The rangefinder was not coupled and went into the accessory shoe. The dial was black. And note, this was a new camera that had been forgotten on the shelf in a small dusty shop in the middle of nowhere. I had similar luck in the Cape, in a Wine Merchant called E K Green, in Mowbray. I bought several hundred bottles of Port and Sherry the manager thought "would have gone off by now" for R1 per bottle. It was all imported wine - I'm not talking about South African imitation Sherry and Port. The Port alone would have been worth fifty pounds a bottle in London.
D Don Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 1:50 PM Subject: Vs: Lens sharpness vs. camera shake > OK, but if I�m not mistaken the correct designation must be 1f - with two accessory shoes. In the American system there was indeed model F - model III everywhere else - and it is equipped with viewfinder and separate rangefinder, coupled, of course. BTW in my old Leica price guide a 1F Black Dial is listed at 1.200 USD and Red Dial at 525 USD. > All the best! > Raimo > Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho > > -----Alkuper�inen viesti----- > L�hett�j�: Dr E D F Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > P�iv�: 21. joulukuuta 2002 11:16 > Aihe: Re: Lens sharpness vs. camera shake > > > >Incredibly simple camera. No viewfinder inside. The viewfinder went into the > >accessory shoe. The lens was that collapsible 50/3.5 Elmar I think it was. > >It was new when I got it - absolutely mint. I'd found it in a camera shop in > >the original box in Bulawayo in 1953. I thought the shutter speeds were a > >bit off, so I sent it to the agents in Johannesburg. It never came back. It > >was stolen by someone who probably knew its worth - I certainly didn't. I > >complained like hell and they gave me a new M3. I sold that after a couple > >of years because I was already into Alpa reflex - what an idiot. I used the > >money for Alpa lenses and beer. > > > >D > > > >Don Williams > > > >http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > >Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery > >Updated: March 30, 2002 > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Raimo Korhonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 12:39 PM > >Subject: Vs: Lens sharpness vs. camera shake > > > > > >> Leica F1? What is that? > >> All the best! > >> Raimo > >> Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho > >> > >> -----Alkuper�inen viesti----- > >> L�hett�j�: Dr E D F Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> P�iv�: 21. joulukuuta 2002 9:19 > >> Aihe: Re: Lens sharpness vs. camera shake > >> > >> > >> >As a student I used to shoot in the 'Pig and Whistle', near the > >University, > >> >with a Leica F1. I usually perched it on a beer tankard (empty) and > >operated > >> >it with a longish cable release. Hardly anyone noticed the camera. The > >> >pictures were great. I had an album full of them - lost now. There's a > >long > >> >long road awinding ... aaaaargh! > >> <snip> > >> > > >> >Don > >> > > >> >Don Williams > >> > > >> >http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams > >> >Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery > >> >Updated: March 30, 2002 > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >
