Jump to content

ph.

Members
  • Posts

    102
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

15 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. A nerdy comment from an occasional collector of such ancient devices: In my occasional inspection of this treasure trove of ancient posts i have reached nuber 330-something and noted this description of KW products In some descriptions of the FX vintage it is stated that Zeiss made prisms to be inserted in the "lichtschacht". I, however have such a removable prism fitting well atop the camera the prism is numbered and marked KW (and with "s" in a triangle ). No idea whether they bought it in and relabelled, but Neusiedlitz near Dresden is not reputed to have had any optical production, so Jena may have been the origin even if those prisms are usually said to be labelled Zeiss. The small diameter thread lens I have for an older body-version is a "Victar" probaly also a triplet like Ludwigs "Meritar" p.
  2. I agree that Heinz Waaske might have used plastics if avaiiable, but disagree that the MInox was preferable. I had three MInoxes in succession where the shutter stopped working (repaired by the importers and then died again). My Rollei still is functional after xx years. The Minox ease of closing certainly was preferrable to having to cock the Rollei before collapsing the lens. Being careful not to empty the light meter battery by not keeping it exposed to light and out of its pouch was a spot of bother and Minox autoexposure certainly beat that light meter arrangenent. Also the Minox "tessar" type lens was excellent. However, the fact that the Rollei works while the Minoxes are dead disqualifies them. p.
  3. I started to review old posts here some time ago and found the Indian gentlemans experiments with developing B&W and commenting on the growth of Bangalore quite interesting. Nowadays I examine posts about cameras I have sitting on shelves and sometimes take out to use as they were intended. I find gthat the posts beyond 2-300 contain intersting snippets of useful info, In the case of Voigtländer versus Zeiss I wished to confirm my belief that the Ultron was as good as the 35-135. C-41 film makes the camera more important in its role as a black container than as provider of well dosaged flashes of light. I do absolutely not regret reviving antiquities, whether in immaterial form or otherwise. And trust that the original compaliner will reailize the irrationality of opposing the use of this trasure-trove of information. p.
  4. Quite a while since this discussion of the Cx RTS but some of them may still be alive and in use. I recently fed my Contax ST with a C41fim and compared snaps made on the same roll of film by a more ancient Voigtländer VitomaticIIa (the Ultron lens variety) with the CX native Zeiss 35-135 on the ST. I did put new batteries in so as not to have trouble with film transport (AND removed them when putting the ST back in storage) No discernible difference in sharpness or colour. although not having strong light against the lens (since the Ultron ahd no sunshade and the Zeiss just an insignificant small one) BUT focussing in a hurry on the same subjects was easier wtith the IIa supeimposed dot than with the ST split image. p
  5. I have both bought and sold at Westlicht in Vienna, Most recently at the Leica auctions. Their comission charges are quite stiff, but their catalogues are excellent distributed both on paper and online (take a look), and appeal to a wide audience. Quite a number of years ago I sold some duplicates at Christies but they did not follow my minimum bid requirement, so I never used them again. Peter Coeln at Westlight preferred not to receive a whole series of items, rather single, valuable objects p.
  6. Interesting historical stuff about millitary cameras on page 300 or so, I presume that the green Nikonos V ones might also qualify if only as tools for war reporters, as according to rumour they were popular for jungke use during the Vietnam wars. p.
  7. most interesting piece about ancient instruments used to set exposure before automation made them superfluous. Some of these instruments ,like the zeiss, are worth having just for their aesthethical appeal. Batteries die in a matter of months or years while photocells die in a matter of decades, but design remains to be enjoyed for centuries. p.
  8. my memory of the shutters may indeed be wrong, but I do recall worrying about the metal ones and in spite of the C7 having a larger view the adjustable bit was attractive. p.
  9. In my inspection of ancient posts to learn about experiences with classic film apparati I have arrived at page 383 and discover that the venerable Canon rangefinder that preceded the C-7 is mentioned. I recall that one as sturdy with a selectable rangefinder view, and its LTM mount would take leica lenses as well as Canons- And as pointed out above, also the ecellent new "Voigtländer" ones. I preferred the VI-T to the C7 because the cloth shutter curtain was not so sensitive to being touched as the metal one was when changing films. But eventually the M3 won. p
  10. SPs many illusttrated and insightsful descripptions of change in India ought to be assembled in a book. The changes he describes can be seen in many different countries. p.
  11. if you are willing to wait for perfection, Master mechanic Andrea Schønfelder at Olbrich's repair shop in Göttingen will fix any old east German camera, I recently had my Exacta "vest pocket" from the late 1930es expertly revived by her team there. p.
  12. Sirs, I do occasionally explore this site, and find your ancient posts ad cameras at bygone times interesting, However, on recent visits, Forum access is almosty impossible without conquering the long text obstacle where one has to agree to sell ones soul - at least in order to get out of that textual trap one has to agree to something (probably unenforceable in Europe). I appreciate the intentions of your site revamp : presumably well meaning , traffic-generating and the obstacle course probalbly demanded by some unreasonable legal entity , but please reinstate a quick way to access the forum. p.
  13. I very much doubt that KW would have succumbed to the more recent temptation of selling their cameras via superfluous bling appaling to less serious collectors. At gthe time when that camera was built there were absolutely no potential collectors of Kw peoducts. But do keep it, Technologically it was a predecessor of the Asahi Pentax even if its thread mount was narrower and the Zeiss Contax SLR pioneered M42 and hence a piece of phototechnohistory. p.
  14. since it seems to be useful to illustrate points, I enclose a snap of a praktica with the prism fitting inside its hood. (several versions of this exists as well) p.
×
×
  • Create New...