Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Free Cameras?

Subject: Re: [OM] Free Cameras?
From: John Hermanson <omtech1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 08:37:23 -0400
A friend of mine had a Miranda Sensorex in HS.  It had the sweetest 
shutter sound IIRC.
___________________________________
John Hermanson  |   CPS, Inc.
21 South Ln., Huntington NY 11743
631-424-2121  |  www.zuiko.com
Olympus OM Service since 1977
Gallery: www.zuiko.com/album/index.html


Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Note:  I was originally just going to send this off list but thought 
> maybe some of the list members might enjoy this little report.
> 
> Hi, Bill
> The cameras arrived Wednesday or Thursday.  I don't know exactly.  The 
> box was left on the porch and we didn't realize it was there.  Anyhow 
> all is well.
> 
> The Miranda Sensorex is very pretty, much more so than I expected.  It's 
> also a lot heavier than I remember from my own Miranda GT... almost as 
> heavy as my Minolta SRT-101.  Them were the solid build days I guess. 
> Too bad about the corroded mercury battery box.  I'm not sure if the 
> meter will ever work again.  Been trying to think about how it might be 
> tested without tearing everything apart.  No sense trying to fix it if 
> the sensor behind the mirror doesn't work.  I hadn't realized the 
> Sensorex was that sophisticated with TTL behind the mirror.  The slow 
> speed governor (I think) doesn't seem to work.  Shutter works OK at "B" 
> and down to 1/30 but the second curtain won't release at 1/15 and 
> slower.  Fortunately, winding on releases it.  That's a surprise though 
> since normally the camera won't wind on if the second curtain hasn't 
> completed its travel and let the mirror back down.  The lenses are also 
> in very good condition except that the 135/3.5 has a sticky diaphragm.
> 
> The Kodak Pony was a bit of a surprise too in that everything seems to 
> work.  The 1955 manual I found on-line appears to be for a later version 
> with a 3.5 lens (vs. 4.5) and 1/300 vs 1/200 top speed.  But it's 
> otherwise quite close and was easy enough to figure it out.  The 
> removable back seems a little loose causing me to wonder about a 
> possible light leak but close inspection seems to say it's just built 
> that way.  There's no sign it ever had any sort of seals and no sign of 
> breakage or wear.  I guess it works by good baffle design.  It has a 
> nice and very easily read DOF scale.  That was interesting in itself 
> since it's DOF scale is different from the later model one in the 
> manual.  They both obviously assume different but rather low resolutions 
> of no more than about 20 lines/mm whereas I normally use 30 lines/mm for 
> DOF calculations.  But I guess that's just the inexpensive lens and the 
> film and small prints of the day.
> 
> They'll probably just be shelf queens but I get to think about all the 
> things I might do and how to do them... but probably won't.  :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> Chuck
> 
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz