The Relatively Unknown Acon

<p>Rick, wonderful post as always. These simple cameras somehow make it easy to get something good out of them.</p>

<p>Pretty little camera, Rick. Looks very well-made. Thanks for posting about it. Nice pictures, too, though of course you must realize that "Three" really should have been posted third in the sequence rather than fourth!</p>

<p>The Acon seems a little primitive for 1957; the <a href="00YB9g">Konica III</a>, which came out that year has a hinged back and an auto-reset frame counter, for example. But the photographic results are nice, and according to Marc's ad scans, the Acon cost a lot less than the Konica.</p>

<p>Great Post Rick. Your camera knowledge just amazes me, but the beauty, eloquence and presentation of your images, even more. Thank you for everything you bring to this Forum.</p>

Wow.. that is a wonderful looking and rare beast.. I wish I would stumble across such pleasing examples. I think SP is right you're just making them yourself and then filling in the background.. no wonder they're rare... just kiddin' Lovely shooting! You've got a great feel for exposure and know exactly how to bring the contrast or texture to the front! Loved that opening shot with the light on the Fall leaves. I see waht Cliff mentions with some design queues from Zeiss Ikon but more compact and subtle the top piece is exquisite. That focus lever and it's limited throw made me think of the Canon QIII etc Didn't you not too long ago show us some "Ruby" cameras they had some similarity? This is physically quite smaller? You ought to do some ,,,umm porn.. for us with all these early interesting Japanese RFs You have a great eye for product presentation!

<p>I'm pleased you all found the Acon interesting! <strong>Louis</strong>, your comments regarding the pleasure to be derived from using simple cameras is so true; if one can accept the limitations and just concentrate on working within them, one finds a certain freedom to just concentrate on composition and lighting.</p>

<p><strong>Peter</strong>, you've summed it up with a great description; it does have the "less is more" look of a classy dresser! "Afternoon" does have a flow to it, mainly due to the long shadows, I suspect. A secret factory is not a bad idea, <strong>SP</strong>; I'll bear it in mind. Regarding horses, I'm no expert, but they do age in much the same fashion as we humans, with sway backs, pot bellies and bony heads. I'm vaguely acquainted with the horses in the photograph, and know them to be past their prime. Regarding their posing, <strong>John</strong>, Peter G. and I have this complex technique involving dry-ice, Blu-Tack and vast quantities of drawing pins...</p>

<p><strong>Starvy,</strong> the camera was probably a little dated when it was launched, as <strong>Craig</strong> has noted, which wouldn't have contributed to any potential success. I don't think it made a big splash in the US market...You're right <strong>Cliff</strong>; when I first saw the camera it reminded me of a scaled-down version of the early Canon rangefinders, so we are on the same track. No removable element. And my "no practical use" comment was a bit flippant; I was really just trying to convey that it's not the sort of camera I'd choose for serious photography.</p>

<p>Thanks, <strong>JDM</strong>,<strong> Rob</strong> and <strong>Donnie</strong>, it's nice to know one's efforts are appreciated. <strong>Tony</strong>, many thanks, I'm sure you're not missing a Wairarapa winter...Marvelous contribution, <strong>Marc</strong>, and you've solved the mystery of the Acon 35 Mk.IIL; pretty much the same, but with a rapid wind lever and faster shutter. Many thanks.<strong> Chuck</strong>, the camera is actually a tad heavier and larger than the Yamoto cameras you're referring to, and a step up in quality. I really appreciate the understated design and appearance of the Acon. </p>

<p>Regarding the "product shots", the Fuji photolab my family struggle on with needed something to fill a blank wall space; they're concentrating more on keen amateurs than the public at large, and suggested that a big print of a few of the old cameras I've photographed for this forum might be interesting. I created a 1.2m x 70cm (roughly 4 foot x 2.5 foot) collage featuring Fujica cameras, plus a few pics from some of the old lenses I've recently been playing with, and attach a copy below. Any comments welcome. It's currently being printed on fine canvas and I'm looking forward to seeing it.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>At the price in the ad, it must have been quite a deal in its day since some cameras in that price ranged lacked rangefinders. Great shots with good sharpness. Thanks fo posting.</p>

<p>Rick I love the montage! What a great idea!</p>

<p>As far as our... uhm... "methods"... I was hesitant to mention glue around horses, especially older ones;)</p>

<p>I agree with Peter -- the mural is wonderful!</p>

<p>My first camera !<br />Bought with lawn cutting and babysitting money in 1958.<br>

My life-long love affair with photography began here.<br>

Your review was excellent.<br>

Thank you. And thanks for introducing me to photo net.<br>

Graeme, on Saturna Island.</p>

<p><strong>Graeme</strong>, welcome to Photo.net! Those gulf islands must be a romantic place to live, not unlike our New Zealand lifestyle, in many respects. The Acon appears under several names and guises, but it's certainly an attractive little camera. Thanks for the response.</p>

<p>How great! Looks like my kind of camera.</p>

<p>Hello Rick -- My 1960 Popular Photography Buying Guide lists the Acon II as a Burke & James import, with a Vita f3.5 lens and a list price of $39.50. No illustration of the camera appears in the guide. Based on other members' messages about 1957 and 1958 Buying Guide listings, I'd guess that Burke & James were blowing out remainders of the Acon II in 1960. The Acon reminds me of a scaled-down Aires IIIL, both in function and angular appearance.</p>

<p>Hi <strong>Roger</strong>... Yes, the Acon does have design similarities with the Aires IIIL, from a family of cameras I admire. This "blocky" look seems to have progressed to the later Topcons, too.</p>

It does have a very neat and tidy look about it. Quite handsome.