Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes]

My first SLR was a Mamiya Sekor that got wet and ruined when I was in Fiji.
Used the insurance money to replace it with a Nikon F, purchased locally
duty-free.

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:47 AM Dan--- via Mercedes 
wrote:

> I look at KEH occasionally to see what my former Mamiya setups would cost
> today. I could get into either one (M645 Super, RB67) better than I had
> previously for under $500, and that’s even with the glass.
>
> A bunch of nice Mamiya TLRs and several inexpensive YashicaMats, too.
>
> So tempting, but I really don’t need to resurrect an old hobby...
>
> -D
>
> > On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:46 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> > The 50mm F/1.4 I couldn't afford back then, I can now buy for $41.
> > Which probably means my F/1.8 is worthless, and my zooms appear to be
> worth about half what I paid for them used in the 1980s.
> >
> >> On August 11, 2019 at 5:14 PM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Check KEH Camera.
> >>
> >> https://www.keh.com
> >>
> >> -D
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:07 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
>  On August 11, 2019 at 2:40 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> 
> >>>
>  Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to
> excellent Olympus OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is
> hot though, as they adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the
> effort of manual exposure and focus you get absolutely superb lenses for
> cheap.
> >>>
> >>> Are manual focus Canon FD lenses worth anything?
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>>
> >>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>>
> >>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>
> >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>
> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
>
>
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Dan--- via Mercedes]

I look at KEH occasionally to see what my former Mamiya setups would cost 
today. I could get into either one (M645 Super, RB67) better than I had 
previously for under $500, and that’s even with the glass.

A bunch of nice Mamiya TLRs and several inexpensive YashicaMats, too.

So tempting, but I really don’t need to resurrect an old hobby...

-D

> On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:46 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> The 50mm F/1.4 I couldn't afford back then, I can now buy for $41.
> Which probably means my F/1.8 is worthless, and my zooms appear to be worth 
> about half what I paid for them used in the 1980s.
> 
>> On August 11, 2019 at 5:14 PM Dan Penoff via Mercedes 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Check KEH Camera.
>> 
>> https://www.keh.com
>> 
>> -D
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:07 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 On August 11, 2019 at 2:40 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes 
  wrote:
 
>>> 
 Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to excellent 
 Olympus OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is hot 
 though, as they adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the effort 
 of manual exposure and focus you get absolutely superb lenses for cheap.
>>> 
>>> Are manual focus Canon FD lenses worth anything?
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>>> 
>>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>>> 
>>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Mitch Haley via Mercedes]

The 50mm F/1.4 I couldn't afford back then, I can now buy for $41.
Which probably means my F/1.8 is worthless, and my zooms appear to be worth 
about half what I paid for them used in the 1980s.

> On August 11, 2019 at 5:14 PM Dan Penoff via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Check KEH Camera.
> 
> https://www.keh.com
> 
> -D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:07 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> On August 11, 2019 at 2:40 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes 
> >>  wrote:
> >> 
> > 
> >> Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to excellent 
> >> Olympus OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is hot 
> >> though, as they adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the effort 
> >> of manual exposure and focus you get absolutely superb lenses for cheap.
> > 
> > Are manual focus Canon FD lenses worth anything?
> > 
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> > 
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > 
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

Check KEH Camera.

https://www.keh.com

-D




> On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:07 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On August 11, 2019 at 2:40 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes 
>>  wrote:
>> 
> 
>> Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to excellent 
>> Olympus OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is hot though, 
>> as they adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the effort of manual 
>> exposure and focus you get absolutely superb lenses for cheap.
> 
> Are manual focus Canon FD lenses worth anything?
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Mitch Haley via Mercedes]

> On August 11, 2019 at 2:40 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 

> Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to excellent 
> Olympus OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is hot though, 
> as they adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the effort of manual 
> exposure and focus you get absolutely superb lenses for cheap.

Are manual focus Canon FD lenses worth anything?

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[OK Don via Mercedes]

That's what I love about the Nikon system - I can use lenses from the
original Nikon F on the current digital full frame bodies. They mount
directly with no adapter, or anything. The old manual lenses are very cheap
now as well - you can get excellent glass for a fraction of the cost in the
film days.

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 1:44 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> I have always suspected the real issue is that the manufacturer wants to
> sell all new plastic craptastic lenses rather than include the necessary
> linkages to use old lenses on the new digital bodies.
>
> And until recently, you could sell a junk lens too, the sensor resolution
> was so low a high resolution lens was wasted.
>
> I've never seen any real research that indicates the light path direction
> issue is in fact something anyone would care about.
>
> Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to excellent
> Olympus OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is hot though,
> as they adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the effort of manual
> exposure and focus you get absolutely superb lenses for cheap.
>

-- 
OK Don

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
pause and reflect." Mark Twain

"There are three kinds of men: The ones that learns by reading. The few who
learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence
for themselves."

WILL ROGERS, *The Manly Wisdom of Will Rogers*
2013 F150, 18 mpg
2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Peter Frederick via Mercedes]

I have always suspected the real issue is that the manufacturer wants to sell 
all new plastic craptastic lenses rather than include the necessary linkages to 
use old lenses on the new digital bodies.

And until recently, you could sell a junk lens too, the sensor resolution was 
so low a high resolution lens was wasted.

I've never seen any real research that indicates the light path direction issue 
is in fact something anyone would care about.

Annoys me endlessly as I have a wide assortment of decent to excellent Olympus 
OM lenses that are now digital orphans.  Pen F stuff is hot though, as they 
adapt to the 4/3 cameras very easily, so with the effort of manual exposure and 
focus you get absolutely superb lenses for cheap.
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[OK Don via Mercedes]

Hmm - I've not noticed that with my old Nikon and Leitz lenses on the D750.
I'll start looking for the effect.

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 7:45 AM Peter Frederick via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> To do infared with a digital camera you have to remove the IR filter --
> it's one of the reasons non-digitral lenses can cause problems in digital
> cameras -- film doesn't have a piece of glass between the image sensitive
> material and the lens.
>
>
> --
OK Don

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to
pause and reflect." Mark Twain

"There are three kinds of men: The ones that learns by reading. The few who
learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence
for themselves."

WILL ROGERS, *The Manly Wisdom of Will Rogers*
2013 F150, 18 mpg
2017 Subaru Legacy, 30 mpg
1957 C182A, 12 mpg - but at 150 mph!
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Peter Frederick via Mercedes]

To do infared with a digital camera you have to remove the IR filter -- it's 
one of the reasons non-digitral lenses can cause problems in digital cameras -- 
film doesn't have a piece of glass between the image sensitive material and the 
lens.

If not filtered out, the images contain infared the eye cannot see, so they 
look quite strange.  Even extended red sensitive films can look odd.
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Curt Raymond via Mercedes]

 Good point, I guess most of them don't though, I've used that trick a bunch. I 
just tested it with my Moto G7 and the hotel TV remote, worked fine.
Another place they come in handy is for seeing if the laser in a fibre 
transceiver is working. Point the fibre at the camera and see if the laser is 
coming through. 
Back in the 1Gb fibre days we used to look into the fibre and see the laser. 
With today's 10Gb fibre you'd be giving yourself lasik. The camera is a great 
option.
-Curt

On Saturday, August 10, 2019, 11:36:23 PM EDT, Craig via Mercedes 
 wrote:  
 
 On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 03:16:08 + (UTC) Curt Raymond via Mercedes
 wrote:

>  You should be able to verify that an IR remote is putting out signal
> by shooting it at a digital camera and watching the screen of the
> camera. What is invisible to our normal eyes poses no problem for a
> digital camera. -Curt

Unless it has an IR cut filter.

When I was in graduate student, a fellow in another lab used a child's
toy video camera to trace where his laser's IR beam, but he had to remove
the IR cut filter to allow the camera's detector to see the beam.


Craig

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

  
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Craig via Mercedes]

On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 03:16:08 + (UTC) Curt Raymond via Mercedes
 wrote:

>  You should be able to verify that an IR remote is putting out signal
> by shooting it at a digital camera and watching the screen of the
> camera. What is invisible to our normal eyes poses no problem for a
> digital camera. -Curt

Unless it has an IR cut filter.

When I was in graduate student, a fellow in another lab used a child's
toy video camera to trace where his laser's IR beam, but he had to remove
the IR cut filter to allow the camera's detector to see the beam.


Craig

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Curt Raymond via Mercedes]

 You should be able to verify that an IR remote is putting out signal by 
shooting it at a digital camera and watching the screen of the camera. What is 
invisible to our normal eyes poses no problem for a digital camera.
-Curt

On Friday, August 9, 2019, 4:16:01 PM EDT, Dan Penoff via Mercedes 
 wrote:  
 
 The key has an RFC chip in it, the battery shouldn’t have any effect on it’s 
ability to start. Same reason why a “Mickey Mouse” key will start and run the 
car as well.

Just for grins, try the remote at each door and the trunk in the dark. I say 
that because my 1997 SL500 fob won’t work in the daylight, but will in the 
dark. I can only assume that something has weakened the fob (this is with brand 
new batteries) or the system isn’t as sensitive as it used to be.

-D


> On Aug 9, 2019, at 4:11 PM, Floyd Thursby via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Last week I thought I had locked the SL with the IR remote that shines at 
> receivers on the doors and trunk.  They have red and green lights that blink 
> red when it locks, green when it unlocks. I have noticed that the lights 
> don't all work, a green on one, a red on another, I think neither on the 
> trunk, and sometimes the key remote won't activate different lock receivers.  
> Maybe the batteries are getting low in the remotes, I'll have to check them.  
> These fobs have a key that flips out of a rectangular housing when you push a 
> little button, then a larger button to work the remote signal.
> 
> So I went to get in the car, hit the remote button aimed at the driver door, 
> then got in.  Tried to start the car, no go.  Ugh. Finally got out and 
> fiddled with the battery cables, tightened them, whatever.  Then it started 
> OK.  Same thing happened Wed evening, fooled with the battery, still no go.  
> I know the battery is good so it was confusing.  So for some reason I tried 
> the remote again at the driver door, which was open, and then tried to start 
> the car and bingo it worked.  So I am trying to figure out if the door 
> receiver is funky, or the key, or what.  i guess first thing is to change key 
> battery.
> 
> I guess this must be some immobilizer feature, ignition is disabled if the 
> locks are locked, although the driver door did not seem to be locking which 
> is why I could open it even though the car thought it was locked.
> 
> This thing gives me fits!
> 
> -- 
> --FT
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

  
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Rick Knoble via Mercedes]

 
>So does my SL500. The systems were IR until 98, I think, when they changed to 
>RF.


 My W210 has both RF and IR receivers. The RF does the door locks, trunk, and 
panic functions. The IR rolls  the windows and sunroof up and down when aimed 
at the door handle receiver. IR also operates the ignition module. I have read 
that pocket lint can get it the key and obscure the IR lens and cause the 
ignition to be inoperable.   

Rick
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[M. Mitchell Marmel via Mercedes]

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 11:11 PM Craig via Mercedes 
wrote:

>
> Cataracts, anyone?
> 


Nah, I prefer Mercedeses.

-MMM-
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Craig via Mercedes]

On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 20:07:03 -0400 Dan Penoff via Mercedes
 wrote:

> So does my SL500. The systems were IR until 98, I think, when they
> changed to RF.
> 
> Again, if the emitter is weak or the receivers are not working well, or
> their plastic lenses are cloudy, it won’t work from a distance of any
> kind, or in the sunlight.

Cataracts, anyone?


Craig

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

So does my SL500. The systems were IR until 98, I think, when they changed to 
RF.

Again, if the emitter is weak or the receivers are not working well, or their 
plastic lenses are cloudy, it won’t work from a distance of any kind, or in the 
sunlight.

-D


> On Aug 9, 2019, at 6:47 PM, Floyd Thursby via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> This one has an IR emitter you aim at these sensors on the door and trunk 
> lock area, each of those has the red/green indicators to show un/locking.  It 
> is a 600!  So it has to be more complicated!
> 
> -_FT
> 
> On 8/9/19 4:15 PM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:
>> The key has an RFC chip in it, the battery shouldn’t have any effect on it’s 
>> ability to start. Same reason why a “Mickey Mouse” key will start and run 
>> the car as well.
>> 
>> Just for grins, try the remote at each door and the trunk in the dark. I say 
>> that because my 1997 SL500 fob won’t work in the daylight, but will in the 
>> dark. I can only assume that something has weakened the fob (this is with 
>> brand new batteries) or the system isn’t as sensitive as it used to be.
>> 
>> -D
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 9, 2019, at 4:11 PM, Floyd Thursby via Mercedes 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Last week I thought I had locked the SL with the IR remote that shines at 
>>> receivers on the doors and trunk.  They have red and green lights that 
>>> blink red when it locks, green when it unlocks. I have noticed that the 
>>> lights don't all work, a green on one, a red on another, I think neither on 
>>> the trunk, and sometimes the key remote won't activate different lock 
>>> receivers.  Maybe the batteries are getting low in the remotes, I'll have 
>>> to check them.  These fobs have a key that flips out of a rectangular 
>>> housing when you push a little button, then a larger button to work the 
>>> remote signal.
>>> 
>>> So I went to get in the car, hit the remote button aimed at the driver 
>>> door, then got in.  Tried to start the car, no go.  Ugh. Finally got out 
>>> and fiddled with the battery cables, tightened them, whatever.  Then it 
>>> started OK.  Same thing happened Wed evening, fooled with the battery, 
>>> still no go.  I know the battery is good so it was confusing.  So for some 
>>> reason I tried the remote again at the driver door, which was open, and 
>>> then tried to start the car and bingo it worked.  So I am trying to figure 
>>> out if the door receiver is funky, or the key, or what.  i guess first 
>>> thing is to change key battery.
>>> 
>>> I guess this must be some immobilizer feature, ignition is disabled if the 
>>> locks are locked, although the driver door did not seem to be locking which 
>>> is why I could open it even though the car thought it was locked.
>>> 
>>> This thing gives me fits!
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> --FT
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>>> 
>>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>>> 
>>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
> -- 
> --FT
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Floyd Thursby via Mercedes]

This one has an IR emitter you aim at these sensors on the door and 
trunk lock area, each of those has the red/green indicators to show 
un/locking.  It is a 600!  So it has to be more complicated!


-_FT

On 8/9/19 4:15 PM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:

The key has an RFC chip in it, the battery shouldn’t have any effect on it’s 
ability to start. Same reason why a “Mickey Mouse” key will start and run the 
car as well.

Just for grins, try the remote at each door and the trunk in the dark. I say 
that because my 1997 SL500 fob won’t work in the daylight, but will in the 
dark. I can only assume that something has weakened the fob (this is with brand 
new batteries) or the system isn’t as sensitive as it used to be.

-D



On Aug 9, 2019, at 4:11 PM, Floyd Thursby via Mercedes  
wrote:

Last week I thought I had locked the SL with the IR remote that shines at 
receivers on the doors and trunk.  They have red and green lights that blink 
red when it locks, green when it unlocks. I have noticed that the lights don't 
all work, a green on one, a red on another, I think neither on the trunk, and 
sometimes the key remote won't activate different lock receivers.  Maybe the 
batteries are getting low in the remotes, I'll have to check them.  These fobs 
have a key that flips out of a rectangular housing when you push a little 
button, then a larger button to work the remote signal.

So I went to get in the car, hit the remote button aimed at the driver door, 
then got in.  Tried to start the car, no go.  Ugh. Finally got out and fiddled 
with the battery cables, tightened them, whatever.  Then it started OK.  Same 
thing happened Wed evening, fooled with the battery, still no go.  I know the 
battery is good so it was confusing.  So for some reason I tried the remote 
again at the driver door, which was open, and then tried to start the car and 
bingo it worked.  So I am trying to figure out if the door receiver is funky, 
or the key, or what.  i guess first thing is to change key battery.

I guess this must be some immobilizer feature, ignition is disabled if the 
locks are locked, although the driver door did not seem to be locking which is 
why I could open it even though the car thought it was locked.

This thing gives me fits!

--
--FT


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com



___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com


--
--FT


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This was weird, or maybe not

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

The key has an RFC chip in it, the battery shouldn’t have any effect on it’s 
ability to start. Same reason why a “Mickey Mouse” key will start and run the 
car as well.

Just for grins, try the remote at each door and the trunk in the dark. I say 
that because my 1997 SL500 fob won’t work in the daylight, but will in the 
dark. I can only assume that something has weakened the fob (this is with brand 
new batteries) or the system isn’t as sensitive as it used to be.

-D


> On Aug 9, 2019, at 4:11 PM, Floyd Thursby via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Last week I thought I had locked the SL with the IR remote that shines at 
> receivers on the doors and trunk.  They have red and green lights that blink 
> red when it locks, green when it unlocks. I have noticed that the lights 
> don't all work, a green on one, a red on another, I think neither on the 
> trunk, and sometimes the key remote won't activate different lock receivers.  
> Maybe the batteries are getting low in the remotes, I'll have to check them.  
> These fobs have a key that flips out of a rectangular housing when you push a 
> little button, then a larger button to work the remote signal.
> 
> So I went to get in the car, hit the remote button aimed at the driver door, 
> then got in.  Tried to start the car, no go.  Ugh. Finally got out and 
> fiddled with the battery cables, tightened them, whatever.  Then it started 
> OK.  Same thing happened Wed evening, fooled with the battery, still no go.  
> I know the battery is good so it was confusing.  So for some reason I tried 
> the remote again at the driver door, which was open, and then tried to start 
> the car and bingo it worked.  So I am trying to figure out if the door 
> receiver is funky, or the key, or what.  i guess first thing is to change key 
> battery.
> 
> I guess this must be some immobilizer feature, ignition is disabled if the 
> locks are locked, although the driver door did not seem to be locking which 
> is why I could open it even though the car thought it was locked.
> 
> This thing gives me fits!
> 
> -- 
> --FT
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com