Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide 100

<p><br />This unique camera as wonderful as it is, intimidates me like no other camera. I will explain the reasons later. The camera was introduced in 1959 and went out of production in 1965, to be replaced by the Brooks Veriwide with interchangeable backs in 1970’s. The original Veriwide 100 had a 58mm X 92 mm image with 7 exposures on 120 film. The newer version’s image is less at 55mm X 79mm(presumably with 8 exposures.) The lens is its most outstanding feature, a 47mm f/8 Super Angulon with 6 elements in 4 groups( a highly respected view camera lens.). It also has a Compur shutter, 1-500, B. It needs manual cocking but there is double exposure prevention. As impressive as all that is, it is not much bigger or heavier than a Nikon F. Its rather plain in appearance but beauty is in it’s simplicity. Mine has a bubble level but later versions have a 3-way level. As an option the camera came with a Leitz viewfinder(hugely expensive now just by itself) that perfectly showed a 100 degree angle. Unfortunately I do not have that, instead I have the Mamiya viewfinder for the later Brooks Veriwide. It seems to work just as well. It’s a Mamiya, how bad can it be! I still wish I had the Leitz all the same. Actually You do not have to have a viewfinder at all, you can use the folding wire frame and that is more than adequate. Focusing is by zone. When its set at 6 ft and at f22 the DOF is 3 ft to Infinity. Focusing is done by zone focusing. With distance set at 6 ft, everything from 3 ft to infinity is in focus.<br>

I came by this camera in an estate sale in which there were boxes of camera gear. I didn’t know what I really had until several years later. The camera was in a rather plain unremarkable case and I assumed the camera was a Russian model. When I discovered what I had ,I then began to test the shutter and it appeared to be jammed. It got put away for several more years until one day in tinkering with the shutter and with the back open I could manipulate the film gate to create a facsimile of film and only then did the shutter perform flawlessly. The double exposure mechanism caused this. I have read in several forums where people complained their shutter was inoperable and either sold them or at great expense sent them for repair. All it needs is film!<br>

I also discovered the cameras value is right up there in the league of mint Rollei’s. My expense was minimal for all the gear I got but this was the real gem of them all. Yet I waited several more years to put film in it and I did so because panoramic and ultra wide images don’t really appeal to me. Ken Rockwell indicates the lens is equivalent to an 18mm lens of a 35mm system. In my photography I use a normal lens a lot and a 100mm frequently. Sometimes I use a 35mm lens and only rarely a 24mm lens for some interiors. So using this camera is quite a leap for me and may explain the difficulties I had with the following images. I found composing a decent image to be quite challenging with the 100 degree angle bringing so many elements in the frame that it is overwhelming. So bear with me and keep in mind the following photos are to demonstrate what the camera is capable of. I thought it was time to bring back banality to the forum anyway—it’s been missing lately (I mean you guys are putting up quality work.)<br>

All shots were in bright sun shot at 125 sec at f22. The film was T-Max 400 which I mistakenly thought was Tri-X and as a result the images were underdeveloped by a full minute in HC-110 B(I hate that when that happens. How I got that film I will never know.) I did compensate with dark values and contrast in Photo Shop. Another issue was scanning the long negatives. I had to jerry rig the film holder with tape in the 4 X 5 slot to get all 92mm length.<br>

All photos were handheld; perhaps a tripod would have helped. I was very conscious of holding the camera level for fear of convergence and distortion.<br>

In summary in the right hands, this is one heck of a camera. It was a definitely a learning experience and I did enjoy that part. I definitely need more practice and a better eye. First some camera porn.</p>

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

<p>Daniel,</p>

<p>There is no reason to create new threads for every photo. Simply reply to your first thread and attach the photo to the reply.</p>

<p>That is one really nice looking camera and it is doing a fine job. I guess someplace in the<br>

hazy section of my memory I have heard of Plaubel before but I have never seen one until<br>

now. Thanks for posting.</p>

<p>I was aware of this camera but have never seen one, so thanks for this post! It looks really neat and quite compact and as you say, the Super Angulon is a superb lens. I have 75mm and 90mm SA's for my 5x4 camera.<br>

I will check out your pictures now!</p>

This thread is continued here:<P>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00blrc">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00blrc</a>