|
Post by conan on Feb 25, 2020 16:31:36 GMT -5
This Compartment Case Model FB5 came with a camera set i've bought. From initial research i've found out the FB5 would be suited to hold a F camera with F36 motor drive with cordless battery pack. After attempting to fit one in this dosn't seem to be the case and only the F with plain or photomic prism will fit. The FB5 could be used for some more modern gear like an FM or F3. These cases were very well made and rather expensive but one must be aware that they are not suited to keep gear locked up in them over a longer period of time as they seal moist wich could cause lenses to develop fungus. The FB5 has Bayonet lens mounts,holds one camera and four lenses up to 300 mm though the "modern" 300mm 4.5 ED will not fit as it's a bit to long. Three lenses are securely bayonetted to the lens mounts on the baseplate, and can be easily and quickly removed with one hand, while the fourth is attached to the camera which is fitted to the holder recess on the inner side of the case. Thepocket inside the case lid holds four filters, and two outside pockets provide additional space for sundries. The tilt-away front cover allows easy access to the contents. This is the case for those who require quick lens changes. Here's a few photo's of what it looks like with vintage and some more recent gear loaded. I first bought one of these in the mid-seventies. They were part of the extensive range of camera cases made by Nikon. It was the most practical case I ever had to carry a couple of bodies and lenses. Water ran off the vinyl and the case opened away from the body and provided a small working tray. Spiratone in the US copied them and had versions that took Nikon, Exakta and M42 screw mount lenses. Considering these days I use Lowepro and Pelican cases that good old FB5 still ranks as one the most practical cases I have used.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Feb 25, 2020 16:29:41 GMT -5
This Compartment Case Model FB5 came with a camera set i've bought. From initial research i've found out the FB5 would be suited to hold a F camera with F36 motor drive with cordless battery pack. After attempting to fit one in this dosn't seem to be the case and only the F with plain or photomic prism will fit. The FB5 could be used for some more modern gear like an FM or F3. These cases were very well made and rather expensive but one must be aware that they are not suited to keep gear locked up in them over a longer period of time as they seal moist wich could cause lenses to develop fungus. The FB5 has Bayonet lens mounts,holds one camera and four lenses up to 300 mm though the "modern" 300mm 4.5 ED will not fit as it's a bit to long. Three lenses are securely bayonetted to the lens mounts on the baseplate, and can be easily and quickly removed with one hand, while the fourth is attached to the camera which is fitted to the holder recess on the inner side of the case. Thepocket inside the case lid holds four filters, and two outside pockets provide additional space for sundries. The tilt-away front cover allows easy access to the contents. This is the case for those who require quick lens changes. Here's a few photo's of what it looks like with vintage and some more recent gear loaded.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Sept 4, 2019 2:24:53 GMT -5
Hi, Conan, I have a collection of over 250 cameras from 8mm to 8"x10" All of them use film in one form or another from glass to celluloide and plastics. But not those digital monsters. Thay can not take pictures and are, therefore not cameras. I can not even find the door by which film might enter the camera. Whoops! Excuse me. My tongue is stuck in my cheek. See ya later when I get it freed. A camera is just a tool to take photographs and improvements in technology make the tools more versatile and faster to use. The last few months I have been dry firing and film firing some of my best cameras. A Leica 3f, 3g and M3, a Nikon S2 and SP, a Contax 3a, Canon F1’s and every Nikon F model – up to the F6 (which is the closest film cameras ever got to digitals) and Rolleiflex 3.5F. These were some of the greatest machines ever made and I appreciate their jewel like quality and the great engineering in them BUT as a tool they just don’t hold their own against modern digital cameras. For serious photography I would no more use one of these than watch a black and white television or drive a model T.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 27, 2019 0:01:25 GMT -5
" Will digital cameras ever become collectable ?" Not a chance! Never! Of course they will be collected. Look at some of the early working digital cameras now being sold and the collectors of early computers and video consoles. People will collect all sorts of things. Old technology means nothing if you just want to relive something from your youth and what you could not afford when you were younger. Like old cars a spin around the block can be interesting and nostalgic but I would never use my Leica’s and Rollei’s for serious photographs – that’s what digitals are for - but it does not stop me collecting cameras from the mechanical age.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 2, 2019 2:14:05 GMT -5
Bought a few days ago. OK its really a Zeiss Ikoflex “Coffee Can’ 850 from 1934. This is Zeiss first production TLR and this is the very first model with the pyramid hood. Its mostly working and only needs some minor work. When someone recommends a good hosting site I will get some pictures up. The Ikoflex models are quite peculiar as many of them seem to be designed by different design teams – there is no design and layout consistency between most of the models unlike Rollei where the designs were progressive. They followed Rollei into TLRs and in typical Zeiss fashion mucked up with different designs and strange control layout ideas.
I bought this to follow up on a 1932 Rolleiflex Standard that I bought recently.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 2, 2019 2:11:11 GMT -5
Back again after a long posting absence but have been reading regularly.
So many regulars here have disappeared
Like many people I just got totally fed up with Photobucket. What’s the ideal replacement – IMGUR? Any suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Sept 11, 2017 16:59:42 GMT -5
Been to the Antwerp camera fair and after all these years i finally found what i was looking fo for so long: a Topcon RE Super with Topcor 58mm 1:1.8, finally!!!. While i was there i picked up a Werra, black Pentax SV and a chrome K2 as well. I was short on time so no pics of the fair itself, just one of what i took home. I am glad you finally got a Topcon to help you some way to complete your “collection”. Confusedly for collectors are the different model designations with the US models having ‘Beseler’ and different model numbers on them and 2 different naming conventions on models for the rest of the World market. I have a couple including the later version with mirror lockup which also has "US Navy” engraved on the bottom. (The US Navy contract is also an interesting story) In theory the Topcon was the first system camera to challenge the Nikon F and despite selling well they did not knock Nikon off the pedestal. By 1964 the Nikon F was the defacto pro 35mm camera and Beseler could not match the sheer marketing expertise and experience of EPOI nor the four plus years of pros experience with the Nikon F. The Topcon of course used the Exakta bayonet with a modified internal ring for the TTL metering, the problem was that Exakta lenses mounted the wrong way which lost the advantage of open TTL. The Exakta bayonet had another problem which was the throat size which limited the design of lenses and although Topcon did produce a couple of superb lenses they could never match Nikons range. The Topcon in theory had another great advantage – a motor that could be just screwed on rather than Nikons ‘mated’ by a technician. Unfortunately, Topcon’s early motor drives were notoriously unreliable. Two interesting facts about Topcon. Most camera manufacturers were experimenting with CDS metering and Pentax showed the first prototype Spotmatic in 1960. The problem was early CDS cells were big, had power problems and colour sensitivity issues. Toshiba were the main developer of these cells and Topcon took a chance with development in a camera BUT they had inside information because Toshiba was a shareholder in Topcon. Later Toshiba took a controlling interest in Topcon. The Zunow only produced one related descendant because a design team member joined Topcon. Also the coupling chain used for the Topcon metering was initially developed by Zunow to couple the shutter speed dial with the shutter. I would be very interested to hear ‘your take’ on the handling and usability of the Topcon considering you’re a Nikon man.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Sept 5, 2017 5:17:37 GMT -5
In 1971 two new versions of the sensomat were introduced, the RE and RS. While the RE followed the "classic" line of Mirandas, the RS was supposed to be a budget model. It was a miscalculation as very few people in '71 wanted a slr with NO meter, DOF preview,self timer even the typical front release button was skipped. only 2000 were produced wich makes it a rather rare camera. 1971 Sensomat RS with Auto Miranda 50mm 1:1.8 ( to make it even more budget some of them were sold with a 1:2.8 50mm) next to the RS is the RE with Auto Miranda 50mm 1:1.8 Are all those Miranda's yours? If they are what with Nikon Pentax's et al how many SLRs do you actually have?
|
|
|
Post by conan on Sept 5, 2017 5:10:16 GMT -5
The last of the Sensorex line was the EE(-2) it was mde between 1971 and '76 it has shutter priority auto with the new E series lenses. Black Sensorex EE with Auto Miranda-E 50mm 1:1.8 While Miranda allways has been a questionabel name for a camera, Sensorex didn't seem like such a good idea either, more like a name they would use for preservatives . I have 3 Miranda’s in my collection including a New In Box Sensorex II (plus the various finder accessories including that huge mag WLF) The Miranda’s seem to lack the essential smoothness of the Pentax’s they were competing against with the winders sometimes seeming like cockroaches were being crushed and the lenses not reaching the smoothness of Takumar focusing. When one considers the early days, Pentax were the original lone voice then followed by Miranda and Topcon and the later two did not survive the move into electronics nor updated their cameras to be more relevant. Miranda were good with the excellent marketing of AIC (who would eventually own Miranda) Topcon had great products but indifferent marketing by Beseler. Which tends to illustrate that you need a good products coupled with great marketing to be successful long term. "While Miranda always has been a questionable name for a camera, Sensorex didn't seem like such a good idea either, more like a name they would use for preservatives "Was this a Freudian slip on the keyboard? What the Europeans call preservatives the English speaking world would generally call condoms. In the UK preservatives are the names of fancy jams. Of course Miranda didn’t help themselves because the largest selling condom brand in the UK was Durex and they had a product called Sensorex.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Sept 5, 2017 5:07:25 GMT -5
Dear Phil, Your absolutely right - a photo book can only catch a snapshot of your collection at a moment in time. But that's a whole lot better than having no overview at all! I do the same sort of documentation with my firearms. Belgium reporter says on the bottom of his posts "Shoot first ask questions later" I hope your version is more modified.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 24, 2017 14:49:12 GMT -5
The body was but not that lens. Only dummy non-working bits of metal and glass were used for some publicity shots. The early 1.4 were 58mm and were not commercially available until the end of 1959. The 50/1.4 was not available until 1962. You might have to settle like I did with my display - a 50/2 to show what the mighty F was like at its March 1959 release. I have been greatly enjoying all your 3d shots but the Nikon F is in 2d - argh……………..
Your 3d stuff is interesting because knowingly or was in unknowingly? You charted the beginnings of The Pentax and Olympus demise in the 35mm market
Here you go conan, the F with apropriate 50mm 1:2, it's the oldest 50mm i've got but if i'm correct the 1959 version on the F would have been a 5cm 1:2 Nikkor. Sadly those early Nikkors with focal lenghts in cm rather than mm are as rare as hens teeth and not available for a simple mortal like me Anyway because i also haven't got a 1959 F the one in this pic is a 1962 model (close enough?), so the 1:1.4 in the previous pic could be the correct match. About the charting of the rise and fall of Olympus and Pentax, it did come to mind so not completely oblivious on what i've documented, still looking after some missing links though... PS, for your viewing pleasure this one is in anaglyph 3D. What missing links are you after? You Europeans have an advantage with availability of the German stuff but not early Japanese since they really didn’t start on Europe till the 1960’s. Down under the early Japanese cameras are more readily available since Australia was getting them at the same time as North America. You are right those early tick Nikkors are as rare as hen’s teeth and priced accordingly I display my SRLRS in date they were available order and like you my earliest F is a 1962 but it goes on the 1959 line up to show what was available then I think that many people do not quite understand quite why the F was so significant. The best from Japan was better than the best from Germany and that EPOI and some professionals in America and Japan were letting Nikon know what they wanted in a camera (and Nikon was listening) rather than Zeiss designers and management pandering to their own ideas of what they thought professionals should buy. It is amazing to think that the original Contarex design did not have an instant return mirror and this was only added to the design for the handmade prototypes for the Photokina of 1958. A design change that was to cause all sorts of later problems with spring tensions in the shutter and mirror. To be a little fairer to Zeiss – they were so tied up with leaf shutters and their control of the manufacturers of them that horizontal focal plane shutters and their desire not to licence any Leica patents led much of their development in the wrong direction. Thanks for the anaglyph of the F. The F was a hockey puck, hammer and nutcracker. It was also at one stage the ultimate SLR tool.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 24, 2017 1:38:18 GMT -5
Great old cameras! Actually Leitz had early designs in 1953 and 1954 for an SLR, the problem was the Leica body was too small to accommodate a proper mirror box and Leitz decided they need a bigger body design. At this stage Nikon and Zeiss and Leica were wedded to the rangefinder design and Leitz were even more conservative than the others. Leitz design was similar to the Russian designs which used the LTM body but provided a dreadful viewing image with their tiny mirrors and small lenses and since Leitz were about to release the M3 with the best viewing system on the market their SLR designs took far longer. In fact, the trade comment about the Leica flex when it was released in 1964 was that it bore no family resemblance to any Leica. Nikon had a far bigger body design and their first working prototypes in 1955 were based on the S2 body which they considered was too small for the mirror box. With the SP development Nikon had all the mechanics sorted out but they still need to add a few millimetres to the F body to get sufficient mirror size.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 24, 2017 1:35:28 GMT -5
To me 1959 was the year in wich the 35mm slr became mature in the form of the Nikon F. There was little before it that was as well developed. The Japanese from then on took over the leading role in camera development. Maybe if Germany wasn't devided in East and West things might have gone differently. The Nikon F with plain prism as it was introduced in 1959 The body was but not that lens. Only dummy non-working bits of metal and glass were used for some publicity shots. The early 1.4 were 58mm and were not commercially available until the end of 1959. The 50/1.4 was not available until 1962. You might have to settle like I did with my display - a 50/2 to show what the mighty F was like at its March 1959 release. I have been greatly enjoying all your 3d shots but the Nikon F is in 2d - argh……………..
Your 3d stuff is interesting because knowingly or was in unknowingly? You charted the beginnings of The Pentax and Olympus demise in the 35mm market
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 24, 2017 1:32:28 GMT -5
Exakta Varex IIb and RTL1000 with some lenses, (all Zeiss, strange isn't it:-) IMG_2039a by Hans de Groot, on Flickr Hansz if you had anything but Zeiss lenses on your German cameras you would probably have been unceremoniously thrown out from the Zeiss Historica Society and also hung drawn and quartered.
|
|
|
Post by conan on Aug 2, 2017 18:15:53 GMT -5
Acquisitions Over the past couple of months, I have been on quite an extensive acquisition spree. This has included many of the accessories for particular cameras. A few small early 50’s 35mm (Ricoh and Zeiss) viewfinder/rangefinders and then some serious cameras. First up was a black Nikon F2A body that is almost mint (Belgium Reporter will confirm you can never have too many F series bodies) Next a pair of Rollei’s - a Cord and a Flex and then a pair of Leica’s. The Leica’s are a 1954 IIIf with a Summitar lens. Cosmetic and mechanical condition is very good for a camera that’s 63 years old Next is a 1957 Leica M3 double stroke with a dual range Summicron that was complete with the Leica googles, a Leica UV filter and the Leica lens hood for the Summicron. There is an MC meter with the camera – alas not working and strangely with a few marks on its front. Again cosmetically and mechanically the camera itself is in great condition. Of historical interest in that the dual range Summicron achieved the highest ever lens rating from Modern Photography when they were conducting their more scientific resolution tests. Both rangefinders were slightly off but fortunately only required minor adjustment. These two Leica’s have given me the opportunity to revisit the LTM versus Bayonet debate and the upheaval the M3 caused to the traditional Leica LTM brigade and why the M3 seriously hurt the Contax IIa with its slow knob winding and poor viewing in comparison to the M3 viewfinder. Historically there are many that say the M3 was the first nail in the Zeiss coffin with the Contax IIa replacement never being released and then Zeiss’s nemesis (Nikon) releasing the S2, then the killer SP which ensured that Zeiss never released its updated Contax IV and then the Contarex vs Nikon F war which ensured that Zeiss became an ‘also ran’ in the professional camera market.
|
|