On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:54:27 -0500, John H.
wrote:


Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's not the
latter!

Did you happen to check the diopter setting on the camera?

Your lens may be focusing properly, but you're not seeing it because
the diopter may be off.

Ask me how I know that. :)

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 21:08:09 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to specs.
I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about
taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's not the
latter!
--
John H


You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.

My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on trips,
because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three really sharp
lenses for it.

Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

Yes. Had one years ago. Couldn't figure it out.

Turns out that the focusing ring was warping the glass ever so
slightly - like in the micro meter scale.

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated it. It
revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.

I had a Yashica that was like that - beautiful, crisp images. You
could pick out details that you never would be able to see otherwise.

What ever happened to Yashica anyway?

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 21:08:09 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to specs.
I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about
taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's not
the
latter!
--
John H


You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.

My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on trips,
because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three really sharp
lenses for it.

Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

Yes. Had one years ago. Couldn't figure it out.

Turns out that the focusing ring was warping the glass ever so
slightly - like in the micro meter scale.

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated it.
It
revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.

I had a Yashica that was like that - beautiful, crisp images. You
could pick out details that you never would be able to see otherwise.

What ever happened to Yashica anyway?


I dunno. I still see accessories for Yachica/Contax cameras, so there must
still be some cameras out there.

HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to
specs. I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about
taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's
not the
latter!
--
John H

You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.
My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on
trips, because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three really
sharp lenses for it.

Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated
it. It revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.



Mine is older, with a pop down lever on the bottom for "rapid film
advance."

You really should scan some of your photos and share them with us.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to
specs. I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about
taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's
not the
latter!
--
John H

You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.
My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on
trips, because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three
really sharp lenses for it.

Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated
it. It revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.



Mine is older, with a pop down lever on the bottom for "rapid film
advance."

You really should scan some of your photos and share them with us.


Why?

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

I had a Yashica that was like that - beautiful, crisp images. You
could pick out details that you never would be able to see otherwise.

What ever happened to Yashica anyway?

I should buy some 120 film and run it through my old Yashica D.... just to
keep it from seizing up.
http://www.butkus.org/chinon/yashica.../yashica_d.htm

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to
specs. I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better
about taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's
not the
latter!
--
John H

You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.
My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on
trips, because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three
really sharp lenses for it.

Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated
it. It revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.



Mine is older, with a pop down lever on the bottom for "rapid film
advance."

You really should scan some of your photos and share them with us.


Why?
Ok, nevermind.

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:56:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to specs. I
am very pleased with it.

Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's not the
latter!
--
John H


You could always sell the boat and replace everything with Leica.


Unless the Leica is about a hundred years old, I wouldn't have it. If I
did, I'd sell it as an antique.
--
John H

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:34:24 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to
specs. I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about
taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's
not the
latter!
--
John H

You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.
My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on
trips, because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three really
sharp lenses for it.

Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated
it. It revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.



Mine is older, with a pop down lever on the bottom for "rapid film
advance."

You really should scan some of your photos and share them with us.

Have you forgotten the owls down by the creek, or river, or waterway?
--
John H

John H. wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:34:24 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
...


I sent me back while it was in warrenty and had them set it to
specs. I
am very pleased with it.
Oh, I didn't recall your having done that. Now I feel better about
taking
mine in. It's either the lens, the camera, or me. Hopefully it's
not the
latter!
--
John H
You could always sell the boat and replae everything with Leica.
My only remaining film camera is a Leica, which I like to take on
trips, because it is relatively small, quiet, and I have three really
sharp lenses for it.
Is there such a thing as a Leica lens that's NOT sharp?

I had an M5 (?? current rangefinder model around 1971). Women hated
it. It revealed every pore on their face, every imperfection.


Mine is older, with a pop down lever on the bottom for "rapid film
advance."
You really should scan some of your photos and share them with us.

Have you forgotten the owls down by the creek, or river, or waterway?

I thought the owl was a really nice photo. It looked like it was taken
with a 400mm 2.8, a really nice lens.