Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Gearhead Delights > Repair / Camera Care

Repair / Camera Care This is a good place to discuss the care and repair of your photo gear. You can share Do-It-Yourself repair and maintenance, as well as your recommendations for pro repairs. This new forum was created 4/1/07. PLEASE title your thread wisely, so others searching for a certain make of camera or repair person can find your thread easily!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Professional Shutter Speed Adjustment places?
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #1
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Professional Shutter Speed Adjustment places?

Hello,
Does anybody know if there are places (US) that do shutter speed adjustment for Zorki-1 inexpensively ? Of course I realize that Sherry and others like that can do it. It's just not worth paying $200 to adjust a $30 camera. Meanwhile everything else works well and I would hate to throw the camera away...
Thank you in advance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #2
mburns
Registered User
 
mburns is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan USA
Posts: 81
Shutter speeds are not a reason for disposing of a camera! Just find a way to measure the speeds and then enjoy shooting film. I was shown by a camera technician the Leitz manual which specifies that shutters one half of a stop slow are within specification. I read that BW film photographers are expected to test their films ISO rating for themselves.
__________________
--
Michael J. Burns
https://plus.google.com/101209456517479509459/photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #3
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
 
Moto-Uno's Avatar
 
Moto-Uno is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: The Wet Coast
Posts: 1,269
If your shutter speeds are reasonably consistent , then who cares ? However, to address your concerns, there's more than a few sites that show how to make a shutter tester that works with the free "Audacity" sound software package . From using it on all my cameras I can say that it's easy and allows you to chart every cameras unique shutter speed . The device is cheap and even I was able to make it ~$20 . If you'd like I can post a few pics of it . Peter
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #4
View Range
Registered User
 
View Range is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 170
https://www.davescamera.net

Dave's Camera Repair near Ann Arbor. Adjusting the shutter curtain spring tension may help, but the camera likely needs re-lubrication to be a reliable shooter. There are camera repair books covering Leica's that probably are close enough to your Zorki if you want to try it for yourself.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #5
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by View Range View Post
https://www.davescamera.net

Dave's Camera Repair near Ann Arbor. Adjusting the shutter curtain spring tension may help, but the camera likely needs re-lubrication to be a reliable shooter. There are camera repair books covering Leica's that probably are close enough to your Zorki if you want to try it for yourself.
That's interesting. I will check it out. Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #7
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
 
Moto-Uno's Avatar
 
Moto-Uno is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: The Wet Coast
Posts: 1,269
^I guess I've been lucky, as all my cameras have had the shutter in the lens assembly .
Would be the last to suggest this as gospel , but my fuji Gl , Mamiya 7, Bronica Etrs and even the Medalist (and Welta ) have tested consistent (although slow in the Medalist ) . Surprisingly the Welta Weltur was within 20 percent on all speeds and lord knows if it's
ever been serviced ! Peter
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #8
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moto-Uno View Post
^I guess I've been lucky, as all my cameras have had the shutter in the lens assembly .
Would be the last to suggest this as gospel , but my fuji Gl , Mamiya 7, Bronica Etrs and even the Medalist (and Welta ) have tested consistent (although slow in the Medalist ) . Surprisingly the Welta Weltur was within 20 percent on all speeds and lord knows if it's
ever been serviced ! Peter
I would not bother if they are consistently off. Unfortunately it is not the case.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #9
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
The shutter speeds in the Zorki-1 aren't exactly adjustable per se; it's a pin-in-hole arrangement in which the speeds are controlled by the shutter curtain velocity. If this is off or inconsistent, the most likely causes are (1) dirt in the works, which is not a bad DIY job to fix, or (2) stiff/hardened/cracked/pinholed shutter curtains, in which case the only fix is replacement of the curtains (which is kind of a pain in the patoot, and you might not want to pay pro repair rates for this much work against the value of a Zorki-1)
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #11
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
This is what I get.
This is too much off, but meanwhile you said the camera is nice and smooth... So I wonder if there is something wrong(lacking parts) with the shutter speed mechanism( the pin-in-hole arrangement as mentioned above), rather than just bad tensioning of the curtains.

How reliable are the test result? I mean if the 1/500s behaves like 1/45s, you should be able to tell it from bare-eye observation.
__________________
tumblr

flickr

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #12
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by nukecoke View Post
This is too much off, but meanwhile you said the camera is nice and smooth... So I wonder if there is something wrong(lacking parts) with the shutter speed mechanism( the pin-in-hole arrangement as mentioned above), rather than just bad tensioning of the curtains.

How reliable are the test result? I mean if the 1/500s behaves like 1/45s, you should be able to tell it from bare-eye observation.
Checked my other camera and it's right on.

Anyway I think I got the answer. If I find reasonable source I will use it otherwise the camera will be sitting as conversational piece :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #13
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
I'm trying to visualize how that combination is even possible. The only thing I can think of is a film chip or something stuck in the gears of the #2 curtain, causing it to hesitate 1/50 second and then pass through. Do you happen to have a CRT television set around anywhere? Those are great for giving you a really good look at what the shutter is doing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #14
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick oleson View Post
I'm trying to visualize how that combination is even possible. The only thing I can think of is a film chip or something stuck in the gears of the #2 curtain, causing it to hesitate 1/50 second and then pass through. Do you happen to have a CRT television set around anywhere? Those are great for giving you a really good look at what the shutter is doing.
No, I was using one of these
http://www.ebay.com/itm/162299432217...%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
The problem, of course, is that with Zorki 1 you cannot put it on a back of camera for direct light access like you would do with M6 for example.
So what I did was- I inserted the piece of aluminum foil in place of film and tester was positioned on front of a camera (replacing the lens). I also was shining the light into camera with small flashlight. So shutter would open the curtains and light shining thru would reflect to the tester. It was very repeatable, I tried at least 3 times for each measurement (I am engineer by profession :-) )
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #15
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
I would try removing the body shell so that you can sight properly through the shutter, and repeat your speed tests. You might get the same results, but it's worth finding out. I've heard of that profession .... as I recall, using instruments in the way they were designed to be used was one of the rules.

  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #16
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
No, I was using one of these
http://www.ebay.com/itm/162299432217...%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
The problem, of course, is that with Zorki 1 you cannot put it on a back of camera for direct light access like you would do with M6 for example.
So what I did was- I inserted the piece of aluminum foil in place of film and tester was positioned on front of a camera (replacing the lens). I also was shining the light into camera with small flashlight. So shutter would open the curtains and light shining thru would reflect to the tester. It was very repeatable, I tried at least 3 times for each measurement (I am engineer by profession :-) )
You're an engineer and I'm not, but how exactly does the gizmo you are using measure the width of the slit that will determine the exposure of the film?
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #17
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
When you checked your other camera and it was right on, did you use this same method, with aluminum foil in the film gate and aiming the tester in the lens mount? Or with that camera were you sighting through the shutter curtains per normal practice? If you're comparing one to the other to verify your test method, you need to be using the same test method.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #18
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick oleson View Post
When you checked your other camera and it was right on, did you use this same method, with aluminum foil in the film gate and aiming the tester in the lens mount? Or with that camera were you sighting through the shutter curtains per normal practice? If you're comparing one to the other to verify your test method, you need to be using the same test method.
No, I was using normal method, because with my other cameras I have access to the back of a camera.
I agree this is not necessarily apples-to-apples but close enough. I mean, if it's accurate enough for slow speeds, then it's equally accurate for faster speeds. Slow speeds are one step off, where the fast ones are completely out...


BTW, I am reading your web site right now :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #19
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
I would not assume the apples-to-oranges is close enough until I'd proven this to be the case. Given that you have access to the lens mount of your other camera it should be easy to test both cameras that way; and you can compare the results between the front- and rear- positioned tests to confirm that the front-positioned test is accurate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #20
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick oleson View Post
I would not assume the apples-to-oranges is close enough until I'd proven this to be the case. Given that you have access to the lens mount of your other camera it should be easy to test both cameras that way; and you can compare the results between the front- and rear- positioned tests to confirm that the front-positioned test is accurate.
It would not be difficult, indeed.
My point is: if I am wrong with fast speeds, then I would be proportionally wrong with slow speeds as well.

Anyway, going back to my original topic, it appears to me that buying Zorki-1, as cute as this camera looks, is completely useless proposition. Unless you are a handyman, who enjoys adjusting speeds and cleaning the cameras, there is no point spending $25-50 on camera where you are almost guaranteed to invest another $200 to make it work. Might as well get the working camera on a first place.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #21
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
That is not necessarily true. In the case where you are aiming the light sensor in from the front, the light source (aluminum foil in the film gate) is about 30mm away from the sensor. At that distance, your sensor may have a field of view of 20 or 30mm. If this is the case, it could be responding to light coming from the aluminum foil over that much distance as the 2mm shutter slit passes across the film gate. This, in a shutter operating at a perfect 1/500 second, would indicate a speed as slow as 1/25 to 1/50 second. Which, by some bizarre and unexplainable coincidence, is exactly the result that you're seeing on your tester.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and speculate that there is nothing whatever wrong with the shutter in your Zorki and that the apparent incorrect readings you're seeing are 100% due to testing error.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #22
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
The little unit I am using translates the length of exposure to light to a sound signal and I am using "audacity" software to measure the wave afterwards, like one normally would.
Look it up, I think there is some info on YouTube.
Yes, and unless I'm missing something I can't see how this thing could possibly give correct shutter speed readings. Especially the fast ones.

The shutter travels for much longer than 1/1000s so your thing detects light for the whole duration of the shutter travel and in effect gives much slower speed readings than the film is exposed to the light in reality. It's the width of the slit that determines the duration of exposure of film but your gadget is reading the light hitting the film area from the left to the far right edge.

What am I missing?! (Again, not an engineer )
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #23
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick oleson View Post
That is not necessarily true. In the case where you are aiming the light sensor in from the front, the light source (aluminum foil in the film gate) is about 30mm away from the sensor. At that distance, your sensor may have a field of view of 20 or 30mm. If this is the case, it could be responding to light coming from the aluminum foil over that much distance as the 2mm shutter slit passes across the film gate. This, in a shutter operating at a perfect 1/500 second, would indicate a speed as slow as 1/25 to 1/50 second. Which, by some bizarre and unexplainable coincidence, is exactly the result that you're seeing on your tester.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and speculate that there is nothing whatever wrong with the shutter in your Zorki and that the apparent incorrect readings you're seeing are 100% due to testing error.
Now I am confused.
Apparently, I am missing something in design there (granted, I know little about Zorki design, never had an interest) but I don't understand why is the same not happening to slow speeds?

What I can do (given a free time, which I anticipate this weekend) is to run a roll of film thru with all the speeds available and see the results, how they differ. Of course, huge latitude of b/w film somewhat negates this, but hopefully... there is a difference between 1/500 and 1/45 that is bound to show.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #24
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Now I am confused.
Apparently, I am missing something in design there (granted, I know little about Zorki design, never had an interest) but I don't understand why is the same not happening to slow speeds?
It is. The relative "error" is just (much) smaller.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
What I can do (given a free time, which I anticipate this weekend) is to run a roll of film thru with all the speeds available and see the results, how they differ. Of course, huge latitude of b/w film somewhat negates this, but hopefully... there is a difference between 1/500 and 1/45 that is bound to show.
You can easily spot the change in density of less than 1 stop let alone 4 or more...
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #25
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Yes, and unless I'm missing something I can't see how this thing could possibly give correct shutter speed readings. Especially the fast ones.

The shutter travels for much longer than 1/1000s so your thing detects light for the whole duration of the shutter travel and in effect gives much slower speed readings than the film is exposed to the light in reality. It's the width of the slit that determines the duration of exposure of film but your gadget is reading the light hitting the film area from the left to the far right edge.

What am I missing?! (Again, not an engineer )
Are you saying that due to specifics of Zorki-1 shutter mechanism the gadget that I use on other cameras (and they were spot-on) is not usable? Am I understanding this correct?
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #26
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Now I am confused.
Apparently, I am missing something in design there (granted, I know little about Zorki design, never had an interest) but I don't understand why is the same not happening to slow speeds?
You are aware of how a focal plane shutter works? Small camera FP shutters generally have only one speed (the one indicated as "sync speed") - for shorter times, they link both curtains so that only a slit travels over the film (shortening the exposure time for each bit of film - but the time between exposing the far left and far right edge of the film still is the sync speed). For long times, they use an auxiliary timer to delay the start of the second curtain - each curtain still needs the same 1/50s to travel across, but the second curtain does start delayed.

Your method with the reflector in the film plane would actually work, if you used a laser (or similarly narrow beam light) for illumination - but given the above, it can never measure anything shorter than sync speed if you use a light source that covers the entire film gate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #27
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevo View Post
You are aware of how a focal plane shutter works? Small camera FP shutters generally have only one speed (the one indicated as "sync speed") - for shorter times, they link both curtains so that only a slit travels over the film (shortening the exposure time for each bit of film - but the time between exposing the far left and far right edge of the film still is the sync speed). For long times, they use an auxiliary timer to delay the start of the second curtain - each curtain still needs the same 1/50s to travel across, but the second curtain does start delayed.

Your method with the reflector in the film plane would actually work, if you used a laser (or similarly narrow beam light) for illumination - but given the above, it can never measure anything shorter than sync speed if you use a light source that covers the entire film gate.
Hmm... That’s interesting, because I used this gizmo on Leica R3, Leica M6 & Minolta X-350 - all very close or right on.
That’s all I have.
Oh, and I also used it on FED-5 (with aluminum foil) and it was also off completely. Must be because it has mechanism similar to Zorki and my method of measuring was also similar.
Thanks.
  Reply With Quote

Old 1 Week Ago   #28
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
Mikhail, PLEASE: for the love of God, please, just one time, humor us: Take any one of those "tested just fine" cameras and test it THE SAME WAY YOU TESTED THE ZORKI. Or, maybe better yet, the Fed 5 has a removable back, test that THE WAY YOU TESTED THE SLRS.

Why are you going to so much trouble to avoid testing your methodology to find out whether it's valid?
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #29
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Ok, so I was wrong…
I did a film test on my Zorki. I shot sequence of frames from the same spot within seconds with the following:
f3.5, 1/500;
f4, 1/250;
f5.6, 1/125;
f8, 1/60
and so forth.
They are all exposed pretty much the same as you can see..
To me this means that Zorki’s speeds are all proportionally correct.
And I think they are all about 1 stop slower than should be.


[IMG][/IMG]
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #30
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
Great news! These are really not bad cameras, and disproportionate shutter speed errors are very difficult for them to create. It could be a bit slow across the board, although a stop seems like a lot. Glad it didn't get relegated to shelf-only status!

take care
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #31
wolves3012
Registered User
 
wolves3012's Avatar
 
wolves3012 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 2,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick oleson View Post
That is not necessarily true. In the case where you are aiming the light sensor in from the front, the light source (aluminum foil in the film gate) is about 30mm away from the sensor. At that distance, your sensor may have a field of view of 20 or 30mm. If this is the case, it could be responding to light coming from the aluminum foil over that much distance as the 2mm shutter slit passes across the film gate. This, in a shutter operating at a perfect 1/500 second, would indicate a speed as slow as 1/25 to 1/50 second. Which, by some bizarre and unexplainable coincidence, is exactly the result that you're seeing on your tester.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and speculate that there is nothing whatever wrong with the shutter in your Zorki and that the apparent incorrect readings you're seeing are 100% due to testing error.
I'd be willing to put money on this being the correct explanation, makes perfect sense, knowing how the Zorki shutter (and most FP shutters) work. It's not valid using the tester unless it's close up by the shutter's passing "slit".

Having had a few FSU shutters apart, there's precious little to go wrong unless they are gummed up or broken. It's actually very hard to get them to run at anything other than roughly the correct speeds if they are clean and free-running. All speeds may be off by roughly the same factor but not in the way reported above.
__________________
Zorki: 1e (x2), 2C, 3M, 4, 4K, 5, 6
FED: NKVD, 1g, 2e, 3a, 3b, 4L (x2), 5B, 5C
Kiev 4, 4A
Leica IIIC
Yashica Minister III
Zenith C, Zenit C, Zenit E
Minolta XG-M, XD-5, Z1
Nikon P50
Panasonic Lumix G2, 14-42 Kit lens + 45-150mm

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."- Benjamin Franklin
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #32
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick oleson View Post
Great news! These are really not bad cameras, and disproportionate shutter speed errors are very difficult for them to create. It could be a bit slow across the board, although a stop seems like a lot. Glad it didn't get relegated to shelf-only status!

take care
Now that I understand a situation a bit better, I realise that in order to use this little gadget successfully I would have to put a small piece of tube over the sensor so it only reacts to a straight rays of light, not angled. Otherwise sensor does not make a distinction between light right in front of it and light coming from the side... I learned something after all.
Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #33
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,373
A lot of people refuse to work on those cameras. It's like taking your Huffy to a high end bike shop. They will just shake their heads and point you toward the door. You would be about 10,000 times better off just buying a more modern and reliable camera like a Bessa R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #34
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M. View Post
A lot of people refuse to work on those cameras. It's like taking your Huffy to a high end bike shop. They will just shake their heads and point you toward the door. You would be about 10,000 times better off just buying a more modern and reliable camera like a Bessa R.
I agree.
I just happen to have this one laying around.
When I actually go shoot I use Leica M6 and Minolta X-350. That's two cameras I have and use all the time.
  Reply With Quote

Old 23 Hours Ago   #35
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 63
Posts: 343
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M. View Post
A lot of people refuse to work on those cameras. It's like taking your Huffy to a high end bike shop. They will just shake their heads and point you toward the door. You would be about 10,000 times better off just buying a more modern and reliable camera like a Bessa R.
Ho ho ho, you make funny joke, no?
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:23.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.