|
Post by paulhofseth on Sept 29, 2015 13:41:48 GMT -5
I have more or less thrown away my first digital experiments. That is what will make such devices collectible.
The first one I kept after trying small "toy" devices to see what it was all about, was the Kodak DCS pro something. Reasonable photosite count (14M? 12 M?) and VERY good colours. Unfortunately, terribly high noise above 400 ASA. The not Kodak-made body also had an inaccurate viewfinder.
I gave up and went to Canon FF and Olympus MFT. They are not perfect either, but sooner or later a better one may appear. Fujis non-hump electronoc viewfinder and the Canon and Sony pixelwars are encouraging.
For my part, I want a pocketable, high-pixel count, low noise, mechanical ISO & time dial (not interminable menus).
Auto lightmetering is OK, but a fast reacting, non battery-eating camera body which will take M-mount or shorter back-focus lenses is necesary. Manual focus with some focussing aids is of course needed.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Sept 29, 2015 1:05:17 GMT -5
And particularly impressive is the gravity defying, floor-space saving vertical stacking.
More seriously, the ancestor of the Practica, the Contax SLR was not only the early prism 35, but launched what later beacame more well known as the Pentax mount, so it a very illustrious pedigree.
p
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Sept 25, 2015 7:45:09 GMT -5
Maybe this site should earn its keep by publishing an online journal; this story deserves a wider public.
As for changes to older cameras, Leitz not only did ex-post model changes, they also made single additions. I once had a self-timer added at the Hauser Torwerk. Cosmetically, like that of the g-series, but not placed like it. When I came to pick it up they explained that they had cleaned and lubricated it and replaced all screws that had been loosened, since used screws did not have the same characteristics as unstressed new ones.
So, if yours is a Leitz mash-up, it has had a renewal treatment at one stage.
I vaguely remember a small seal covering the top screw fastening the mount with a letter stamped by the last workshop that opened the camera, but on looking at my current Leica, a much maltreated M6, there is no sign of it.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Sept 25, 2015 7:01:46 GMT -5
I belong to the tribe which when travelling prefers to bring one piece of hand luggage. I found the picture quality of the little Minox C too limiting, so its bigger brother was for a while the camera I brought in hand luggage when travelling.
The electronic shutter of the Minox EL is not one I would recommend. Years ago I got an EL since it was a pocketable full-frame. The shutter conked out, was repaired and stopped working again. Another EL, same story after a few years.
I have not found the Rollei 35S unreliable. Like every Compur/Prontor/Seiko....the long exposures of the wholly mechanical shutter does stiffen with time if not used. The only peculiarity with the Rollei is that you cannot collapse the lens unless the shutter is cocked and as with all complicated machinery, using force is not a good idea.
As for lenses, the Sonnar was good enough for my purposes, -as was the Minox optics. Sharp & good contrast in the age of Kodachrome.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Sept 17, 2015 7:21:37 GMT -5
The list above: why exactly Alpa6 rather than the others with the Alnea bayonet?
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Aug 14, 2015 11:38:06 GMT -5
Roman panos always manage to compress the centuries. I do not have any built-in pano capaility in my cameras, but have used a recent ICE variety with reasonable results. For me it has produced up to about 400Mb composites.
Advantages; fast and can be fed with raw files. , makes seamless joints, can join previous stitches together with TIFFs. Disadvantages; not 16bit output, does not cope with larger exposure differences and seems not to use a "scratch disk" (complains about needing 4Gb when given larger numbers of files than it can digest-has probably used about half of my 8Gb Ram- while it still has the potential use of around 100Gb disk space.)
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jul 24, 2015 14:36:57 GMT -5
A long time ago I swapped my IIIg for a Nikon SP, but in time gave that one up as well. Practicalities, not aesthetics decides. Looking back and adopting a purely aesthetic perspective, the Werra I wins.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jul 19, 2015 10:30:24 GMT -5
For some reason an elderly Nizo S 2 R sits on one of my shelves. Not particularly automatic, but it is sturdy and has a satisfactory number of cogwheels and is called "Heliomat". The take-up wheel helpfully states in large letters that if film is on that wheel, it is only half exposed.
Viking burials were not of the incendiary type. They used grave mounds and buried the property owning classes with their weapons and finery, so just pile stones and earth over your collection and leave it for archeologists to ponder over.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jul 11, 2015 12:02:25 GMT -5
A late reflection on the demise of your pocketable Leicas:
Leitz, alias Leica ,got taken over by various investors.
They experimented with farming out their trademark, with buying in hardware and with providing optical designs and quality control to others. Their conclusion seems to be that their excellent mechanical and optical skills are better rewarded in the luxury market. Also, the digital change has made it absolutely necessary to leave the film P&S market.
Once they stop working, the ones with fixed optics can be cannibalized with its lens reused (google: VNex)
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jun 12, 2015 13:41:28 GMT -5
Early experience; Canonet with terrible flare in the wrong light conditions, so a light meter plus a Leica replaced it. The Canon VIt in my view, had a better viewfinder than the Leica IIIg, and i liked the Canons winding mechanism, but since the M had better optics plus Visoflex, Canon lost out. No experience with early C-SLRs (but my digital 5ii works well). I have however succumbed to the anachrophiliac tendency and harbour an F1n "phone camera" (one of those modified by ALOS in Switzerland). Probably the current non-use Canon favourite.
p
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jun 2, 2015 4:47:00 GMT -5
Your higher serial numbers would indicate that the 4 element lens came in at a later date. The instruction book for my B2 does not reveal anything about different lenses, but does list a number of accessories.
The B2 also differs from the B in having what is described as "Exclusive No-Double-Exposure Device" - which stops the shutter cock-release button from fully returning.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jun 2, 2015 4:21:58 GMT -5
Interesting. It inspired me to go through Z in my bookshelf. I then looked at some of the material on your website, but could not easily find whether you had any of the texts that I have. I noted that Voigtländer from before ZIV and Contax from Japan will not be included, so of the texts I have, there are only 11 that are relevant.
If you wish I can mail you about 3cm. of literature that I have instead of scanning it myself. Alphabetically:
aus Jena Bildgestalung Wirkung Perspektive Druckschriften-Nr. N 54-082-1 Carl Zeiss Jena, new-years greetings card from the Geodätische Geräte Vertriebsabteilung Contaxphotographie undated,probably 1936, 96p, ZI Dresden. numbered C740 o. Pr Contarex brochure, Norwegian, Best.-Nr 3421 norwegisch "Contax" brochure, German, 29p. undated, probably early 1930es, no print info, but clearly CZ. numbered C 504b o.Pr Contessa brochure , Swedish, 3leaves, no 5219 Schwed 50 1050 Modo de usar el fotometro "Diaphot",dir. for use, Spanish, 1922? 12p.ZI Dresden numbered B 2208 Sp.and H 2808.30.1128 Ob Beruf oder Hobby brochure ad Contarex one folded sheet, Best.- Nr. 3425 dt. o. Pr. Phototechnik nr 3 1922, 48p. published by Ica AG Dresden, ContessaNettel AG Stuttgart, Mimosa AG Dresdan (on Diaphot) Planar 1:3,5/100mm Brochure, Swedish by Dr. Hans Sauer, published by Hasselblad. Marked Gøteborg 1.006 Sv 14 71 Super Ikonta III, dir. for use(of camera nr. C 97080), German, 27p ZI Stuttgart, numbered 319/531/16
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on Jun 1, 2015 14:03:44 GMT -5
Not sure how to identify early or late production.
The only numbers on my B&B2 are on the bottom and seem suspiciously round, so I thought they might be part numbers. (11800 & T1700). On the other hand my "C" has a less round number. All Anastigmats, but the first closes to f.16, the others to 22.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on May 27, 2015 13:39:08 GMT -5
Interesting info on Waterhouse.
I suppose a tunnel instead of a knife edge will confuse the diffraction-prone photons so that they will not just be in two minds about where to land, but in several.
One supplementing piece of info, (for 2x8 at least) my Kern Switar is 0,5mm longer, 5,5. I may have the price list in my library, but no time to fish it out right now.
I do not think Bogopolsky had much influence after the first Viteflex\Alpas.
I believe that it was the need that Pignons had for an outlet for their cogwheels and the Swiss patriotism and fear of overdependence on Leitz that drove development. Remember that Alos, Telefonbau und Normalzeit bought the main output from the factory and kept them afloat.
In their final years mr. Bourgeois seemed to chase any avenue for income. When I had one of my Alpas in for service he once showed me round at their Ballaguies plant (lots of spare parts, an impressive test photo rooom, but few workers). Besides highlighting the Roman road behind the factory, his main interest lay in promoting their new underwater devices.
p.
p.
|
|
|
Post by paulhofseth on May 26, 2015 13:48:24 GMT -5
Mr. Bogopolsky seems to have continued his predilection for stainless steel- as used in the early Alpas. My cine version goes down no further than f.22 AND it has "Waterhouse stops", not an iris aperture.
p.
|
|