Any luck w rechargeable batteries in the F6?

[ChrisLivsey]

He does not mention 18 rolls.

Much as it pains me to defend Rockwell, and I really can't believe I wrote that, he does "get closer to eighteen 36-exposure rolls on a set, and that includes low temperatures and long timed exposures in minutes."

But really 15 to 18 it's the difference between grim and grimmer!!

 

[Huss]

Much as it pains me to defend Rockwell, and I really can't believe I wrote that, he does "get closer to eighteen 36-exposure rolls on a set, and that includes low temperatures and long timed exposures in minutes."

But really 15 to 18 it's the difference between grim and grimmer!!

Agreed, but I now got 30 rolls of 36 exp w/o any movement of the battery indicator using the rechargeable Watson batteries.
I don't know how much longer they would have lasted, but it is already double the regular batteries, and 10 times as much as my defective ones!

For rechargeable, that is awesome as I would never shoot 30 rolls in a day!
Unless someone was paying me serious money, then I'll take a spare set!

 

[Huss]

I also wonder about expensive lenses sold by dealers that are used but mint: has someone tested them and found them to be not quite right?

Chances are yup. I know pros who test lenses and return the decentered ones and/or ones that don't AF correctly until they get a decent one.
In actuality they are not doing anything wrong - if you pay big bux for a lens you expect it to be working as designed - but it is the dealer/distributor/mfg who decides what happens to those returns.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

Indeed buying used, particularly older lenses, a well used example is more likely to have been on the good side of the bell curve of quality than the "mint" copy that languished at the back.