Photography for Profit or Fun

Konica Rangefinder Cameras

My Konica I is pictured above. This camera is important as it marks one of the first attempts by Konica to enter the 35mm rangefinder camera market. The lens pulls out about an inch farther than pictured. Konica became one of the major players in the camera market during the last half of the Twentieth Century. This camera came out first in 1946. The next Konica I owned was a Mamiya-Sekor 1000 TTL 35mm SLR in 1968 or 1969. Konica is probably best known for their razor sharp Hexanon lenses.

Here is a pretty concise resource for early Konica 35's

Konica Rangefinder Cameras.

Leica IIIc and Konica Model 1 Rangefinder 35 mm Cameras

This is a nice reference to the Leica IIIc in the professional photography world .http://www.nicobastone.com/Leica_3c.htm

 

 

The Leica IIIc straddled WWII, a long-running model, featuring a solid die-cast body; this made it more durable than its predecessors. It was worthy of many photography greats. How many world-famous photographs were taken with a Leica? Your guess may be as good as mine, if indeed you know much of the history of photography.  

 

Henri Cartier-Bensen is considered one of the greatest photographers of the Twentieth Century. This link shows a few of his photographs. Notice they are black and white, and they were taken with the Leica IIIc.

http://www.afterimagegallery.com/bresson.htm

 

 

I feel something special when I use one of these old relic's such as the Leica IIIc or similar wind-knob models. It is the feel of precision mechanical engineering. I feel it with other vintage German cameras, or Swedish Hsselblads, or even Swiss or German firearms.

 

Switzerland was never been occupied by a foreign power during the Tentieth Century. The Scmidt-Rubin K-31, in 7.5 Swiss caliber, was used by the the Swiss Civil Militia. Since its inception in 1931 until the early 1960's, the K-31 was issued to every able-bodied young Swiss man. The militia drills once a month with these fine rifles. Thes rifles are con sidered the Swiss watches of firearms, the most accurate military long rifles ever made. I love these wonderful rifles. The action is as smooth as butter. In the hands of a marksman, they can't be beat. Do you know who, on the whole, are the greatest marksmen in the world? One guess.

The Leica IIIc is this kind of a precision instrument, with just as important a history as the K-31. They have recorded life and death and the greatest ugliness of humankind, as well as the extreme beauty of it all.

 

They are not artificial. They are special. I was a slow convert, but a convert to these old fellows, I am. 

The following link tells more technical information about these old Leica's, from someone who knows more than I do. 

http://cameraquest.com/ltmcam.htm

 

One of my childhood photographer heroes was Alfred Eisenstaedt who lived though most of the Twentieth Century. He was one of the first photographers to adopt the small 35 mm format Leica IIIc and similar models to do the big job of world news photography. He snapped the famous photography of the sailor who kissed the lady in Time Square upon hearing the end of WWII.See this link for some of his famous images. http://www.answers.com/topic/alfred-eisenstaedt

 

 

Let me be perfectly clear, even though it may bring the universe down upon me, I don’t much like most Leica cameras. There. It is out! It is not an entirely rational thing, although I am pretty sure a rational mind could arrive at the same conclusion. It is more born of my intolerance of  intolerance. That is to say, I am snobbish toward snobs.

 

 

And those who own Leica cameras are largely snobs. In a sense, aLeica IIIc camera is a true pain in the hiney to use. I had one for years. I often cite my dad’s Yashica 44 LMas the first adjustable camera I ever had. That’s not really true. In an old chest of miscellaneous junk, I had several old rangefinder 35mm cameras from as far back as I recall.

  

 

 

I didn’t use them much, because I had a not entirely founded opinion of 35 mm cameras in general. I preferred the utility of medium and large format cameras for their wonderfully clear images due to the larger negatives. I considered 35’s mere play things.

 

 

There have been periods in my career when I intentionaly handicapped myself by limiting my photographic efforts to the purist forms of artistic expression though one camera and one lens. If you've read my blog, you may know that the Leica IIIc was one of the models I did this with. You absolutely can not do all the same things with such an instrument as you can with one of the digital wonders, which I too enjoy today. No. You can't. But you can do so much more with your own creative genius when unleased by breaking your dependence on all of those whistles and bells. You'll be a better photographer for it.  

 

 

I had an early Leica, an early Konica, and an early Argus. I simply didn’t like the looks of the Argus. I later learned that it had been dubbed, “the brick”, by photographers of its time. I liked the looks of the Konica and the Leica, but I didn’t like the whole hassle of loading them, the lens/range-finder issues, and odd as it sounds, I found them too small and light for my taste.

 

 

I recognized Leica cameras as one of the famous brands, but I thought it was for their newer models. Even if I could have afforded one of those models, I would never have spent the amount required to acquire one. I have always been frugal and pragmatic. Although I would have readily spent the bucks on a medium format Hasselblad, I would never have spent the requisite arm an leg for even a moderately used, newer Leica.

 

 

Although I remain unrepentant, it is for another set of reasons. I consider myself a world-class photographer. I don’t know if the term carries with it a specific set of criterion, but here’s how I figure it I have taken pictures all over the world, even some really exotic or nasty places, I have had many pictures published since the age of twelve or thirteen, I have sold many of my images fairly consistently when I have gone into that mode, so I know people like them. I have made many postcard scenes in bulk and have always run out of them fairly quickly. I feel something when I take a great photograph—and the feeling seems to be a good predictor of my audiences favorite images.

 

 

And I have aggregated among other photo-journalists with the best of them, while covering world events, and I can talk the talk, and walk the walk, as well or better than any I have ever encountered. Like the old one-season TV show staring Walter Brenner as a character who used to say say, “No brag just fact.”

 

 

The funny thing is that I have often observed the pecking order of these journalist based upon the kind of equipment they used. There are by far more Canon and Nikons out there in the field of journalism than any other cameras. There are always a few Leica’s though. Their owners wear them like fur stoles which I don’t believe in either.

 

While I have killed most species of game and fur-bearing animals with both firearms and bows with arrows—I have never again sought them with steel traps, since my first trapping expeditions in the arctic. I am soft on animals unless I am using them for some necessary cause, such as lean meat to eat for health, or leather or fur to keep warm. I don’t need the latter. And I cannot approve of the horrors the trapped creatures endure during their capture.

 

 

I have known of legs gnawed off in steel traps. Yet furs remain a status symbol among the wealthy, or more likely, the wannabe wealthy. I have even observed vegetarian Green-Peace types throw their standards to the wind, once they felt it necessary to demonstrate to the world that they had presumably arrived at some place financially. Cameras should not be used for such petty things.

 

 

I have even been guilty myself, albeit in my younger years, of showing off my expensive gear when arriving on location, and then deferring to my ragged out old army surplus gas mask bag full of beat up, though functional medium-tier equipment when I actually left to follow my assignment.

I have photographed, upon invitation, heads of state, including a very popular US President. Many of the places I have shot are more conducive to being killed for your fancy equipment, or at least having it routinely ripped off or confiscated. I have fancied myself as adventure photographer.

 

 

Around the turn of the millennium, I joined a High Adventure Photography Tour Group. It sounded like my kind of deal. When I invited the group director to allow general participation in my tours, she informed me that their people would not be interested in live-fire (especially at them), poisonous snakes and spiders, and covert operations. I never did find out how high their adventures got.

 

 

 

My point is, that these cardboard-cutout wannabes, with their latest greatest elitist toy cameras, garner more disdain from me than any degree of respect. Real journalists laugh at them. Not-with-standing, some of the greatest news photographers of the last century did use Leica Cameras as their tools. I just never personally knew any of these my photographic heroes. I was born three decades too late. 

 

As a youth, I worked as a flunky, for a cool photographer named Bill Ward. He was a good photographer, and a good guy—if a little snotty himself. I was included for a time, if only just barely, within his sphere of, well, snot.

 

The first half of the Twentieth Century was one of the most important, though tumultuous, periods of all time. Among the most tumultuous were the years that happened during the years of the Leica IIIc's manufacturer 1941 top 1950. The Lieca IIIc, has perhaps photographed more important events than any other camera model.

 

 

If anyone had reason to be so, it was Bill. He had a lot of great contacts. His brother John,was the publicist for one of THE Rockefeller boys. WhenWin was the governor of my state, his son Winnie, who was a few years older than I, would come ‘round the studio, with all of his branded gear.

 

 

Not only did Winnie have his Hasselblads and Leicas out the wazoo, they were gold-plated and what not. His pictures were not even marginally as good as mine—God rest his soul. It wasn’t his fault he had money to burn. So I have always had a bit of a chip on my shoulder about such things. It happens.

 

 

 

When I finally did gain an interest in the old Leica and the Konica (I gave the Argus away) residing in that junk box, it was not for reasons of elitism. It was because my retro-interests had given me an appreciation for their historical roles in the evolution of photography. I took an interest in making the best photographs that I could, given the limited functionality of these vintage pieces. It always gives me a reverent resonance to juxtapose myself into the minds of those photographers who used these tools for greatness.

 

 

This Leica IIIc is the most plentiful model of the old screw-mount Leicas.  It was produced longer. It had a great run. Still it is getting harder and harder to find these in any kind of decent shape. Mine works quite well, it is even cosmetically in good condition. Not perfect, by any means but as my pictures illustrate, it is very good. It has few dents or defects, the covering is good.

The black lens and filters themselves and the one auxiliary finder have some brassing. Even the leather camera case is in entirely in tact. The lens casers are in outstanding shape. The original manual is a little brittle, but aside from the front cover being completely detached, it is in excellent condition, too.

 

Konica Model I

 

 

My Konica is made well enough. The brittle leatherette covering is coming off in flakes. I suppose I should recover it, but probably won't. Otherwise, it will be functioning for a long time. I will readily tell you though, it is no Leica.  Not just because the lenses and finders wo't interchange either. The Japanese are great engineers. This camera is no exception. But it was an early attempt. Thise companies who merely copied the Leicas don't even compare to the Leicas in feel and operation. I have made a few cameras. As a hobby gunsmith, I have all the required metal working tools and precision instruments to do a good job. I have access to superior materials. One day I may make a camera that meets the Leica bar--but I doubt it. I can't even tell exactly what makes the difference. But there is a tangible difference, which I have already alluded to.

 

I believe my Konica is a model I, which is actually Konica’s second model. It uses a Hexar lens, which is known to be of among the very sharpest type lens ever made—so much more remarkably, from that era. It takes very nice pictures.

 

The historic rung that the Konica occupies is as one of the first models of 35mm rangefinder cameras ever produced by the great Japanese photographic company, Konica. The lenses from the era including both of these rangefinder cameras did not have near the science behind their coatings. Coatings were just being employed for the routinely, primarily to decrease the phenomenon of double imaging which could happen under certain conditions of refraction through glass--it is akin to the multi-tailed blure we get wehn our eyes are tire and we are driving a night. the points of light begin to take on ragged edges. The coating really do help this phenomenon.  

 

I have used these cameras for color photographs with good results. And I will soon post some images from each as compared to other cameras, both film and digital, using modern lens coatings. You can tell the difference as you will see when I post the examples from each, but you may be surprised, at how little difference—given all the fanfare of modern formulations and coatings.

 

However, I most enjoy these cameras most for the images I make using good, low-speed black and white films, self-developed and printed to the old news submission sizes. When so doing I feel that I am more nearly using them within the environment and application for which they were designed. This is where these vintage photographic treasures shine brightest.

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Konica-Rangefinder-Camera-with-Hexanon-Lens_W0QQitemZ260338847813QQihZ016QQcategoryZ15234QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l1262

Konica Rangefinder Cameras.

Vintage Lens Review: Hasselblad Sonnar 150mm C a Good Old Choice

Hasselblad 150mm Sonnar lens for the C series was/is a great lens for model head shots, Senior Portraits, and other people pictures that best include head and shoulders only. The lens is very sharp--certainly as sharp as any portrait lens needs to be. It can be used for wider body shots, especially three quarters length views, but few studios have the room to go far enough back to accommodate much more than this. It could be used outdoors, but again, for full body shots, you have to back up so far that you may lose the desirable proximity for a good working distance,which requires a certain closeness for directing and receiving directions.

I have owned half a dozen of these lenses over the years. I also have owned or do now own the newer version of the lenses, which are said to be much improved with their new coating, and design features. Unless I get a bargain for these newer lenses, I don't consider the typical price difference not be worth the gain. All work well with modern films or high-res digital cameras.
All work well with Softars, which diffuses the image sharpness anyway. A lens hood will limit most reflection or flare problems, as will proper light arrangement.
This lens, in original form, wears well. The newer ones are said to wear even better. Medium format, whether using film or digital technology provides a bigger image to begin with. However adapter are made to fit this lens for manual use to all of the popular camera brands, and it performs well with both digital and film in this way to.
If I were starting a photography business on the side and on a low budget--a pay as you earn proposition--depending on what type of photography you were to emphasize, I would probably recommend this as your second lens--and in some cases, your first. I would acquire a good Hasselblad EL/M body and shade for it, a couple of backs of your preference and a Waist level or 45 degree finder. I would also want to have as many mega-pixel digital SLR in any popular brand as well, and adapters for all your Hasselblad lenses as well.This would be a starting set-up. Adding a used digital back is a good next step.
This lens can be used with various length extensions too--but you'll need to take care to work out the exposure compensation when not using TTL metering. For old-times, and those so-inclined, the lens can even be used in an enlarger, turned backward on the lens-board, to good advantage. Used with a pro-shade or similar bellows system, vignettes and other special effects attachments, whether commercial or homemade are good with this lens too, as it does not show a hard edge in such configurations.
Another good use for this sharp lens is in doing both macro, using one of several auxillary close-up attachment options, and landscapes. Although the depth of field may be limiting in some macro uses,in some cases, a shallow focus or the closer field of view is actually desirable. And, while the first thought for landscapes is a very sharp wide-angle lens, pros who do landscape shots and postcards for a living, know that the narrow field of view and the medium telephoto advantage of the 150mm Sonnar is very useful when physical obstacles prevent getting any closer, and/or when an exaggerated background, such as a hazy setting sun, a flower, or similar iconic image is wanted. I have used this same technique in still-life macros and product sets. Since I collect cameras and lenses, I literally have my choice of any camera/lens--still I select this sweetheart for many important shoots. http://stores.ebay.com/Military-Optics_W0QQsspagenameZMEQ3aFQ3aSTQQtZkm

Regarding Lenses Good or Bad

Bokeh is a term that is used to described a set of effects that are caused by the way any given lens treats certain elements in a photograph. I have been intentionally vague in this definititon  because it apparently means so many different things to so many different people. It seems to be a relatively new term, but the phenomenon is as old as Galileo, at least.

I have read that the term comes from the Japanese word for blur. I am not sure of that. No one else is either. I have studied Japanese and having worked for a major Japanese camera manufacturing company, I know many native Japanese linguists who agree that it would be a stretch to consider the term derived from any word, which we can agree upon.

The Japanese word for blur might fit, but who knows. None-the-less, the term bokeh has been showing up in literature and photography discussion groups for ten years or so. Since no one has really standardized a definition for bokeh yet, I guess it can mean whatever you want it to mean, but it is gradually gaining a specific definition . 

The following couple of links will give you an idea of what it is coming to mean. If you want to jump over and read more about bokeh, then do so and then come back to my lens discourse below. I'll Throw my six-pence worth in. 

If It's Not Bokeh, Don't Fix It - DOF and Bokeh - DigitalRev.com.

Bokeh
Bokeh is a Japanese term, which literally means fuzzy. DOF signifies the part of the image that is in focus, the depth of field in the image that is clear, Bokeh signifies the part that is unfocused. The reason people have given it a name, is because the fuzz can be good or bad. Good bokeh is nice uniform fuzz that looks nice, while bad bokeh just looks messy. The quality of the fuzz depends on the lens. Sometimes bokeh is clearly defined as little circular fuzzy shapes; a lens with few diaphragm blades might give less circular and more angular shapes.

DOF and Bokeh go hand in hand together, the only thing you as a photographer needs to decide is how much of the image is going to be blurred and where you want the image to be focused, or if you want any blur at all.

Here's Another Link: http://idealfstop.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/02/bokeh_for_dummi.html

As I wrote previously, the set of circumstances caused by the term bokeh seems have been around as long as there have been lenses, and noticeably so, as long as there been photographs to record them. Bokeh supposedly figures into what makes a lens good or bad. But since this is a subjective judgment, it is useful only as much as photographers (and lookers) agree. So instead of chatting away about some BS mo-jive term that is generally used to appear to be in the photographic know, lets move onto something else.

Lens sciences have been developing for a few hundred years. Once it was both an art and a science. Families of glass workers began to specialize in making lenses to make telescopes and spectacles, and other optical products through trial and error. The correct shapes of  lenses were learned and passed on to families in the trade. 

I don't presume to know their secrets, but at some point, mathematics in the form of geometry, trigonometry, algebra, and calculus were applied to define replicable forms of convex and concave glass surfaces to perform in a variety of predictable ways.

Many variables go into the various formulas for making acceptable photographic lenses. They have been in development for about two hundred years. Everything from the kind of sand used and other media, which goes into the firing furnaces to make the glass, to the materials for making the contoured moulds, to the surface grinders and finishes and coatings--are now mostly computerized using algorithms to mathematically describe and control the way a finished lens is made to perform.

If you want to gain a real appreciation for lenses, get a good book and a slab of optical quality glass and build a telescope from scratch. My oldest brother did. It took him, working a few hours a week grinding the glass, about two years. It is an interesting part of physics. And, although it may help to understand the science behind controlling light to make photographs through the use of lenses, it isn't really necessary.

Suffice it to agree that there are several different models and associated algorithms to describe several different lens types that we have come to accept as good (or bad). One design may be incredibly acute in resolution, another may spread this resolution from edge to edge, and others may be sharp in the center, but diffused on the outer limits. Other lenses, very expensive ones, make a science out of blurring the image in an acceptable way, so as to render so-called softer images of human skin and flesh tones.

During my lifetime, I have participated in a number of educational forums to further my understanding about photography. However, while I have sought to learn from other photographers, I have resisted the notion of boiling subjective opinions down into objective rules. I came to this modality gradually. But in photography, the art, there are no rules.

There are lenses and there are lenses. There are no good lenses and no bad lenses. There are cheap lenses and there are expensive lenses. All can be tools for the creative to deliver images of the types they desire to. A really nice soft-focus portrait lens costing ten grand or more is not necessarily any better than a cheap lens covered with a sky-light filter with Chap-Stick swirled around the outer parameter--if the results of the latter is better, perceptibly, the same, or more desirable.

Tessar, Compar, Prontar, Biometric, Dia-this and what-sa-that--all are descriptions of specific lens formulas. It was once believed in the West, that certain formulations for lenses were better than those made in the East and vica versa. This is nonsense. All are based on excellent science and I have personally found Eastern lenses, which I was once led to believe to be inferior to MY Western lenses, are actually superior in certain applications.

My purpose here is to merely make you aware of lens differences. I suggest that you analyze your own photographs. Sure it is also good to collect images, and study the works of great photographers and artists, which appeal to your emotions and incorporate those into your own mind's-eye, tucked back for subliminal expression at some point when needed. But eventually your own style will emerge.

I submit that art proceeds the science. The various methods used to teach art by reducing it to rules of thirds and optical centers and so on are indeed helpful, but they arose in an attempt to qualify something that was originally felt at an emotional level. Don't be afraid to let the voices within speak--through your emotions, or through your heart, as any artist might say. Hopefully they'll wind up, atleast partially, in an expressive photographic image.

I recall reading at a very young age, photography books that told me to make my pictures "say something". Tried as I might, I didn't understand this back then. I come from a family of artists, who lean very far to the practical side. Maybe I can blame this on the Great Depression. There is little time for art when your family is starving to death, as were the families my mom and Dad belonged to during the depression.

So for you literalists, let me spell that idea out more black and white; before taking, at least some of your pictures,ask yourslef WHY? you are taking this picuture. You may readily be able to say, "so I can remeber what this loks like." But it when it comes to art, it becomes harder to answer the question. The picture doesn't have to speak a paragraph to you, to be "saying" something. You may only hear a faint whisper--and that only if you try real hard.  

Learn to know which lenses deliver which effects. This can be a lifelong pursuit, but it can start now with the lenses you have. When these lenses will no longer adequately convey what the voices are telling you, then, and only then to you need to acquire more lenses. I feel that photographers today, are often so overwhelmed by the shear availability of gear, that they seldom really come to understand the value of each piece. Fewer is sometimes better.

Now let me take a stab at defining what is coming to be described by the term bokeh. Lenses, are, more or less, designed to intensify light by concentrating the dispersed energy into ever smaller and smaller, or more and more intense beams, which become what our eyes perceive as tiny points of focus. That's what we call these points--focus. When these points are not as intensely concentrated, it is then called out of focus.

Whether by hap stance as with the earlier lenses or by design as are known formulas used to make lenses today, the patterns of spheres and cones and circles and rods and lines, both vertical and horizontal--take on different shapes and intensities such as in the out-of-focus back-grounds or foregrounds found in outdoor portraits. Some shapes and intensities within the unfocused realm, have a greater or lessor tendency to draw the eye away from the subject than others. In most cases this quality is less desirable. But not always.

Further, with the use of computers and software with a gazillion more readily available working algorithms for rendering final images than can ever possibly be incorporated into any bag of lenses--you can deliver results similar to any lens on the market. But you have to know what to look for before you can duplicate it.

Add to the equation that only the most discriminating viewers, mostly photographers, are going to be able to tell the difference anyway--that all of this serious pomp and circumstance concerning lenses, is lost on the average viewer. So, I suppose that my final thought here is to suggest that we should never take ourselves, our medium, our art, our science, too serious.

Judged by the ultimate criteria, ask yourself, does this image do for anyone else, hopefully several body elses, what it does for me. If not you may have failed. If so, you may have succeeded.  But even this is not etched in stone. Perhaps you meant to express offense. LOL.

http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2008/12/leica-iiic-and-konica-model-1-rangefinder-35-mm-cameras.html 

Nikon Camera SLR Models Referencing My Favorites: FE2 Review

The first link is an excellent resource for the vintage family Nikon genealogy that helps keep the many models which I have used straight. The second link is a more complete write-up about the Nikon FE2, about which I extol numerous virtues, and cite as an under-rated film camera which is worthy of particular notice--and an opportunity for a good vintage film 35 mm camera buy from auctions.

I suppose stubbornly, I have seldom relied much upon the opinions of other camera reviewers who were my era peers--as I have found, at least often enough to beware them, that they usually are pushing some hidden agenda. But I was gratified to find among the historical hind-sight information about the FE2 almost universal agreement with my opinions regarding the excellence of the Nikon FE2. Below the link second link, is just one Internet excerpt that helps make my point regarding the FE2

http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/models/htmls/slrmain8090.htm

Nikon camera SLR models 1982-1983.

The Nikon SB-15 speed-light was its companion flash for TTL/Auto. Manual flash control. A delightful feature was the fail-safe M250 mechanical back up speed, used in case of battery failure or when the camera has an accidental jam. In addition to that, It can share to use virtually all the system accessories designed for the mid-compact Nikon such as motor drives, focusing screens, Data back etc. Despite after 20 years (2005) since its debut and discontinuation, the much dependable Nikon FE2 is still an extremely attractive mid-size Nikon system SLR camera for personal photography.

I really liked the Nikon F, and the Nikon F2, and the Nikon F3. I may be one of the few people alive to have ever memorized the entire family tree of all the Nikon models of that era. I owned or used almost all of them and there were plenty. I have owned many of them. I know what they were designed for, and all their little idiosyncrasies and nuances. I know their relative strenghts and weaknesses. But somehow, the first time around, I missed a very important point concerning the Nikon FE2, that once discovered, made it one of my favorite models.

Continued next post about FE2

I still believe the Nikon FE2 to be one of the most brilliantly thought out film cameras of the last century. The camera has a full contingent of lenses, and accessories (even if not as many accessories as the other models I've mentions as my favorites). I'm not sure who Nikon was targeting with the FE2. I think they may have missed their mark or they would have made the viewfinders more professionally adaptable to professional use. At least the focusing screens are adaptable, with two or three new ones of its own.

The FE2 has an excellent metering system--considered revolutionary when a year before the the debut of the FE2 (FE2 debuted in 1983) first in the FA. This metering system is certainly as accurate as I would ever desire. It is TTL-OTF, paired with a proprietary Nikon SB flash. The flash is compact, cleverly designed for different tilts and with a built-in dispersion device for wider-angles. Though never a huge fan of auto-thinking electronic cameras even to this day, the FE2 taught me a new level of trust for such when we first met. I would bet that it is very close in discernible accuracy as is any more modern system.

I don't fully trust any meter anyway. I am constantly monitoring the automatic settings of even the latest digital cameras of today, to see if I felt I need to manually override them. Maybe this is arrogant, but if something DOES go very wrong, with the automatics, and it always does (ask Murphy), I will ALWAYS know about it and try to compensate, before the job or more than a couple of frames are screwed up.

The FE2 only once disappointed me and that's when it came back from a scheduled maintenance with the shutter knob on backward. That threw me for a loop at first. Although an important "electric/automatic camera design, the FE2 allows features to save your butt in the event of electrical failure. This is seldom if ever necessary if you are prepared with fresh batteries, but it did reassure potential naysayers.

It was one of the first serious electric/electronic offering attempts made by Nikon. When it came out, people were still a bit skeptical, therefore, if the batteries went cold dead, it could still be used manually at a shutter speed fail-safe'd at 250, at least sufficiently to let you finish what you were doing and pick up a back-up or get the batteries changed and what not. 

And you could use all the controls and read the setting through the viewfinder. This was more of an innovation than you might guess, at the time. You could use the FE2's automatics and make manual tweaks in the setting while on the fly. I'm telling you that some real so-called human-engineering went into this design. If you knew how to use the controls they were as much "at your fingertips", as any Japanese 35mm camera ever was. They tend to be too small for my hands, but the FE2 came real close to perfect for me. And it is an intermediate compact design--perfect for many applications.

The power film drive was good too. It was beefy and inspired metallic confidence. Children of magic polymer confidence may have their own version of the same. I understand that too. After-all, I was one of the first on my block to own a Nylon 66 semiautomatic 22 rifle back in the sixties. I got kidded some fora it. But I could out-shoot anyone with a Nylon 66. It is now a classic rifle, and I still have my original, long after the wooden-stocked brothers of the day have warped and decayed. I  have sniper rifle with a composite stock. Plastics are good, okay?

But there is still something reassuringly analog about the largely metal design of the FE2 and other such solid and near-perfect craftsmanship.There is also one standout feature that sold me above all the other 35's. The problem of being bound to a slow-sync speed of most 35's of the era, really put me off to 35 mm cameras. 

Having been spoiled by the wonders of medium format sync-ing at all speeds provided by the TLR's and Hasselblad SLR's I cut my teeth on, the low-sync of most 35's was virtually a deal-buster for me. Try shooting a race-car on the move or a bucking cowboy right about dusk with a flash sync at 1/30th and you'll agree. But 1/250th is okay. Further, the two cameras also broke the 4 minute mile by going to 1/5,000th second. That's about 1/2000th of a heartbeat!

I was once tagging along with some irregulars playing soldier where I shouldn't have been playing around, when they decided to capture the flag at dusk. My flash was not a problem with all the other racket and flashing going on. But secondary light was. I have alway been considered something of a dare-devil, but if I am, I am a fairly calculated one.

If I have to play games with high stakes to get good stuff, then that's my job. But only the foolish do crazy things without assurance that there is a reasonable pay-off. And under such circumstances of dusk with flash at a low shutter sync speed, when you are already pushing your fasted film to the max and have your best glass wide-open, you are not hoping for the special effects of ghost images to ruin your pay-day. The FE2 has made my payday a few times.

The Nikon FE2's generally fetch a decent enough price on the secondhand market, but occasionally I have to slap my mouse-hand just to keep from sniping one that appears to be going at an irreverently low price. This can be a good thing for those buyers who are looking for a great deal on a really functional old classic film camera that did a lot toward reassuring doubting photographers, that "electric" or "automatic" cameras were not exclusively for amateurs. The FE2 surely bridges the gap nicely to integrate the best of both worlds.

The other Nikon models that I have mentioned: F, F2, F3, and even the F4 are great old cameras.Classics without doubt. And they are examples of the fine Nikon-esque design, engineering, and craftsmanship of vintage cameras within the pocketbook of even some newspaper photographers. But the FE2 has features, which are not readily noticed that place it up there in the brilliant ring. Get one, before everyone figures it out.

Why I Like Old Nikon Cameras

Some would guess that I like all old cameras. It's just not true.

 

Note:first draft. Needs edit.

I was just now doing a search on a subject totally unrelated to cameras or photography. Isn't it interesting how things pop up when we are not looking for them that remind us of what we should be doing. I don't have time to waste, and it is imperative to me to finish the vintage camera project I am working on. I ran across an article at the following link that said some things, not really what I would say, but probably just as important, on a camera topic that I had planned to write about, just not this soon.

I agree with the writer concerning old Nikon cameras as far as it goes. Maybe you could read it and come back and see what I have to say about vintage Nikons. Here is an excerpt to get you started.

It could automatically “bracket” the exposures to give one slightly underexposed and another slightly overexposed compared to the auto exposure setting. It could even remember what settings had been used to produce the picture.

This piece of gear should have impressed everyone. It didn’t. The pictures weren’t sharp. Reasoning that it had to be poor technique, for the next week the camera was mounted on a tripod and lo and behold - the results were still “soft.” Hard bitten press photographers with outdated equipment were producing the goods, and the very latest bit of electronic whizzbangery was producing something which at best could be described as “average.” I was in despair. Here I was, the “outside” hot-shot, brought in to write columns on photography and my photos were fuzzy.

I confided in the pictorial editor who threw me an old Nikon FM2 which had probably seen more rolls of film through it than you’ve had hot dinners. It was well worn. “Try this for a week” was his reply. So I took the “old” camera away and shot a multitude of photos. Off to the darkroom and guess what? Every one as sharp as a tack. The super electronic marvel was returned and Harry purchased some second hand Nikon equipment, and has never regretted it since. In fact, old Nikons are still part of my camera equipment.

You can read the whole piece here: Pattaya Mail Columns.

I may be more involved with photography than is the foregoing writer, but the conclusions are much the same. I don't often disclose that I once worked for a well-known Japanese Camera company, and it wasn't Nikon. There is no reason other than my own need for privacy that this tidbit seldom is declared. It was a great job and I liked it a lot. I traveled a lot and did their dog and pony shows and answered product questions and helped dealers manage their inventory, so they'd buy more. I had a lot of fun with it.

Once while in Oklahoma City, I stayed in a familiar hotel that was located fairly close to the airport. I like the area because there were good office spaces with a network of paved drives where I could jog. While jogging, I noted a Nikon regional office within those offices.

The next time I had a few moments while in OKC, I just stopped by to introduce myself. You would have thought I was a Lebanese terrorists at an Israeli airport. That really gave me the third degree. They wanted to know why I was there. I guess I should have kept my business card in my pocket, but I was not comfortable being deceitful about my identity.

"I am a customer and a big fan of your cameras," I said.

"Why?"

"Why, What?" I said back to blinking eyes.

"Well, because I like them."

"But what about xyz? You work for them."

"Right. What about XYZ? I had Nikon cameras before I worked for them. I mean, I haveHAD some very good XYZ cameras. As far as I know ALL XYZ cameras are great cameras. I use them quite a bit at work. "

More eyes were blinked in my direction. The eyes looked among themselves and back at me, speechless. I shifted to my other foot and was growing uncomfortable. Had I broken some unwritten code of camera manufacturer ethics? What? WHAT? I mean I did once have a fried who worked for Pepsi who said he'd be fired if he was ever known to drink COKE.

"Well, then it's nice ot meet you Mr., uhh. . .Mr. Wright. We've got to get back to work now."

"But, But . . . ," I started to explain that i had hoped to maybe some gear and chat about this and that . But it was not heard. I was more or less, but mostly MORE escorted to the door.

So why did I not change to CY cameras  when I started representing them. I didn't notuse them. I actually liked them. In fact, I believed that XYZ and Nikon had been playing a forever game of one-ups-kinship for as long as I could remember with XYZ making more and more astonishing gains.

The thridmajor player in 3mm film cameras at the time had, in my opinion the best metering system of them all. I postulated that the ultimate 35 would have the Optics of Nikon, the electronics of XYZ and the metering system of the third player. But hat would have been seriously splitting hairs. All had excellent optics. It was just my opinion. Still I kept my Nikon system, and kept adding to it. Why?

Two reasons, or three. One, I am stubborn. Two, XYZ products twisted their lenses in the opposite direction to mount. And three, I would never be able to get the full value for my cameras by selling them and buying all new XYZ's. Okay there's a fourth reason; Nikon had, at least technically, if not always practically, backward compatibility. I could use all my bodies and lenses with new bodies and lenses--at least to some degree. This is, as an old garner once told me regarding his opinion about hoes, "The mainest reason."

I've alread admitted that I came to trust 35mm as viable cameras later than sooner. Even then it was tentative. But given better films, and the need to run like a corn-cobbed cat at times, I did convert at length--at least for some photojournalist endeavors. But even then I was old school.

www.http://atncorp.com  this link is about Night Vision Read before purchasing NV equipment for use with cameras.

Essential Notes Regarding Night Vision Equipment as paired with the Nikon FE2

As I am selling this FE2 with an ATN Gen 2 Night vision multipurpose device, please take time to read the ATN link regarding how Night Vision Works in General. You mayalso want to read my Guide about NV on Ebay. It's bee there for a few years, but the basics are still appropos.

Selling this camera with the Night Vision invokes a whole cluster of different buyin grules. For one thing, it is illegal for me to sell Gen 2 NV into many world countries. There are possibly even some states that prohibit private ownership of them. I am only required to do two things.  1) Not sell to a list of countries. 2) Report any "suspicious circumstances or inquires--based on my own "feelings", to the Department of Homeland Security. I have only felt to do this a few times. Neither me or our government is out to violate your rights of privacy. But I/they/you have an obligation to prevent trrorist attacks. Night vision is highly sought after by would-be terrorists.

Also, make sure that you are going to keep this stuff. Due to the sensitive nature of the equipment, any returns made for faulty equipment, must be made to the manufacturer, ATN. I can't return it, so do't return it to me.

This equipment can be easily damaged by improper use, such as opening the scope tube in daylight or directed at bright lights. Your own eyes may be damaged if you look directly at the near invisible IR supplemental lights. So please read up on the pit-falls of this technology. These are not toys. They are equipment of Law Enforcemnet and War. There are a variety of civil and personal uses for NV, but the same professional care muct be taken is so using.

One oif the biggest complaints regarding Night Vision, has to do with unrealistic expectations. The ATB web site has a lot of true NV views so please view them to see if this will meet your needs. You will first notice that the images are essentially black and white, with a green cast over the entire image. They are not full-color. The imges are fuzzy like rater on TV screen. In fact they use phosphers similar to a an old-style TV picture tube, whic intensify the image of the light levels when electrons bombard it.

Black specles overhte imagesis par. This is just the way it is. If you tell ATN that you have raster or green or black specks on your image and ask them to exchange it or give you a refund, they will laugh at you. they have an outstanding gurantee, but it is essential that you first understand the capabilities and limitations of the NV equipment.

If you have questions or problems using your equipment, I will try to help you determine if you really have a problem. If you don't--I can not refund your money or exchange equipment.

 

 

terrorist attacks.

Hasselblad: Still a Photographic Leader: The H System

New Moons are Still Rising at Hasselblad

          

of a great new images--new vitality, through great old cameras--I want to make it clear that I am in no way rebuffing the wonderful new digital cameras and associated technology. I love it all. I have always been a technocrat. I live in wonder of cameras and the physics that make them work. I revere the minds, emotions, and souls who receive the inspiration to use these elements to build communicative art. I revele in the opportunity to be one small piece of that grand receptor.

Hasselblad is just one of the surviving names, with a photographic heritage that I admire, but they are a good one to admire. And though their heritage is not passed of blood, their heritage continues to be a high pedestal upon which to reach for the stars.

Read this brief introduction and then hop over to see some of what's new at Hasselblad today.

H System. 

Every H System camera, lens, or component is designed, developed and produced to the most exacting standards and precise specifications. Every camera body is constructed using solid stainless steel housings and a high-strength aluminum for the inner core, guaranteeing both reliable and durable performance, whether in the studio or in the field. The result is a lightweight, compact design that is ideal for hand-held photography, without sacrificing the sturdiness and quality needed for professional, tripod-bound shooting.

H System.

http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2008/12/leica-iiic-and-konica-model-1-rangefinder-35-mm-cameras.html

Hasselblad is Still a Leader

H3D digital camera system

Photokina Hasselblad Digital Cameras.

http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/

Why did Japan Excel in Camera Production After WWII?

The title poses an interesting and complex question. Personally, I think it was a combination of  structured controls and incentives put in place by General Douglas MacArthur's reconstruction team after WWII, which meshed well with the  inherent Japanese cultural of nationalism, teamwork, and work-ethic. But this too would be an over-simplification.

Certainly, arrogant American manufacturer's missed an oppotunity, secure in their own success, when they offhandedly snubbed Edward Deming when he posed his statistical quality contol methods (The Deming Way) to the Detroit car-makers and other in American Industry. His methods, for which Deming found acceptance in Japan has long been too-heavily credited for the gains that Japanese manufacturers made against American manufacturers during the eighties. But I feel that The Deming Way explanation was only one small part of it.

This question is worthy of a loton examination, but the excerpt from the authors paper found at this link poses a better underpinning, I believe, for understanding this issue. If interested, you may widh to start your furter reasearch ehre, after reading this blog.

In 1986, Deming published Out of the Crisis and changed the discussion.  In that book, Deming describes how he first went to American companies in the 1950s with his statistical methods of quality control, which would enable them to control costs by reducing defects.  The American companies were too proud to listen.  So, Deming went to Japan, where companies such as Honda took his ideas seriously.  As a result, Japanese companies became more cost-effective in their production and other operations.  This experience became the basis for claiming that the Deming method was responsible for Japanese manufacturing companies out-performing American ones. 

Having been an American working for two Japanese companies, one which began as a camera company, I feel that i at least somewhat understand the Japanse tendency for national cohesiveness, that set up a manufacturing edge, based largely of their state in histgory owing loargely to world events and timing. Let's not forget either, that the USA made incredibly large financial inverstments into the success of post-war Japan. Ironically, this is probably the largest single factor regarding this phenomenon.

Excerpt from this link: http://www.huaren.org/Text/1136833692484-5303/pC/1136759429609-1691/Articles

In 1986, Deming published Out of the Crisis and changed the discussion.  In that book, Deming describes how he first went to American companies in the 1950s with his statistical methods of quality control, which would enable them to control costs by reducing defects.  The American companies were too proud to listen.  So, Deming went to Japan, where companies such as Honda took his ideas seriously. 

As a result, Japanese companies became more cost-effective in their production and other operations.  This experience became the basis for claiming that the Deming method was responsible for Japanese manufacturing companies out-performing American ones. 

http://www.huaren.org/Text/1136833692484-5303/pC/1136759429609-1691/Articles

Good Model.

In 1970, Mamiya Shakes Things Up, with the RB67 Camera System

 

By now you are probalby begining to understand why I came to regard Mamiya as one of the greatest Camera makers in history. Not only were they impacting the 35 mm camera market with great designs, but they simultaneously brought out TLR's unlike any other ever seen And they honed the Press camera basic rangefinder design into a highly versatile systems camera.

  

At the same time they were bringing out improved designs in the world of medium format  SLR cameras. Also, they had become known for their exceptionally fine lenses. They were by no means finished. But lets talk about the ground-breaking RB67 Camera now.

Mamiya has always amazed me with the numbers of differing models and designs they could manage to come out with and market simultaneously. The next Mamiya camera that I will discuss, it the Mamiya RB67 modular camera. It was immediately accepted in the market--as an alternative to the Hasellblad Camera System. The RB had to fill a niche which was long over-due, adding features and capabilities that Hasselblad did not have.

The RB67 Camera System came out in 1970. I got mine a few years later--primarily as a studio camera--but as with alol of my cameras, I would come to use it for many aplications including on-location advertising Photos, weddings, scenics for postcards and calendars, news photos, photographic wall-art, and macro and copy work.

 

I am sometimes flabergasted when I see one of these old RB67 kits go for a hundred bucks or less on eBay. Granted, it is not very often, and not for one of the best specimens, but still . . . I regard thes cameras within my own frame of professional photographer's context--as brand new. I intellectually realize that hey are not, but these cameras fit-the-bill for many professionals at many levels, styles, and for many diverse purposes. As recently as fifeten years ago (that's right before I seemed to enter a time warp), I bought one of these kits for nearly three grand!

More pictures of my RB67 Pro-S and lenses at the following length: http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2009/01/cleanimagescom.html

So you might understand why I would consider a few hundred dollars quite a steal. If cared for, the RB Series cameras and lenses don't just "go bad". They are just as viable today as they were when they first came out.  (More to come--with Photos).

I have heard photoraphers say that he RB67 is rickety. I fully understand why they say that. Mamiya had to make a decision to either make th eRB heavy or light. They made it light. This was achieved by using state-of-the art alloy known for both their tensil streangth as well as their maleability--meaning the oposite of brittle.

I am both a knife collector and a knife maker. I have a bundle of balisongs (buttefly knifes), which originted in the philippean Islands. These are unique knifes which become a game and an art to open 46 different ways--like a circus act. When the great knife manufacturer, Benchmade, came out with a full-sized titanium balisong, I had to have one. Titanium is very strong and can be made very sharp. And it is lighter than aluminum. But it is brittle. I was none to happy to have taken my new knife on a walk at night on the sidewalk tossing and opening and changing hands as one does with a Balisong. It was immediately too light to feel right. When I allowed it to reach hit the sidewalked rathr than my hand--having thrown the lighter than accustomed to knife wrong to catch to hard--the blade shattered.

I had my Balisong ordered formonths before they were finally made. My evaluation of this first model is said to have resulted in a new blend with more of that, and less titanium, in order to correct the problem with brittleness.

The RB67 may seem rickety, but it IS NOT flimsy. It is designed from fine light alloy metals, to make it balance well on and off of the tripod, and to be easy enough to handle as a filed camera. Although the camera has often been relegated to the studio, it was not intended to be. It has many features that add to ease of handling--even if it is a handful. I simply know of no other camera that allows one to do so much with such a small package. Remember too, this produces a gigantic negative, 6cm x 7cm, which can be rotated onthe fly wither horizontally or viertically oriented.

It will take a host of backs, filters, special effects attachments, bellows lens shades, finders, and handles. As a field camera it is usually carried in a large case to include a good number of lenses and accessories. The caemra itself can even ride aound your neck if the strap is adjusted correctly--without pulling you neck off. Backs holding different film loads can be fit into photograpy vest pockets and removed to exchange and easily get black and white, slide, and color film captures of any scence with a minimal amount of fiddling around. The camera, if not intuitive, kis not very hard to get--with just a little practice.

http://stores.ebay.com/Military-Optics-Vintage-Camera-Sale

http://stores.ebay.com/Military-Optics-Vintage-Camera-Sale

Mamiya Super 23 Link

Shutterbug: Classic Cameras.

Mamiya 23 Press & Omega-Konica Medium Format Rangefinder Cameras

  During the sixties, I observed and read about medium format press cameras. Although I never felt that it was a good choice for me during those early days, primarily due to fairly hefty prices, I was well aware of them, and would have liked to have had one. Larger format press cameras had been around for a long time, I even used a Crown Graphic 4x5 camera at some point. Graflex was one of the big names in photography; they made a 6x7 Press camera too.

I am not sure if I owned that 4x5 press camera, or if it belonged to the local newspaper or some employee there. Maybe I did own it. It was a long time ago and I am often amazed at how much detail I can pull out of these old crevices between my ears. But the details are definitely getting a bit foggy now.

Two Camera Company's offering very similar camera designs particularly caught my attention back then. I wasn't too far along in my career before I did find justification for both models of these cameras. I don't think I realized the close relationship that Mamiya and Simon-Omega cameras shared. They looked and functioned a lot alike, but that's really where their early offering split.

Koni-Omega Rapid Press Camera Vs. Mamiya Super 23

The year I was born, one of these early camera designs was born. It was the Omega Press Camera. The company behind it was Simon Brothers, an American Company known for their line of Omega photographic products. They had had an exclusive supply arrangement with the military during 
WWII, for their simple, reliable design for combat cameras. It was called the Omega Combat Camera. The company also produced an excellent line of photographic enlargers during those days. All of these products used  excellent Wollensak lenses, produced in New york. 

That first Omega Press Camera was derived from the Combat Camera Simon Brothers company was so famous for, as used by all of the US Armed forces. The basic design of the Press cameras was not much different. It was a rangefinder camera which used 120 film to image 6x7 cm negatives. It was a pretty serious two-hands full, but actually, a fairly manageble camera.

Eight years later Simon Omega company had been bought-out by Konica, a very old and successful Japanese Camera Company, known early for their excellent Lieca-like 35 mm rangefinder cameras, and their very fine Hexanon lenses. I still have a Konica II which is in remarkably good shape. It takes great pictures. I've several Konica 35 mm cameras of later vintage since then. In fact, Konica has been one of the main-stay graphics company that has seemed to shadow my career.

Most recently, Konica, having merged with another great vintage camera company, offered some of the first digital cameras under the name of Konica-Minolta. But finally the company bailed out of the camera business in 2005, or thereabouts 

Under the label of Konica-Minolta,this company is still among the very most aggressive surviving graphics and business copier builders, and their connected laser printers are second to none. It's odd how things go full-circle sometimes. My second son, was voted employee-of-the-year for his superior sales achievement during Konica-Minolta's 2007-2008 fiscal year.

The 6x7 press cameras of this vintage that I know best are the various Koni-Omega Rapidcameras. I had already started selling off pieces of my camera collection when I had the idea, bright or otherwise, to document here all the cameras I had ever owned and used. But I do still have one complete functional Koni-Omega Rapid press camera left.

At this time an d even during the fifties, German Camera Companies were pairing with Japanese companies to produce a variety of cooperative products. In the case of Koni-Omega, it was a cooperative effort between an American Company and Japanese company that perpetuated the original Simon Brothers design.

Read more about this phenomenon at my post at this link:

http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2008/12/why-did-japan-excell-in-camera-production-after-wwii.html

I grew to love these cameras for what they can do best--make big 6x7 negatives using extremely good optics--with a minimum of expense and difficulty, now. Because, there is a fairly high demand for these cult cameras. They have their admirers, and I have long been one of them. The early design is really quite remarkable and I like these better than the early Mamiya competitor--the Standard 23 Press camera.

The design of the Koni-Omega Rapid Press Camera had already gone through an evolution, ever since WWII, when they came out in fifty-seven. The product was well thought out and remarkably easy to use, with changeable backs and lenses of superb optical qualities--whether bearing the label Omega or Hexenon (Konica). The lenses could be changed faster than most SLR's. The ingenious rapid-wind mechanism, which oddly, has never been employed in cameras before or since (that I am aware of), allowed quick sequences even for the big format camera. 

I recently read from one of the popular vintage camera review webs, the pros and cons of the Koni-Omega Rapid. A subjective user observation was the the reviewer on the web site regarding the seeming lack of anything to hold ontoon the users right hand side of the Koni-Omega Rapid. I just happened to note that the user/reviewer was a Japanese female. I am intending nothing either racist nor sexist, but I also considered that these factors may have affected her analysis; I am merely supposing that her frame and hands may be somewhat slighter than American male hands, for which the original camera upon which it was based was intended.

I also would like to point out for those with similar feelings regarding the lack of convenient handles on the Rapid--that it was almost always paired with a large flash-bracket. The default flash that we used during those vintage years was the G, mounted by way of a Graflex quick-release mechanism onto the flash handle;these flash units or strobes, as we incorrectly called them, were known for their large chrome tubular handles. Some models used four D-size batteries inside the tubular handle.

My point for mentioning this is that the flash tube served as the right-hand handle by design. I recommend for users of these vintage cameras today, acquiring one of the old flash units, keeping the quick-release clamps, after discarding the flash head, to serve as a handle for the Konica-Omega Rapid Press Camera. BTW, the camera, by the time the Rapid original model came out, was not really a press camera per se. This is what they were originally used for, but news photographers had long since opted for the smaller 120 TLR or SLR and even 35 mm designs.

 The Koni-Omega Rapid Press Cameraquickly evolved through a series of additional fast and liberating changes. Each models that came out at the rate of every year or two offered useful new features.The camera became a system, with interchangeable backs, and with backs, even formats could be changed, 6x7, 6x6, 6x9, cut film, Polaroid film. Shutter-release-weilding handles for easier . . . well . . . handling.

A contingent of fine lenses for various fields of view and focus, and close up rings, greatly increased the appeal far beyond what the camera was first intended for. The camera now appealed to everyone from magazine and advertising photographers--owing to its superb lenses and sufficiently large format for such purposes.

When the evolution had almost ripened, starting with the Konica-Omega 200, my old friend Mamiya, whose line of competing cameras had been paralleling the Konica-Omega for some time, began producing the lenses for this line. Mamiya was already a major player in this medium format, so-called Press Camera market.

Mamiya Press Cameras

As mentioned earlier, the Mamiya Press Camera, and its evolving models had been on my mind and awareness from the earliest days of serious involvement in photography--beginning in the late sixties. It wasn't until much later that I owned any of these Mamiya version of the press camera models. I do feel that early-on the Konica-Omega Rapidmodels were clearly more manageable than were the Mamiya equivalents. But this changed.

Mamiya had two mainstay models of the Press camera from the sixties, the Mamiya Standard 23, and the Mamiya Universal 23 Cameras. Although much the same as the Standard, the sister Universal 23 camera was designed to not only change backs, but allowed an adapter to accept many other competitive backs, and other accessories including a ground glass. A short bellows, moving uniquely toward the back, also enabled tilts to adjust the film plane to straighten lines of perspective. This was great for architectural and advertising applications. It works something like a mini-view camera. The moving back belows also enabled macro photography because the unique back bellows feature would shrink the subject by half. If you are familiar with Mamiya's first camera design, the Mamiya Six (of old) used a similar bellows concept.

The Mamiya Super 23 Camera was an Apex in Full-use Camera Design

The following excerpt is from the following link. You can read the entire post by jumping here: http://shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/classic_historical/0504sb_classic/

Two revolving keys on the back of the body allow for the attachment or removal of roll-film holders and other attachments. The four knobs on the sides of the camera are what make the Super 23 so unique. Loosening these knobs allows you to extend the bellows back mount 13/16” and then apply up to 15Þ of swing or tilt for perspective correction or depth of field control making the Super 23 something of a mini-view camera. The additional back extension was also useful when shooting close-ups as it provided an ability to get just under 1/2 life size with the standard 100mm lens.

The Lenses
Mamiya offered a wider range of lenses for the Super 23 than any of the competitive systems. Ten different lenses in eight different focal lengths were available to Mamiya users, all rangefinder coupled in helical focusing mounts. The lenses used the reliable Seikosha #0 shutter and provided for flash sync at all speeds.

Among the functioning cameras in my collection, I have both a Mamiya 23 Standard, and a Koni-Omega Rapid--which I will soon show pictures of and taken by, within this post. I will now make a recommendation for what I consider one of the best uses for these old classic cameras is today, aside from merely indulging in the wanderlust of going vintage. And there certainly IS that.

Because of the exceptional acuteness of these lenses--especially the wide-angle lenses, paired with the capapability to take 6x7 and 6x9 backs imaging on roll film--these cameras make very good landscape and scenic cameras. They are more portable view cameras--which are considered the ultimate in image quality for scenics for use in magazines, displays, wall-hangings owing mainly to the 4x5 and larger film that can be used. But photographers who desire to access the best scenery in the world,  may need to backpack out among the birds and the bears and the trapping of wilderness. While these just-discussed cameras are not the smallest cameras, they are smaller that 4x5 view cameras.

Note: Although we are not going to review the newer vintage Mamiya medium-format rangefinder cameras, I will say that one of these models--namely, the Mamiya 6, Mamiya 7, and Mamiya 7II cameras are known to be the very best cameras for Landscape Photography.

I own an early Mamiya Standard 23. Had I not been initially used to the Omega Rapid model, I would have little to want for in this model. I retained one of this basic model because I found that someone had done the thinking that I had not yet gotten around to, of using the Standard 23to make a 6x12 camera for scenics. I bought the plans for ten bucks from eBay.

I even have a design for converting one of these bodies to accept a homemade 6x12 film back, using 120 roll-film and the wide 75 mm lens on the one hand, or the 58/60mm wide lens on the otherhand. BTW, as alluded to earlier, my understanding is, that the Omegon-labeled 58mm lens and the Konica Hexanon 60 mm lens, are in fact, the exact same lens. These are highly sought after lenses.

Oddly, on eBay they often bring a higher price when told singularly than as an entire kit containing the lens and a whole camera system. I guess you just have to know what to look for. Some people may be looking for the lens for another camera, or project camera they are building or modifying--never realizing what camera the lenses were made in the first place.

(Continue to the next post to learn more about the Mamiya RB 67 Camera System.)

http://stores.ebay.com/Military-Optics-Vintage-Camera-Sale

Rollei SL26: Camera Mistake, Or One of the Most Brilliant Ideas Ever.

Rollei made a few mistakes.The first Rollei Magic TLR might be considered a mistake by some, although those who know how to use it, have found it a great great camera. Tthe Some consider antoehr to have beena mistake--Rolleiflex SL26, from the mid-sixties, now long forgotten, except for any surviving Rollei designers and marketers--a few Kodak insiders, and perhaps a few users from the era. It is misunderstood if considered at all. 

When the Camera came out, I recall discussing it with my older multi-talented friend John Reno, my sometimes photographer mentor back in the day. It created quite a stir in the photographic world, the film format wars waged. Kodak's proven 126 cassettes format success had moved Rollie to build a fine camera, a rather sexy little Single Lens Reflex, with lens interchangeability, for the Kodak cartridge film system then so well-known as Instamatic. Kodak brought out the Instamatic Camera, cartridge, and flash system in 1963. Had Rollei read the tea leaves earlier and acted, the story might have been different.

You can probably go through any box of junk from the mid sixties until the end of the eighties and find an instamatic camera. According to Kodak, there were some 75 million Instamatic cameras sold. Who would have known that they wouldn't just go on for ever? Rollie's timing with this amazing little Rollieflex SL 26 was just too late and it didn't fly long enough--so not very well.

The majority of that incredible total 75 million Instamatic cameras sold by Kodak, had already been sold by the time the cool little Rollieflex SL26 came out in 1968.

The following Wikipedia stub succinctly tells about the Rollie SL26. It just takes a moment to hop over and read this link when you finish here. Rollei SL26 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

What a beatuiful piece of work this Rollei kit is--in every good way. It might have become the flagship Rolle product, had the long-fought battle between Kodak and the makers of 35mm cameras and films. It was an old style production warKodak and Rollei were fighting; similar strategies had worked before. But this time Kodak eventually lost--and by default so did Rollei. Or did they. Well, they lost the war, but certainly not this battle. The sales for the Rollei SL 26 were significant. But this time Rollei read it right. They stopped producing the ill-fated format camera at precisely the correct time. 35mm had won. 126 Instamatic cassettes would soon be camera history.

Consider these facts: The SL 26 was the smallest automatic SLR, with the fastest lens interchangeablility ever--a totally new lens change concept. The Zeiss lenses were among the best optics ever made. With the 126 instamatic cassette system, changing film couldn't be faster. The camera arrived on the scene at a crucial time of film technology, bringing forth new film emulsions that could be blown up like never before, with outstanding color. 

The lenses are interchangeable in an odd way. The lens mount and base remain in place while the top part of the lens changes out in about on eheartbeat. Three lenses standard, wide, and telephoto make it a very usable system. It is small, light, well-balance, and runs on one flat battery cell. When cassettes were widely available, I found this camera the one to take on a non-photographic vacation (is there really such a thing), for some undercover or expose work, and sometimes just to go out shooting. There are a hundred tricks of optics and flash and filters and homeade attachments that a creative photographer can use to expand the capabilities of this camera.I have evne used it up against the right telescope successfully.

John Reno and I actually discussed the wisdom of bringing out such a camera at this stage in 1969. From all indications the SL26, using 126 cartridges, was at the right place, and who would know that it wouldn't be a huge success. I didn't even know much about it other than seeing the advertisements in a few Photography Mags. But John, a marketer himself, questioned the wisdom of bring the little camera to market. I guess because of that, I have always followed the little camera. I have at least one left in my collection. It a very nice little camera. It is small and easily-carried. Has everything you could ask for in a compact camera. I like it still.

It came with a 40 mm lens as standard. And a case, and all the quality trimmings and hoop-la associated with other fine Rollie Cameras. When I get my collection upstairs, I will take some pictures of mine to post here, and I'll take a few pix with it to compare to other cameras to post here. You'll be impressed. I have been a marketer for a lot of my adult life--in one shape or another. I find it incredibly interesting how the success of a product can rise and fall by the timing of its announcement.

Rollie could not have guessed that the Instamatic product life-cycle was just then going flat. When any product comes out fresh, it has a slightly inclined beginning until people learn about it. If it is going to take off, it usually does fairly quickly, then the curve goes almost vertical for a while. It may take months, it may take years, but it will eventually begin to flatten out. In lay terms, the flat top of the bell-curve is that their is basically just replacement sales from initial buyers. There may still be a lot being sold, but no new sales, and as the bell curve starts to go down, it represents a decrease in sales.

 

Instamatic cameras and film actually had a full twenty-five year run. Not bad. So why didn't the Rolliefles SL26 fly. Maybe Rollie considers that it did. I just don't know. It is a fairly rare camera If you are a collector or jsut like neat little cameras, it is worth what you will pay for it on eBay right now. The price will surely increase steadily over the years. A good investment

 

The SL26 was and is a great camera design and Rollei made hay while the sun still shone. All-considered, the SL26 was among the most innovative and veratile cameras ever made. I LOVE this gem of a camera. The engineering is awesome. The optics are superb, and contrary to what some believe there are both sources through which to buy good 126 film in cassettes as well as options for hand-loading.  

You can still find SL 26's on the used camera market for less than $200. Sometimes yhou have to watch and pick up the lenses and cases seperately. Each auxilary lens comes in a hard leather case. There are filters and other items to be had, but these are bedoming very sparce. My system includes two cameras with the base stardard 40mm lens. One can be outfitted with the 28mm wide angle lens or the 80mm Tele. These are each small enough to cary one in each vest pocket, or two in one pocket. The remaining lens and a handful of cassettes easily ride in a balancing pocket. I have traveled discretely just so outfitted many times. Long before the age of zoom and digital technologies--this was my ticket, and it still ain't that shabby.

BTW, you can get 126 cartridge after-market film from specialty suppliers. I'll put a link here to a couple, but any search for "Instamatic 126 film" should yeild plenty of sources.

http://stores.ebay.com/Military-Optics-Vintage-Camera-Sale

Twin Lens Parallex Problem Explained Using Mamiya C as Example

With all TLR cameras parallex is a problem that must be reckoned with. The farther away, from the camera or/and the wider the lens viewing angle, the less of a problem this phenomenon becomes. In lay plain-speak, this is best understood by the notion that each of the two lenses are viewing from a slightly diferent point--therefore their will be a slightly different view seen through the viewfinder/top lens-than the view that actually exposes the film through the bottom, picture-taking lens. This discrepency of view is parrallex.

Parrallex became a big practical problem with military rifles equiped with optical scopes, and even before thant, long-range tangent sights. Did you ever see Tom Selleck in the the movie entitled Quiggly Down Under. Sellect play the part of a Wild West buffalo hunter who is wrongly accused of murder or some such mischief. He feels for Australlia and answers the call for a long-range crack-shot which is something he is qualoified for--since this is how buffalo hunters dispicably killed their prey.

Aside from the fact that buffalo hunters were inherently irresponsible at best and murderous below that for laying waste to the point of near extinction of those magestic beasts, which once populated the Grea Plains of America. Sorry, I am a hunter, but that just sucks. Anyway, Quiggly is portrayed to be a good guy, who has lived hte Old Western life and is good with guns.

Although thes legendary black-powder buffalo rifles range and accuracy is more myth than fact, they really could shoot a long ways. The so-called tangent sight rides high above the breach-end of the long rifle and have a minute peep-sight through which the fron sight is lined up with the front sight and the eventual target. Quiggly and all such long-range shooters have many variables to deal with.

The most significant one is the effect of gravity and resistance acting upon the bullet once it has left the rifle's barrel at fairly high velocities. The remedy is to aim high. Knowing how high is the skill. At medium ranges, these shooters establish a  point small target that they can both see and that the projectile's power and velocity can consistently hit. Whether a shooter is using a scope, or some other type of high-setting sight, the problem of parrallex comes into play.

The barrel is pointed from a slightly different angle than is the scope or sight. And whether we are aiming cameras or rifles this problem must be dealt with the closer the subject-target to the camera or the rifle.  If so inclined we could theoretically draw a line leading from the scope or sight or top camera lens on a TLR presisely and correctly leading straight to the target-subject.

If we did the same thing with a line from the barrel or bottom lens to the target, the two theoretical loines would at some point intersect and then keep going until the two were far apart. Again, this problem, known as parralex has to be reckoned with if on the one hand we expect to hit the target we are aiming for or in the other case to not cut the top half of the subjects head off in the exposed picture. It is, in both cases, a serious problem.

The way the problem is handled with most TLR's varies. It is not usually a problem unless one uses cloes-up rings. The difference at the nearest point of focus is negligible. Bellows on the Mamiya TLR are incorporated in 0rder to move the lenses farther from the film plane than would be possible without bellows. This enables lenses to focus much closer to the subject for excellent and sharp macro pictures.  However, parallex becomes much more evident when focusing up close and/or using differnt than standard focal length lenses.

It can be compensated for but you have to know how much ot compensate with these variables. It becomes confusing. The early C-Series tried several variation on a theme to help the user to correct for parrallex. By the time the C-22 came along, the problem had been reduced to three basic steps. First, when a lens was changed, a corresponding dial has to be turned to a compensating point. This is located on the left side of the camera body. This only has to be done when the lenses are changed.

There are two other measres to help the user compensate for parrallex. The first one is a line etched into the ground-glass seen through the view-finder. At the extremes of lens parrallex on the C-22/C-220, the subject must appear below the etched line when the film is exposed or it will be cut off in the picture. At the lessor extrems, the viewfinder actually shows a moving red pointer when the camera focuses close enough that comp-ensation is required. This red pointed is used just as the etches in the viewfinder glass if used. Keep the subject under it.

The third measure tackles two problems simultaneously. One problem is the changes in zone focus  parameters when dfferent lenses are used. The other problem is that, coupled with the changes in zone focus when the camera uses the bellows and creates parralex. If it sounds confusing, it is. The changing graph that makes these calulations possible with the earlier models, is located on the right side and changes with the bellows extension.

Colored lines are used to distinguish the different numbers to be used with different lenses. It takes some study to understand this scheme and even more ot internalize and use it. It works though but it is not uncommon, in the heat of the moment to forget and thereby lose part of the image.

This IS a drawback, but surely not a fatal flaw. The newer C-330 Professional Model has all but eliminated this problem. If one uses the normal lens exclusively, it is hardly a problem at all. It is much improved with these latter models

A big, Heavy Camera is Easy to Hold for long Exposures. Here's How.

I have shot many wedding ceremonies without the flash turned on during flash-prohibited portions using ASA 100 color film at 1/4th second or longer without any signs of motion blur. We're talking by candle-light. Yes there is a tchnique to it, but the technique doesn't work with a smaller lighter camera. I guess this is because the technique relies on the help of gravity to help anchor the camera during the exposure.

Here's the way the solid hold works--and works especially well with a waist-level finder on a Mamiya C-Series camera and a side-mount handle or flash (runed off and discharged priot to shooting.) If you have a wall or something tall and solid to lean yur back slightly aganist to keep your body from swaying either laterally or front-to-back--it helps a lot, but is not absoluely necessary. It is necessary to pland your feet shoulder-width apart. In martial arts we call this the horse stance--except your strong-side food is slightly behind the other foot.

In denfensive-style handgun competition or proficiency practice, we call it the Weaver stance. With your feet so spaced, it is easy to keep from swaying--fro a few seconds or longer. Next, you raise the camera eye-level finder to a viewing height where you don''t have to stoop forward much,if at all, to look intothe magnifyer and focus. You focus and allow your face, forhead, nose, lip, or whatever you can manage, to brace the camera in place at the top of the finder.

You tuck your arms solidly against your sides and plant them firmly there all the way to the elbows. You take a couple of breaths and let the second one out to a natural feeling point--about a third of the way for me--and hold your breath. You are holding the camera naturally in your hands with a finger on the shutter or trip-button on a side-mount bracket. You push the button straight back lightly until it trips.

Keep holding your breath until the exposure is more than ever. That's it. The camera's weight will help keep it solidly in place. Try it! What else will the Mamiya C series cameras do. Maybe I'll start by discussing what's wrong with them.

Mamiya C-Series Twin Lens Reflex cameras

"I toted that big old heavy case around with pride and relished any opportunity to take it out and extend the long bellows, which would facilitate macro-focusing with any regular lens." 

 "I know that I had often wanted lens interchangeability without giving up big negatives."

Mamiya's first really succesful TLR design came in 1948. This was a big achievement as the entire Mamiya production facility had been destroyed by American bombs during the war. What made the Mamiya TLR design so unique was again their wise use of bellows AND the ability to change lenses. This was not the first attempt at TLR lens interchangeablity, but it had long since been given up as impractical. 

Mamiya had one really good TLR they designed prior to that, a conventional TLR design called the Mamiyaflex Precision Professional, as I recal. I have one, which I show somewhere. It was very well made, but just more of the same TLR's on the market then.  But the one with the bellows is the one whose updated designs, I discoverd for myself in 1969.

 

"You need some kind of side mount handle to use these cameras off the tripod. But I can assuere you that these cameras can, have, did, and do get toted around as any mini-35 or digital camera does today."

I was working for a home town photographer as a flunky--later darkroom tech and only sometimes full-fledged photographer (I was never good enough for Bill. I emulated his style well at the time, but I was just a kid.) Still, I loved the place. It was Grand Central Station. Bill had close ties with the Local Newspaper located right across the street from his upstairs studio. I knew all the people at the newspaper. I did all their stringer-type freelance photography at the time. I shared rides and events with the reporters. I went to school with the owners family. Small-town America at its most quait Norman Rockwell.

Luck Gave Me First-Hand Experience with the Rolliecord TLR

And since we were located next door to the local happening AM radio station (those were the good stations back then.), I knew those guys well--DJ's, Manager, News Announcer, secretary/receptionist, salesman, and the owner was my agend Latin teacher, who, for whatever reason, counted me as a student pet. What a wonderful Lady elderly Mrs. Clayton was. She was a widow. Her husband had been a hobby photographer. Mrs. Clayton loaned me for months after the demise of my first good camera, a nice Rooliecord that had belonged to her husband. Maybe she thought I would buy it. I didn't. But I used it like it was my own, and loved it. I really think she was just being nice to a highstrung somewhat precocuios kid whose potential she, among a few, was banking on cultivating. It sure helped.

 

"The C-330 is made of very strong polymers and alloys. it is lighter and stronger than earlier models."

I've tried, with only moderate success, to recreate the atmosphere of friendly hometown excitement and security of being on the inside, as existed at Bill's studio. I was in retrospcet, only a mascot, but it was enough. The place was abuzz with friendly movers and shakers of the community who knew and respected Bill. The prettiest young adult girls worked there. It was my home away from home. I spent late night hours in the creaky old building keeping up with Bill's darkroom work and then my own news pictures, for delivery under the Newpapers door prior to deadline.

How I Became Proficient in Darkroom Techniques 

It became my experimental laboratory. I became a good darkroom tech. I would attach the old speakers that were mounted in the darkroom up to my newly aquired cassette tape play--state-of-the-art at the time--and crank up Abbey Road, the last cut before the Beatles broke up. I knew every nuance and phrase and note.

One Sunday, while I was stuggling to get caught up in the darkroom, Ben, a full-time musician in The Stoned Four, and part time DJ, cmae over and insisted thatI come listen to a new promo song he'd recieved. That's the way artists got heard back then. You can't just drop everything with times and buzzers and this and that when working in a darkroom. Everyting is time-critial. But I got free as quickly as I could. Ben was moody and I didn't want to make bad with him He was cool. He once broke his base over an obnoxious drunks head who wanted to fight at a club he was playing. Ben simply was NOT going to play Eyes of Texas for the guy.

Ben knew his music, too. He played for me, for the first time ever I heard, Art Garfunkle's Bridge Over Troubled Water--atypical of music of the era.

"That'll blow the charts!" Ben predicted. It wasn't hard to agree. The piece was nice.

John Reno had been an announcer at the station. He certainly had the voice. John was also a fine marketing guru and photographer and a gazzilion other things--allo cool. He was Bill's age and they were friend. I guess they were in their early thirties. John would come by the studio and shoot the breeze or talk shop with Bill--and sometime me.

Chance Brought My First Mamiya C-220

"The second weakness with these cameras is in the film transport."

One time John had a Mamiya C220 Twin Lens Reflex camera, in a nice black leather upright soft case, and three (maybe four) lenses to fit it. He was upgrading to a new camera, which turned out to be the then brand new Rollie 66. He was leaving the kit for Bill to decide whether he wanted to buy it, or at least for Bill to show it around for him. Every would-be photographer in the town and beyond came by the studio at one time or another. Actually, as I recall, John may have bought the Mamiya from Bill in the first place.

"I have used a fleet of these cameras [Mamiya C-330] and other than the problem of parrallex changing with different lenses, which has even been highly perfected by these models--There are no real drawbacks."

They must have had me targeted. I was a sucker for medium format cameras. I had seen these advertised but for some reason been put-off by them. I don't recall why; the new cameras were probalby out of my league price-wise. I know that I had often wanted lens interchangeability without giving up big negatives. Hassleblad was out of the question. I had thought about the Bronica Z, and the Mamiya Press 23--but they too were too pricey.

The Kowa Six had special appeal to me, mostly because I fell in love with a stupid little Kamoflex-S, which was broken, that Bill had temporarily for some reason. He had let me take the little 4x4 SLR camera home to mess wiht. He said it was either broken, or we didn't know how to work it. He let me take it home one weekend to mess with. Bill was always good that way. If the Kamoflex-S was not broken when I got it, it surely was when I got finished with it. We had no manual, and there was no quick way to snag a download off the Internet back then.

Sometimes C series lenses get sticky shutters from setting unused for a while. The corect way to fix these lenses is to use a lens barrel spanner wrench to take a lens off and access the shutter blades. An eye dropper is used to place one drop of solvent (we used to use ether which is now illegal to buy. Make sure the solvent you use will not disolve plastics. Carbon Tet will;acetone won't and might work just fine for this. It is easily availabe. But try it on an old lens or glass first as I have never used it for this application. I use it routinely for guns).

Most solvents dry very quickly, so you'll need to work the shutter blades before it evaporates. It usually cleas right up. Don't over do it as it will also disolve the lubricants. You may also want to properly lubricate this with special shutter blade lubricant. You'll need to re-secure the lens with the proper agent. Do a search if necessary for these supplies. Also, look for a camera repair post on the blog for more repair sources.

"It takes about three seconds to implement this field fix. Simply place a rubber band of the right size and tension over the shutter cocker and then pull it to the most apparent secure place above the cocker..."

The old-timers field method of dealing with this stuck-shutter problem is just as effective, but it looks a little hoaky. It takes about three seconds to implement this field fix. Simply place a rubber band of the right size and tension over the shutter cocker and then pull it to the most apparent secure place above the cocker (I forgot what this is, it may be the synch plug attachment) and slip it over this point in such a way as to help the shutter spring back into place. It works!

Of course the Internet didn't even exist then. As it runs out, the Kamoflex had a notorious design flaw. They were easily broken by not following a peculiar sequence in advancing and cocking the shutter when nno film was loaded. In fact, every Komaflex I have ever seen or even noted on Ebay, was broken--except the little jewels that I now own. I still like the stupid little thing.

I don't know how it transpired exactly, but I think I paid John half his price and took delivery and then paid him the rest later. It wasn't the last camera I ever bought from John. I will refer to John again when we get to the oddball little Rollie 26--one of a kind SLR ill-formatted for the Kodak 126 Instamatic cassete. Who would know that the widely used 126 Instamatic cartridges would ever be discontinued? Not Rollie.

Read this Post to Learn About the Rollie 26 SLR

This is how I acquired my first Mamiya TLR with bellows. It was not my last by far. I toted that big old heavy case around with pride and relished any opportunity to take it out and extend the long bellows, which would facilitate macro-focusing with any regular lens. The thing was cool-looking among its peer cameras if also a little intimidating. It weighed a ton--especially when equipped with a side-mount Honeywell Stobe. These were, I believe, the first automatic-exposure flash units ever to gain popularity.

Vintage News Strobes--The Early Electronic Flash Units

They were large, by todays standards, but made a wonderful handle paired with any camera--especially the Mamiya C series TLR's. You need some kind of side mount handle to use these cameras off the tripod. But I can assuere you that these cameras can, have, did, and do get toted around as any mini-35 or digital camera does today. And enjoyed. As I have said before, size and weight of a camera, is merely an expectation and a mind-set. I prefer them and feel they are easier to handle and hold free-hand without blurring than a lighter camera. To read how I do it, read this post: http://www.typepad.com/site/blogs/6a00d8341c30bb53ef00d83455641e69e2/post/compose

The second weakness with these cameras is in the film transport. The C-2, C-22, and C-220 were the less-expensive offerings. It has been a while since I have used any of these, but my recollect tells me that one of the cost saving measure was to have a less sophisticated transport system. Instead of a rapid-wind crank, these models used first, a transport knob, and then a flimsy crank. I have seen several of these transport systems mal-function and go completly bad, with no easy fix, except a camera repairman.

"I've said it many time: The Mamiya C-330 is the best value in cameras. It gives the maximum bang for the buck. It will take anything from portraits to candids, to macro still-life's, to scenics to restoration copies. It focuses close, changes lenses, and doesn't blank out during exposure. There is no mirror movement, and it is substantial enough to stay still on a tripod. The optics are superb. All things considered it is absolutely the most versatile camera system on the market to this day." 

The C-3, C33, and C-330 models use both a crank and a beafier underlying transport system. I haven ever seen one of these go bad. The C-330 is made of very strong poloymers and alloys. it is lighter and stronger than earlier models. It is also black instead of gray. I have used a fleet of these cameras and other than the problem of parrallex changing with different lenses, which has even been highly perfected by these models--There are no real drawbacks.

By the time the C-330 came out, all the bugs were worked out.

(Read this Post to learn more about TLR Parrallex) http://www.typepad.com/site/blogs/6a00d8341c30bb53ef00d83455641e69e2/post/6a00d8341c30bb53ef0105362edb43970b/edit  

 

Make Sense of Roll film Format Numbers: 120, 127, 620, 135, etc.

If you weren't around photography during the hay-days of film cameras (or even if you were), you probably can't make heads nor tails of the roll-film numbers. Don't feel foolish, the numbers don't make any sense unless you have the key. To further confuse matters, there are coincidentally enough similarities in some of the film numbers to cause one to charge off in the direction of thinking the film format number designations are referring to some unit of measure. They simply do no such thing.

For example, film format number 135 film has nothing to do with the size of the film--which is generally accepted to mean perforated 35 mm movie film size. Some people think 35 mm is just a shortened version of the number 135 film format it refers to.

So then one might extrapolate that number 120 film format size is also expressed in milimeters, and conclude that this size is a bit smaller than 135 film/35 mm film. Although perfectly logical, this extrapolation is way wrong. 120 film is closer to 60 mm wide (and long, making it square). It is almost twice as wide as number 135 film, which is about 35 mm wide.

The best bet is just to throw all notions of film size as relating to the film format number designations out the door, and start over in your understanding of these film numbers and their associated sizes. The fact is that the roll film numbers used to denote particular film formats arbitraily began with the number 101 and continued throughout the first half of lthe last century sequentually as different film formats were brought to market.

This is especially unsatisfying when dealing with vintage cameras, because all but a couple of roll-film sizes  used by such cameras have been discontinued. The excerpt below is from a link you can go to and read a helpful film size chart, and the real explanation as to how various film sizes got their format number designations. I will bet, once you read and retain this information, that you will have a greater understanding than do many modern day photographers regarding the subject. AND you will be better able to determine what film format and size vintage cameras actually use.

History of Kodak Roll Film Numbers.

History of Kodak Roll Film Numbers

---

Kodak Roll Films Starting with 101

It first became necessary to specify which Kodak roll film was required with the introduction of the No. 2 Kodak camera in 1889. As different models and sizes of cameras were introduced, the film boxes were marked with the names of the cameras that the roll would fit.

By 1908, this system had become difficult to use for ordering film. It was now necessary to specify the image size and the camera the film was to be used in, as not all films for the same size pictures could be used interchangeably. To simplify this system, it was decided that the daylight-loading roll films on flanged spools would be numbered in the order of introduction, starting with the first Kodak film of this type introduced with the No. 2 Bullet camera in 1895 as number 101.

This system was gradually phased in as new film boxes and camera instruction manuals were printed, but the numbers did not appear in Kodak price lists until 1913. By this time, numbers 101 through 129 were used. Numbers 106 through 114 were used for films spooled for Cartridge Roll Holders, which allowed roll film to be used with cameras designed to use glass plates. In 1916 one more number in this series was added: No. 130 for pictures 2-7/8 by 4-7/8 made with No. 2C Kodak cameras.

Some Kodak and Brownie folding cameras made from 1914 to the 1930's have a little door on the back which is marked "use Autographic film A-(number)". A-116 film, for example, was for the same size pictures as 116 film but instead of red and black duplex paper, the film was wound with a sheet of carbon paper and thin red paper. This film used in an Autographic Kodak camera allowed a brief message to be written on the film in the space between the pictures. Pressure of a stylus on the backing paper transferred the carbon to the red paper and light passing through these lines in the carbon paper would photograph the message onto the film.

When 620 and 616 films were designed in 1931, considerable thought was given to the numbering. These films were for the same picture sizes as 120 and 116 but the spool diameters were smaller to allow them into thinner cameras. The "6" was to indicate the number of pictures per roll but by the time this product had reached the market, the decision had been made to increase the number of pictures on this size and on sizes 120 and 116 to eight exposures so the "6" became meaningless. continue at the above link for entire read.

Meopta, the Overlooked Warsaw Pact TLR Cameras

"Meopta and other excellent Eastern European camera makers are really just now being discovered by the Western world."

"What about Meopta?" a soft male voice asked from the back of the class.

Many years ago, I developed a now fairly-well-known posing method known as Wright's Wrap-and-Roll (explained within this blog). At the time there was an inexcusable absence of any easy to learn starting-point for beginning photographers. I have since taught this method freely to many--some of whom, have shamelessly called it their own. (I still have attendance rolls to my classes, but all in all who gives a flip.) Ha. 

"Meopta, huh. Are you sure you are saying that right?" The instructor foolishly chided.

A dozen or more years ago, I was asked to be a presenter at a series of photographic classes offered by the City of Germantown, Tennessee where I (BTW very nice place). I never critique or correct or comment when I attend these seminars--unless I am asked to--even though I have to laugh to myself at times. Arrogance and know-it-all is never appreciated. Besides, I may be wrong in my opinions. Photography is sometimes a subjective art.

But I almost came out of my chair, and did make some corrections behind the scenes after the following played out in class. An older gentleman with a dignified and contained demeanor spoke up a couple of times when the varieties and relative quality of vintage Twin Lens Reflex cameras was under discussion. Digital was much less of a factor at the time--as it really had not arrived yet for the average hobby photographer. 

"The old gentleman was thin and fit-looking and had a graying mustache that resembled those seen on in the pictures of the aging Einstein."

The old gentleman was thin and fit-looking and had a graying mustache that resembled those seen on in the pictures of the aging Einstein--except for being better trimmed. He had an Eastern European, English accent as well. The class instructor either didn't hear the man, or didn't have a ready answer, but the man persisted until he was acknowledged.

The instructor was caught flat. There is nothing wrong with not knowing but one should never try to fake it among virtual peers regarding a subject in question. But evidently this is what the instructor did.

"Meopta, huh. Are you sure you are saying that right?" The instructor foolishly chided. I was becoming embarrassed for both parties for the developing situation. I was hoping that the instructor would give it up, but he didn't.

"Sir, you must not have been here day we discussed the fleet of Japanese cameras that flooded the market during the fifties and sixties--there were hundreds--that came and went. They weren't very good."

"For users and collectors as well, these circumstances provide a wonderful opportunity for easy-pickings at dream-about prices. It can't last that long."

The old gentleman was exactly that, a gentleman. He only smiled, but didn't say more. I raised my hand quickly and spoke without being asked to.

"Yes, oh sir, yes, back here. I will discuss Meopta on break if you like."

He smiled more broadly. I asked, "Are your from the Czech Republic? You are fortunate to have one. Fine cameras. Yes." He appeared grateful. I didn't look at the instructor--and he quickly went on to another topic. But I was somewhat surprised, as the fall of the Soviet Union and respective satellites governments had opened these countries up to a whole genre of excellent cameras some twenty years earlier and still, they were not much known.

This condition of relative ignorance concerning a number of European cameras has not changed that much. But it will. There are others, but of them all The Meopta series of TLR's stand out as one of the oldest makers of fine TLR's--sharing a legacy of at least three camera and optics companies as they were merged into one under communist rule and the name of Meopta prior to the Soviet break-up. This Western predilection to scoff at "Commie" products--or at the very least the failure to acknowledge these fine products--coupled with the mass defection of film users to digital cameras--has kept these products out of the mainstream eye.

For users and collectors as well, these circumstances provide a wonderful opportunity for easy-pickings at dream-about prices. It can't last that long. The camera-collector appetite was first and continues to be driven by Japanese collectors--primarily interested in obtaining good examples of the myriad of vintage Japanese cameras--which are still plentiful. Of course, the better-known European cameras are also highly sought after. Meopta and other makers are really just now being discovered by the Western world.

As always, I try to point out those exceptional values when I see them. This is one of them for those who act quickly.

I discovered Meopta before most Americans did just by hap-stance. I have been a marksman as long as I have been a photographer. I grew up as a sportsman. With my family living or traveling in a variety of locations that supported the cause of guns as a necessity of life, it was only natural to grow up around guns and optics. And living through the so-called Space-Age, sciences including physics and astronomy were my cup of tea; I had an interest in telescopes and binoculars and other optical devices.

 

Another urchin and I once set the older boys' hide-out on fire in Kotzebue, Alaska--above the Arctic
Circle. It was accidentally done with a thick magnifying glass out of a projector so something. I was just there. He did it. But I got beat up and thrown in the Bearing Sea, and left for Dad because of it. But that's another story and I can't rightly figure out how to tie it in with cameras. Oh, but I can with guns. Dad went looking for them with a Ruger 44 Magnum revolver. Fortunately, he didn't find them. And Dad had a scope for that pistol--although it wasn't on it at the time.

The scope was not a Meopta, but we did have a Meopta rifle scope at some point. I don't know how we came by it. Russia was just across the strait form us. And contrary to the fun made of Sarah Palin, there is a lot of Russian cross-pollination those parts. Siberia and Alaska have a lot in common.

Then, being the boy scientist, I also knew the name as associated with microscopes. Meopta. Opema, one of the entities that became Meopta, was active in cameras and lenses long before the Iron Curtain sealed chech products off from the rest of the free world. The Flexarette Twin Lens Reflex cameras emerged during the 1930's. They were good cameras with good optics. When Communist rule began after WWII, several camera and lens companies were merged and Meopta was what they sere called.

As with other camera manufacturers, camera quality suffered due to lack of parts and material during and after the war. Cameras were in demand as part of the war effort. This was true with all countries. A lot of documentation was done for propaganda purposes by all warring entities. You don't think much about it, but cameras were very important, and left us with a lot of history of the war.

By the fifties most camera companies were again making good products, Including Meopta. I once owned an "off-brand" enlarger. It was the best enlarger I had ever used. I got it for a little of nothing and sold it for a fortune. It was made by Meopta, which I remembered from my youth.

So somewhere in the past thirty years or so, when I ran across Meopta cameras--all TLR's, I got them. I paid little for them, couldn't  find out much about them form anywhere. I still don't know all that much about them. Most sources don't seem to include them among the very good TLR's. But the ones I have had have been excellent.

 

I will show pictures of the for or five that I still have in my collection along with comparative photographs to compare with other cameras. The cameras do look and feel good, but for whatever reason, about half of the ones I have run across were non-functional in some way. On the other-hand most of the other TLR's that I class as very good manufacture, have been operable. This is not scientific and may prove nothing. Then again it may say something about their quality of construction, design, or lack thereof. Still,I like them.

Note: The above complaint is an old problem. I was wrong about the Meoptas being problematic. I feel stupid because several designs DO require the tension of film loaded in the camera to work properly.  When I finally tested those models (I don't know why some worked without film) they almost all worked with the film loaded. So make note of this to be checked before you chunk one as lousy.

With this bit of knowledge rediscovered, because I think I knew this at one time, I have to declare the Meopta Flexarette and earlier models among the overall best TLR's ever made.

Another day, another view. I have sometimes made the claim that in many ways Meopta Flexaret TLR cameras, in all their variations, rivals Rolleiflex TLRs. There are seventeen different models or more depending upon when you start counting. Meopta is a combination of several optics and camera companies that began in the early thirties. Some of these models have unique features that no other TLR's have. Thee optics areof their own making, but they are second to know, as this company was and still is one of the great optical companies of all time. Soptting scopes and rifle scopes and miroscopes and other optical equipment comes at a premium from Meopta--as they are considered among the best

The Flexaret models have a variety of accessories including filters and masks and adaptors for different size films, such as 127 and 135. The camera bodies are made well and seem to hold up quite well. Some models require film in them to work right, so don't toss one until you check this feature. These cameras are finding their way onto eBay at rediculously low prices. If I had a choice of buying an equally outfited Meopta Flexaret model for model against a Rollei at the same price, I would probably buy a Rollei--simply becuase it is currently worth more. But given time, the Flexaret will become just as vaulable if not more so.

For many years, I have been scarfing up Meopta Cameras and enlargers, and other quality optical equipment made by Meopta at bargain prices. Now I am selling them all as I sell my entire camera collection. But it would be a worthy place to start for a new collector/photographer to get as many Flexarets and other associated models as possible.

Don't just take my word for it. Check it out below.

http://www.meopta.com/index.php?id=311

http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Flexaret_VII

http://www.tlr-cameras.com/Czech/slides/5.%20Meopta%20Flexaret%20IIa%20(first%20Meopta).html

In French, with good pictures. http://ebgy.free.fr/photo/flexaret.htm

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/FLEXARET/

http://www.tlr-cameras.com/Czech/

Mamiya Cameras, Unique in the Photographic Marketplace

My Introduction to Mamiya cameras

Mamiya was established as a company in 1940. As with Rollie, this company came aobut as the result of a designer and a businessman getting together to produce cameras. From the beginning, the Mamiya designs took a decidedly different approach to their cameras. Good market-place timing seemed to serve Mamiya with most of their designs.

The first Mamiya was a medium format camera that used bellows (Mamiya Six - Older), at a time when other camera companies were moving away from bellows designs. But this design was radically different in the way it focused. Instead of the lense moving in and out as with most cameras, the back film plan moved. This worked well with the roll film it used. It was a fairly cumbersome camera but was well-accepted by the market. Back-orders existed perpetually for the popular camera, and they made their way to the west, where the Mamiya name gained recognition.

The first Mamiya 35 mm camera from Mamiya used a similar focus mechanism. However the design didn't work well with the 35 mm perforated films which had a tendency to curl badly. Mamiya continued their foray into the 35 mm market with more successful designs, while simultaneously designing and building medium format cameras unlike any other on the market.

The first Mamiya camera I ever encountered was back in highschool. It belonged to the Annual Staff. You were supposed to be a High Scool Junior, to be on the annual staff, but I was their defacto photographer because I was a good photographer and it was known that I did a lot of freelance work for the local newspaper. I liked the deal because I had pretty much free run to take a teachers new 1968 Mustang Fastback to run errands when I should have been in school.

The camera that only I was allowed to use, and therefore I treated as my own, was a Mamiya Sekor 1000. It was a good SLR. They only had one lens for it, and it was not my preference, but sense the film was free, I used it often enough for school stuff. I suspect that the Mamiya-Sekor 1000 was the first 35 SLR that I ever used significantly. But I was still a hard-core medium format photographer for my serious stuff.

Picture of Mamiya Sekor 1000DTL from my Collection Will be inserted here.

(coninued in next post)

Rollie 6x6 Twin Lens Reflex Cameras and Copies

Shown here are vintage TLR's still left from my life-long collection, which I am now selling.

   

  

Rollie is synonymous with fine TLR's. They are the best. With very few exceptions, they are well made. One model, just part of a run Post WWII, were not made with as quality materials as the others, but even those are not bad--still better than most Rollei copies. The optics are superb.

 

The TLR came into its own during te 30's in Germany and The Chech Republic, although few sources recognize the latter. Depending upon whom you believe, Rollie wa not the first TLR design. However it is the first TLR design that was a huge and lasting commercial success. 

 

 

This camera is an Automat II from my collection.

My own experience with Rollie cameras began with observing Dad using his several Rollieflexes and Rolliecords. Dad was a serious hobby photographer. I have quite a few of his photos, and he was good. But my actual use came in high school when my little Yashica 44 Twin Lens Reflex copy of a Baby Rollie cratered. My Latin teach for some reason felt compelled to allow me to borrow her deceased husband's Rolleicord. I used it for a semester. It was very good.

   

This one is a Rollei Magic from my collections, which was produced briefly as Rollei's first Automatic camera. People didn't trust automatics, although they work very well. They can also be "tricked into" manual adjustments by changing the ISO. 

 

I have owned a dozen or so Rolleiflexes and a couple of Rolleicords since then. I used them professionally during the early seventies. I had one 2.8 F model. The optics were unrivaled by any camera I have ever used but it was somewhat limiting due to lack of interchangeable lenses. I had auxiliary telephoto and wide angle attachments and they worked well enough, but the didn't have as much depth of field as I would have liked. The same was true of the close-up rings--but I used them quite a lot.

Many vintage leather cases are now brittle. You can see the scraps of leather straps hanging from the camera strap connectors of this Rollei Magic. Although they are not attractive and beg to be removed, there are now many collectors who are not lookin g so much for original cameras in great condition (they are very expensive and out of the range for some). Just as with some hobby car and gun collectors, many hobby camera collectors, especially those who want to enjoy taking film pictures with their trophies, are restoring cameras as close to as original as possible.

For this reason, I try to leave such things as the strap ends in-tact so that the new owners can see how to attached the straps if they retore the camera. Also note the piece of leather I save on the cloth below.

It was my fault for not handling the the leather case on the Magic as carefully as I should have. It can slip up on you, and dry leather can fall a part in your hands. Some leather is not rotten, and can be made more pliable by misting with a spray bottle and storing in a humid place for 24 hours.

    Sometimes I just take a Rollieflex out of my collection and run a roll of film through it for fun. I still enjoy using the fine instruments. I am selling my collection, and I feel funny parting with my Rollie's but I will never use them. So it is just foolishness. But still I hope they get good owners--l;like they are dogs or something. Dogs are treated like kings these days at my house.

Camera making and WWII cannot be separated. You have both Germany and Japan making excellent TLR's prior to the war. Dresden Germany was the camera capital of the world for some reason. There were more designers and factories turning out cameras than all of the rest of the world combined.

 

Japan, with its imperialistic aims followed suit, with the intent of becoming completely self-sufficient. Minolta, Ricoh, and Yashica all had TLR copies of the Rolliecord prior to WWII. Respectabloe ones too. Some camera factories both in Germany and Japan were bombed by the Allied Forces during the war. After the war, companies tried to pick up where they'd left off prior to the war and subsequent Allied occupation.

 

Parts and even raw materials were were lacking in both countries immediately Post War. But both countries also benefited form the great investment in the economies of both countries during the reconstruction. What rose out of the ashes is not only a testament to the tenacity of both the German and Japanese peoples, but perhaps even a grander illustration as to how to put countries back together as capitalist economies--but it wasn't pure capitalism--it was also greatly assisted by the jump start of a huge influx of money from the free-world--and largely the United States.

 

Whatever happened, both Germany and Japan rebounded with an attitude. There were, all told, over two-hundred fifty companies in Japan making both 35 mm range-finders, and Twin Lens Reflex roll-film cameras built more or less around the proven Rollie designs. Incentive were given among the competitive Japanese companies to achieve higher quality standards and at first, all cameras made had to be exported. This introduced Japanese cameras to the rest of the world, with a big emphasis on the US market, largely as a result of the GI's stationed there after the war.

 

This Yashicamat 124 G was the last, most-evolved Yashica TLR. It was, and still remains a very popular Camera. The G stands for Gold, indicating gold electrical contact points for added security by reducing corrosion, which had bee somewhat problematic in its predecessors.

 

Although not the one I owned, I did own one just like it. This camera found its way into my collection recently. I already had a plain 124, which shows normal wear or use, but this one was especially clean. The case appears virtually unused. This one came from a highschool. Normally this might have been a point of concern--speculating about multiple users and rough handling, but the excellent condition tells another story

I always check out all of my collected cameras by using them. The only problem this one has, must have developed while in my possession. I have often repaired cameras but I am a little stimied by a small problem this on has developed of late. I placed it on a tripod and used a shutter release cable with slow speed black and white film. I had a bit of a problem taking the shutter release cable off after use.

 

After spraying a small amount of WD-40 on the shutter release and lettin git set, it camer off without problem--however, the shutter does not fire without using the cable release. As it now stands, this is the only was it will operate. For the new owner, this should be fixed easily enough, but I am selling it "as is" due to the timeframe within which I am trying to get all my collection listed.

 

After everything is listed, I may come back and try to correct the problem. In retrospect, this may account for why the camera appears so pristine. If it was thought unusable at the school, it was likely just set aside from then on.

  

On the other hand, the great pre-war German camera companies such as those that comprised the cluster of Zeiss-Ikon associated companies which were splinted all over Germany and beyond. As Russia and the United States and its Allies divvied up Germany, Dresden, the big pre-war camera stronghold, was occupied by Russia.The Chech facilities of what would merge and become Meopta, also benefited from this industrial intelligence. Although not well-known to the West for a long time. Meopta became one of the premier optics and camera companies in the World. 

The picture below shows the hand-etched ID information as was often used to identify equipment. It was a good idea then and now adds interesting historical information for collectors. This reminds me of the Swiss rifles that were sold on the army surplus market after new models replaced them. For most of the last century, each Swiss male was issued a fine Schmidt-Rubin K-31 rifle to use during monthly drills.

When these rifles were later taken out of service and sold by the Swiss Government--not for lack of quality or usability, but for preference to the newer semi-automatic replacements--collectors were enthused to find name and issue information inside the buttstock. In many cases those to whom the rifles had been uissued were still alive and were able to be contacted regarding personal stories about the rifles.

Although, Minolta is generally credited with the radial-focus design of the TLR, which uses a handy lever under the bottom lens to focus quickly with eithter/or both index fingers--my research indicates this to be originally designed by those companies that we now recognize as Meopta, in the Chech Republic. Interestingly, the earliest Mamiya TLR design (before the C-Series) also used this design. I will discuss Mamiya's design in totallity later. Mamiya is perhaps the most prolific post-war camera companies. 

Russia sought to preserve the Zena facilities by moving the company lock-stock-and-barrel to Kiev, Ukraine, which was part of the accumulating Soviet Union. The companies on both sides of the devide, were more or less pillaged after the fashion of the spoils of war. Britain, the US and their Allies, having full access to designs and patents of the camera companies, as well as scrutiny of German manufacturing processes, used these resources to launch their own facilities to make copies of the cameras and lens designs.

It is assumable that Rollei's pludered designs were offered to the Japanese to boister their post-war reconstruction--simply by the sheer numbers of companies that copied them. But this is not a give, nor do I have any historical data prooving such. It is not a difficult for a competent engineer to dismantle a legitamately acquired camera in an effort to learn how to construct it. This process is called reverse engineering and the Japanese were and are adept at it.

All in all, it was the twin lens reflex designs by Rollie and to a lessor extent, Zeiss-Ikon, that emerged as the most copied and produced camera in the world. Some were good copies. Some were lousy. Some of the best ones survived the huge competitive onslaught, but most did not, including the very decent American and British Designs. However, even these design have today become highly sought collectibles. They include the British Microflex, and the American Circo-flex/Graflex 22, which are built like tanks, and weigh as much as well.

As it turned out, in as much as they still existed in their form prior to the war, the camera companies that ultimately survived through it all--were the original German and Japanese Companies. Rollei continued to make fine TLR cameras. Ricoh, Minolta, and Yashica made fine TLR's as well--carrying on construction quality traditions as best they could given the materials at hand during the time of their production. Each Japanesee company produced increasingly higher quality cameras as they entered the 1950's going full-bore. In my unbiased estimation, none of the Japanese cameras ever equaled the quality of most Rolleis in not all.  This opinion after years of use of each.

The stories of most of these companies, especially Rollies are well-known and well-documented. I have enjoyed TLR's from all of these manufacturers. I especially like the Rollieflex and the Rolliecords-the preference of most photographers and collectors. Among other German manufacturers, I also favor the Ikonoflex TLR.

I also enjoyed several models of the Yashica 6x6 TLR's and two each made by both Minolta and Richoh. I have owned a dozen or so other Japanese cameras and German medium format 6x6 TLR's which I will post information about within this blog too. I will enumerate the particular models that I have owned and used in this post a bit later.

For now I will make split departures to different posts. First I will tell about Mamiya, and the often underestimated impact that their unique cameras have had on the photogrpahy world, and upon me personally as one of those professional photograpahers.

Next, I will post my finding, opinions, and beliefs concerning the little-mentioned Chech products from the companies that we now recognize as Meopta. The TLR designs I will discuss, test, and show will be the Flexarette series.

I will also diverge to post the same type of information concerning the Soviet cameras with which I have had some experience.

Rollei Made a Wide Range of Accessories for Their TLR Cameras. I will try to package these attractively as I sell off my life-long camera collection.

  

While discussing Rollei, I don't know where to put this little jewel. It is in a class all to itself. You should at least know about it. The Rollieflex SL26 is a high-end Instamaic 126 film camera. Read about it at this post:

http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2008/12/meopta-the-overlooked-warsaw-pact-tlr-cameras.html

Rollie SL26 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Eollwi 4x4 TLR's http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2009/09/more-pictures-of-reviewed-vintage-cameras.html

More 127 4x4's from Camerapedia.org

The following is a very concise resource for lessor known 4x4 TLR's. Great job Camerapeida did with this.

http://notesandnods.typepad.com/photography_for_profit_or/2009/01/dad-said-start-with-160th-shutter-speed.html

Halma 44 - Camerapedia.org.

Japanese 4×4 TLR (edit)
4×4cm	Cordlef | Olympus Eye Flex | Haco-44 | Halma 44 | Kino-44 | Laqon-44 | Minolta Miniflex | Primo Jr | Prinz 44 | Ricohmatic 44 | Ricoh Super 44 | Sawyer's Mark IV | Tower 44 | Tower 44B | Toyoca-44 | Walz Automat 44 | Yashica-44, 44A, 44LM
Other TLR, pseudo TLR and medium format SLR ->
Other Japanese 6×6, 4.5×6, 3×4 and 4×4 ->