Fish Out of Water; A Nikonos II vs. Calypso Comparison

<p>Let me put this out here; I am not a professional by any means, just an enthusiastic amateur who collects these old film cameras and tries them out if I can. This is also my first comparison, so I'm sure some of you with more keen eyes than me will be able to spot differences if there is any. :)<br /><br />I'm sure some, if not most have heard of the 'Calypso' camera, which was the very short-lived predecessor to the well-known Nikonos line of underwater cameras. I can't really find too much information about these cameras except for the brief timeline of it's life: The camera as produced only from 1960-1962 by a little French company named Spirotechnique. Due to the small size of the company, production numbers weren't large and Nikon took an interest in the self-housed diving camera. They bought the rights to the production of the Calypso and produced initially what was the 'Nikon/Calypso', or Nikonos I in 1963. Essentially the same initial design carried on through the production of the Nikonos III before it was changed to a more SLR-type of camera. I really wish I knew the production numbers of the Calypso but I cannot find much. I only know that earlier models had the 1/1000th shutter speed on the top dial, while later models only went to 1/500. Looking around on eBay and on other various websites there are variations to the design of the camera: some have a chrome nameplate with 'Calypso' written. Others, like mine, just have the script on the camera body itself. Others also have a bold 'MADE IN FRANCE' engraved onto the camera body on the back. My Calypso just has this in very small print by the shutter lock. I do not know what sequence these changes were made.<br /><br />How I got these two cameras are small stories. My Nikonos I found while going to a huge rotary sale locally. They had an entire room just filled with photography and other visual equipment. They had an entire table of just vintage cameras I had to shoulder my way into. While looking, I notice a small booklet of sorts poking out from the top shelf (I'm short and couldn't see it) right next to me. Reaching up, I grab it and the camera that it was attached to. A complete Nikonos II in what looked to be in very decent shape, with a booklet of sorts relating to the camera. Price? A whopping $3! Even the man working the booth agreed it was a lucky buy. Initially it was extremely hard to crack open due to any lubricant being long gone. But since then I keep the seals lubricated if I ever plan to put a roll of film through it. Won't be going underwater though. :)<br /><br />My Calypso I found while cruising through CL while on a trip in Southern California. Dangerous place that is...I was looking and spotted it and realized that it wasn't a Nikonos that someone put 'Calypso' in the title just for clicks....that seal skin gave it away! And my goodness, the price....$450. A quick search on eBay would tell you that's a very good deal. Being with my family, we took a detour to meet the guy outside a busy store. There is was, the camera, the right lens, and even the original lens cap that read, "Calypso PHOT". He told me it was his father's, who bought it new in the early sixties because he was a diving instructor. We agreed on a price of $400 cash and it's probably my favorite souvenir of any trip!<br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13116173_1477627538966347_2340814241860880959_o.jpg" alt="" width="561" height="373" /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13130973_1477627702299664_3155101287314102878_o.jpg" alt="" width="561" height="373" /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13123312_1477627772299657_2885865067430234607_o.jpg" alt="" width="560" height="372" /><br /><br /><br />Superficially they are very similar in many ways, obviously made on the same platform. However, between these two cameras the feel is different when shooting with both!<br /><br /><strong>The differences:</strong><br /><br />-Looking through the viewfinder of both is quite different. I know the Nikonos series are known for their foggy viewfinders from being underwater. Mine is no different, but it is not too bad in the shade. However, the Calypso's viewfinder is absolutely crystal clear! You don't think the Nikonos one is bad until you view through the Calypso. Wonderfully bright and clear. There are no frame marks however, so framing without getting something chopped out is sometimes difficult.<br /><br />-Shutter speed. The Nikonos only goes to 1/500, while my Calypso has up to 1/1000th. The Nikonos also has an 'R' setting to rewind the film, while the Calypso does not need that setting to rewind the film. Speaking of rewinding, the Nikonos is fitted with the little 'crank' which feels pretty flimsy in my opinion. Calypso is fitted with a little knob for rewinding. Its pretty stiff but I'm sure part of it is from non-use. It did cut up my fingers though from the ridges on that knob. <br /><br />-Film advance. They are pretty much equal in all respects, however the Nikonos is quite a bit noiser when advancing the film and for my own camera, it does not 'catch' and I lose a frame from it swinging ll the way back out. I can be a little more careless with the Calypso I have yet to have lost a frame this way.<br /><br />-Now the lens. The Nikonos features a W-Nikkor f/2.5 35mm lens. The Calypso features a Som Berthiot-Flor f/3.5 35mm lens. Unfortunately on the surface of the SBF has a scratch through the bottom corner of the glass, where it does give it some extra flare in I were to shoot in the sun. A lens hood would be wonderful but I would have to find one that fits over this lens without getting in the way of the knobs. The Nikonos has a 'ridge' around the lens that may have helped with sun flare, as well as no imperfections. The 'knobs' themselves for the aperature and zone focusing feel a lot more controlled and refined on the Calypso than the Nikonos, where the focusing knob is very sloppy and the aperture one is a little sticky. Of course, that could just be my camera too.<br /><br />Next post I will be some comparison shots I took with the camera. I tried my best with the focusing because of the differences of the focusing ways of the cameras. (Calypso has just feet in different increments, Nikonos has both feet and meters). Feel free to comment on the differences of the photos!</p>

<p>I tried to be accurate as I could with comparing these photos but they are not as accurate as I would have liked. The zone focusing is a little different on both of them so I tried my best to get the two to match. I also have only done zone focusing a couple times as well. Another difficulty is I could not use a tripod for the both of them, so I resorted to all handheld shots. The Calypso had what looks like a battery area underneath the camera which might hide a tripod mount. However, I couldn't get it off without damaging the cover.<br /><br />With the photos I tried a variety of the apertures and shutter speeds. The photos came out best with apertures larger than f/8, really nice and sharp on my subject (and more forgiving on the zone focusing). I used Kodak Ektar 100 and it was developed and scanned from The Darkroom labs. On a side note; this was the first time using this film and I really like how it came out. Much, much better than whatever 200 film I was using before. <br /><br /><br />Top ones are Calypso, bottom ones are Nikonos. All images are not post-processed.<br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13119991_1477626952299739_1948021236930588615_o.jpg" alt="" width="579" height="383" /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13119965_1477687878960313_6457094215818371585_o.jpg" alt="" width="579" height="383" /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13131195_1477627022299732_2045926125482221902_o.jpg" alt="" width="580" height="382" /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13086630_1477687938960307_3128645039234614462_o.jpg" alt="" width="581" height="383" /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13161774_1477627092299725_3949040572521034982_o.jpg" alt="" width="593" height="391" /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13087128_1477687978960303_6589075960143233500_o.jpg" alt="" width="598" height="395" /><br /><br />Here in these pictures I used with apertures 16-22. Both are sharp all in, showing some nice details and textures. The more obvious differences is that the Calypso appears to give a more warmer tone to it's pictures while the Nikonos has a more colder feel and a bit of haze almost in it's pictures. Next post is some more wide open apertures.</p>

<p>These were more of a wider aperture. Again, top is Calypso, bottom is Nikonos.<br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/r270/13103343_1477627298966371_4341905164613769280_n.jpg?oh=c306a93b054370e250e813b1e4d9ab8e&oe=57AA99AC" alt="" width="535" height="807" /><br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/r270/13138906_1477688168960284_4512009605393152224_n.jpg?oh=40cda108c5c08d36b5c54f984d71f982&oe=57AC153A" alt="" width="538" height="811" /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/r270/13102846_1477627428966358_8881724280387049729_n.jpg?oh=83ca1fe859cb3a8e7377cb62f9f9b527&oe=57AB869A" alt="" width="541" height="815" /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/r270/13082484_1477688302293604_4896952496092295616_n.jpg?oh=816a9f52875c3c0a7f988eb425064c13&oe=579ABFA7" alt="" width="544" height="820" /><br /><br /><br /><br />The bokeh in these were noticeably different. The Calypso has a smoother finish in the non-focused areas whereas the Nikonos looks like it's almost 'bubbly'. The Nikonos also looks a bit more swirly in the background, however the Calypso shows some as well.</p>

<p>Here you can see how the sun flare affects the Calypso vs the Nikonos:<br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xlt1/t31.0-8/13131705_1477627235633044_6566009139871038104_o.jpg" alt="" width="587" height="388" /><br /><br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13131670_1477688165626951_1047986911597383404_o.jpg" alt="" width="585" height="387" /><br /><br /><br />Colors came out beautiful in the Nikonos rather than somewhat muted from the sun glare in the Calypso.</p>

<p>In short, there are some differences to how these two see the picture. Some of the differences are due to my own copies of these cameras and could very well differ from camera to camera. Could they both use a CLA? I'm sure they could, but the shutter speeds are accurate enough to forgo this. These aren't the best quality cameras to shoot with (especially at the Calypso's price); however with zone focusing and their very quiet shutters, they are fun, casual shooters that on a nice sunny day outside can produce some very nice pictures of just walking around downtown. I feel like the Calypso does feel like a more refined camera in the hands and in the feel of using the camera. Not to mention I prefer the warmer tones the lens takes and the overall 'feel' of the picture than the Nikonos..but it's your call whether or not it's worth the price. Between the two, I will be taking the Nikonos out on more adventurous tasks like wading through the lake without worrying if it will be damaged. My Calypso isn't just a shelf queen though, and I really enjoyed taking that camera out and about to actually use the darned thing! <br /><br />Now if someone could tell me what this number meant on the back of my Calypso....obviously a serial number, however who knows how many they made? I have the number '2176' on the back of the lens so I think it's safe to assume they were made together. <br /><br /><img src="https://scontent.fsjc1-3.fna.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13116036_1477627705632997_4350602221911178163_o.jpg" alt="" width="468" height="311" /><br /><br /><br />Hope I did well comparing, it was a fun experiment. :)</p>

<p>concerning viewfinders: I do not think that viewfinders are foggy by design but maybe some are rather prone to dirt and fog than others. I have cleaned quite a few viewinders from inside and outside and sometimes was amazed how crystal clear a +50yrs can be. Maybe a thorough cleaning (wiping the outer surfaces will not help too much) will help with the Nikonos viewfinder, too. <br>

Actually, the idea for the Calypso came from the famous french diver Jacques-Yves Cousteau. The camera was manufactured by the French company ATOMS which so far had been manufacturing leaf shutters used by some other French cameras. Spirotechnique was rather manufacturing diving equipment (and of course were in close contact with Cousteau), they were an independent department of a still existing company, Air Liquide, producing compressed gas for industrial and diving purposes. This company took over sales of the Calypso. </p>

<p>Nice post <strong>Ms Pype</strong> ... an interesting read.</p>

<p>Great!</p>

<p>Useful addition to the www font of knowledge. :)</p>

<p>Well that's interesting, what a lot of time and effort you must have put into this informative post, much appreciated thanks.</p>

<p>Now, I want one.</p>

<p>Intriguing.... Many thanks for you time and efforts, <strong>Katie</strong>.</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-11707-Spirotechnique_Calypso.html</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-11708-Spirotechnique_Calypso.html</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-4227-Nikon_Calypso%20Nikkor%20II.html</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-11618-Nikon_Nikonos%20II.html</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-4240-Nikon_Nikonos%20III.html</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-1995-Nikon_Nikonos%20IV-A.html</p>

<p>http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-12766-Nikon_Nikonos%20V.html</p>

<p>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikonos</p>

<p>Information in the pages these links point to doesn't always agree with information presented so far in this discussion.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well presented Katie! Always enjoy a comparison, and it's great to see the Calypso close and personal. They are a rare beast indeed, and you are very fortunate to acquire one for such a great price.<br>

I have never seen one in the flesh, but have owned all the Nikonos models up to the 1VA from one time or another. Currently have a model 111, and I can report that the viewfinder is quite clear on mine, unlike the model 1 and 11 that I had previously.<br>

The 35mm standard lens is direct from the older Nikon RF cameras, and is quite a good lens. I also have the 28mm UW lens that works much better underwater due to being fully corrected for that application. Of course it can't be used out of the water like the 35.<br>

Look forward to some more classic camera test from you in the future!</p>

<p>Nice history of the Calypso Katie. While I do not recall even seeing a Calypso, I have owned three Nikonos II's. The first camera failed because the rewind mechanism became too sloppy to use effectively and the spacing between frames became variable. This presented a problem with getting prints made from negatives. Prints produced from an automatic printer often printed parts from two frames on one print unless the operator was paying attention. I didn't dare shoot slides with the camera! The winding mechanism on the second camera failed. I finally found the third camera, that I still own, that works perfectly. I purchased the camera at about the same time that waterproof digital cameras were introduced, so I mostly retired the Nikonos.</p>

<p>The solution for your lens hood dilemma might be to find a flexible rubber slip-on hood that Nikon produced for the 35mm lens, assuming that your lens has approximately the same outside diameter as the Nikkor 35mm lens, which appears to be the case, judging from your photos. Mine is shown below. Look for a new-old-stock hood since the rubber tends to stiffen and crack with age and sunlight. I see two of these hoods advertised currently on eBay.</p><div></div>

I would think they couldn't bne used out of water... Stupid me!! I now know a lot about these cameras...

Thanks!! I guess given the age.. trusting the seals would be inviting disaster with salt water and cameras!!

:)

<p>Chuck, new O-ring seals are available for Nikonos cameras. If the seals are good and sufficient O-ring grease is applied, an old Nikonos is as waterproof as when new (down to 160 ft. below the surface, as I recall). The Nikonos cameras work well above water with the standard 35mm lens. Other lenses are designed solely for underwater use. The newer versions of the 35mm lens have the same design as the older versions, but have better coatings, and are therefore less prone to flare. </p>

The problem is that there are also orings inside the camera, which you should not change yourself because its too complicated. So even thougt you use brandnew orings, the camera can be flooded. There are still guys doing this for the Nikonos cameras e g southern nikonos, but it isnt cheap and Im not sure if Calypsos are still serviced

Calypsos are still serviced

I bet even more services were available two years ago when this thread ended!

The above was interesting but I couldn't see the images. All that were there were What am I doing wrong?

 

For whatever it's worth, here are photos from a Nikonos IVa I took years ago. All Ektachromes I believe. I still have the camera.

Search: nikonos | Flickr

I bet even more services were available two years ago when this thread ended!

Oops. Well, it's nice to still be alive to read old threads. :)