TTL is 1/50 of a second, not 1/45.

 

According to the expert Leica technician who fine-tuned my M6 TTL from clunky to silky smooth, the "notchiness" at 30 on the shutter speed dial was due to roughness in the engagement of the various gears when shifting between the high and low speed shutter timing mechanisms.

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Electronic flash sync on M6 TTL is 1/50 of a second, not 1/45.

 

According to the expert Leica technician who fine-tuned my M6 TTL from clunky to silky smooth, the "notchiness" at 30 on the shutter speed dial was due to roughness in the engagement of the various gears when shifting between the high and low speed shutter timing mechanisms.

 

I stand, or rather sit, corrected.

[michaelwj]

Electronic flash sync on M6 TTL is 1/50 of a second, not 1/45.

 

According to the expert Leica technician who fine-tuned my M6 TTL from clunky to silky smooth, the "notchiness" at 30 on the shutter speed dial was due to roughness in the engagement of the various gears when shifting between the high and low speed shutter timing mechanisms.

 

I use a M6 classic, and always thought the 'notch' was there so you could feel when you're getting into the slow shutter speeds:)? Thats what I use it for anyway, once I hit the notch I know I'm getting to the limits of handholdability so to speak.

 

Michael

[philipus]

I'm not sure that was the purpose, but it certainly is something I use to realise where on the dial I am (when the camera is at my eye, naturally). I guess, it would be particularly useful for the M7 since that dial rotates 360.

 

A slight, esoteric, tangent: of the shutter speeds on my TTL and my M4 I much prefer the sound of 1/50th to any of the other speeds. Odd.

[semi-ambivalent]

I'm not sure that was the purpose, but it certainly is something I use to realise where on the dial I am (when the camera is at my eye, naturally). I guess, it would be particularly useful for the M7 since that dial rotates 360.

 

A slight, esoteric, tangent: of the shutter speeds on my TTL and my M4 I much prefer the sound of 1/50th to any of the other speeds. Odd.

 

Your post caused me to waste a frame. However, I remain undecided.

 

s-a

[philipus]

yes the differences are subtle.

[colonel]

Thanks for all your help

 

I decided that its all a bit too much to do my own developing for the moment (not just that I don't have a completely light sealed room), so am having the film processed by ilfordlabs (for B&W) and peakimaging (for colour). Then I use the plustek.

It all takes quite alot of time, would be nice to get a scanner that could do batch scanning (probably very expensive). also ilford cuts the negs into strips of 4 which is a pain, peakimaging is better, they cut into strips of 6 which is more convenient.

 

Well its all very interesting. Probably going to annoy a few folk here but the absolute picture clarity compared to modern digital is quite poor. However you do get character by the boatloads. I also think taking pictures on film is genuinely therapeutic

 

Some early test shots:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sblitz]

nicely done. it is all in the scanning to get what you need from the negative. i don't scan myself, the lab i use in nyc scans and develops (i harbor no illusion that i would have the time to scan anything). the cheaper one-hour places in manhattan gave me awful results and thought film yeeech! anyway, found this pro lab, it improved, and now they send me 10mb tiff for each shot and i am in business -- all the latitude if not more to do whatever in LR4. not sure who does same in London but i am sure there is someone, when it comes to cameras and film, London and NYC offer the world.

[gberger]

To go back go the OP's basic question: I've owned and really used a IIIc, M4, M6, and an M7. If his average shooting style is to depend on an internal meter, I'd suggest the M7.

 

If he is really fastidious, deliberate, and very careful about achieving proper exposure for each slide, then I'd suggest an M4 and a Sekonic 308 meter.

[sblitz]

well old fud i disagree, especially if you are shooting negatives. there is a lot of latitude, a good scan reveals a lot of room to correct (surprisingly so to me), and once the meter ( i use the l-208, perfect size) is set to the middle value you are liberated from the noise in the viewfinder to just take pictures. now, if the aim is perfect exposure in a controlled setting, you are 100% correct. but for random picture taking, the m4 (or any meterless camera for that matter) is a liberating experience.

[Broadside]

I decided that its all a bit too much to do my own developing for the moment (not just that I don't have a completely light sealed room), so am having the film processed by ilfordlabs (for B&W) and peakimaging (for colour). Then I use the plustek.

It all takes quite alot of time, would be nice to get a scanner that could do batch scanning (probably very expensive). also ilford cuts the negs into strips of 4 which is a pain, peakimaging is better, they cut into strips of 6 which is more convenient.

 

I contacted Ilfordlabs about the cutting of negative strips into rows of six and they told me they do not have neg bags for six neg strips. However the lab manager suggested I send and empty neg bag of my choice along with the film along with a note explaining what I wanted. She was very helpful.

[erl]

Ah! Neg bag sizes, and contact sheet sizes. The bain of my life. For the past 60+ years I have been cutting into strips of six and contact printing onto 10.5" x12" paper that gives the details written on the transparent bag as well. All that in the darkroom.

 

Now, I contact proof on an Epson 700, but it only covers effectively, 8"x10". that means I have to cut into strips of five (Grr!) and leave off any shots after 35!!

 

So now I buy bulk film wind my own re-loadable cassettes and only wind for 35 shots. I hate being cornered. I suppose I will survive and adapt. Such is life.