Getting back on the Pony

Back in 1971, the first adjustable camera I owned was a Kodak Pony 135

Model C -- 44 mm f/3.5 Anaston (coated triplet) lens, front element

scale focus, drop-in film loading to rival some of the most modern

point&shoot junk, Flash 300 shutter with ASA synch connector, and it

took 35 mm film! I was in heaven; no more of that 620 stuff for me,

no sir (and never mind that a couple years later I replaced an Exa II

35 mm SLR with a Kodak Reflex II and thought it a step up).

 

With the camera I got a Gossen Sixtomat meter that I still carry with

my plate cameras, and a Kodak #2 push-on close-up lens that fit. I

used that camera intensively for a couple years, until I dropped it

and chipped the body, causing a light leak. Disgusted, not willing to

carry a roll of black tape to cover the leak in order to keep using

the camera, I gave it to my brother (he traded it for an Argus C3, I

think) and saved up for the purchase that turned out to be the Exa.

 

I've wanted another Pony 135 ever since finding this forum. They were

good little cameras; the Anaston is a pretty capable triplet, and

reasonably fast at f/3.5. The first two models of Pony 135 (the first

a 135 version of the Pony 828, followed a couple years later by the

Model B) had a 51 mm f/4.5 Anaston in a Flash 200 on a retracting

mount; after the Model C came the Pony II and Pony IV with body

redesigns and, on the IV, an upgrade to the exceptional 4-element

Anastar (that camera is pretty high on my list for the future).

Meantime, however, I've already been reminded of why I loved my Pony

back in 7th grade.

 

This one came to me for $10 via eBay, cosmetically exceptional and

needing only a bit of cleaning. A week or so ago, I got around to

cleaning it up, degumming the sticky shutter, resetting the focus, and

cleaning the inside of the viewfinder. The camera now looks almost

new -- a paint wear-through above one corner of the viewfinder is the

only sign that it's spent, at a minimum, forty-plus years in its

everready case (even the case is in excellent shape). I got a flash

that fits it at the same time, also a Kodak product with no corrosion

at all, but it takes only bayonet bulbs, of which I haven't yet found

any at a price I can stand. I'm working on solutions for that --

either bulb adapter or sourcing reasonably priced bulbs -- but I'm

also thinking of simply making an ASA to PC adapter that would fasten

onto the camera's synch connector and let me use the Gold Crest BC-7 I

recently got from Glenn Thoreson. The camera has no shoe, but I have

a bracket that I also use with my Argoflex EF.

 

Of course, on this forum, we don't care what the camera looks like, so

much as how it works. This one works perfectly. Drop in the film,

make sure the leader is under the deflector at the takeup end, advance

once and the nub on the spool catches the film and pulls it around, no

threading through the slot and hoping it stays caught. Put the back

on, release and advance twice, set the counter to the length of the

roll (it's a count-down type, so I always know how much film is left

instead of having to remember if I have a 24 or 36 loaded), and I'm

ready. The shutter is manually cocked, and the film advance has a

lock and release. Advance is deadly accurate, though I have found

that turning the rewind will pull the film backward about 1.5 mm,

which messes up the spacing.

 

I did all this stuff with a roll of the bulk loaded Tri-X I have as

(at present) my only B&W 35 mm film. I didn't bother with a meter, I

just went out and shot.<div></div>

You'll have to put up with one more view of the camera before I show you results -- the top plate is a fine example of simplicity, nothing there that doesn't need to be (though I'd rather have seen ASA speeds than film product names on the reminder dial), but everything that's needed firmly in place. There are two almost hidden levers at the joint between back and top plate on the right, near the advance knob -- one is the advance release, which unlocks the advance; the other, less visible, is the rewind release, which simply disengages the silent ratchet that otherwise keeps the takeup spool from turning in reverse.<div></div>

And now it's time to see what that Anaston and Flash 300 can do. When I was 11, I used that close up lens to shoot tiny wildflowers, which came out 2-3 times life size in a 4x6 print. I don't yet have a close up lens for this one (got one on the way, but it's the wrong push-on size, I'll probably have to glue felt inside the spring prongs), so the closest I can get is what's on the lens -- but there are a fair number of SLRs that won't focus down to 30 inches with the kit lens, while it's routine for the Model C.<div></div>

When not trying to see how close you can get, the camera's operation is pretty routine -- look at light conditions, set shutter and aperture, set focus by scale (all nicely arranged to be visible from above, no looking at the front of the camera to set it as with some of my older pieces), cock shutter, aim and hold steady, squeeze that nice, soft top release, then release the advance and wind on. Repeat 35 times before rewinding... ;)<div></div>

If you're up early in the morning, as I am (to take my wife to work -- she likes to be there at 6:30!), you get to see a fair number of sunrises. And if you've been paying attention to photographic work, you realize that you don't have to have color film to shoot a sunrise (though it certainly doesn't hurt).<div></div>

Oops, that one wasn't resized down to 511.

 

Here's another, a few seconds later, a vertical with the parking lot cropped off the bottom.<div></div>

When the sun is rising, don't spend all your time looking into the light -- you'll miss what's happening as the light begins to fall on the land.<div></div>

Of course, there are things to photograph later in the day, too. Everyone should know their place -- this is mine (or at least the street it faces).<div></div>

Speaking of oaks, they're always willing to pose, and they have such interesting shapes...<div></div>

This time of year, though, it's pretty dark up inside the oak's canopy. The tired old pine behind it is a little more interesting from close below.<div></div>

Okay, that's enough for now. I've got a roll of Max 400 in the Pony now, I'll see what I have to say about that in a week or so, when I get it processed.

Thanks for this stuff, Don. Been reading up on yer HC-110 notes as well, giving it a shot tonight on some FP4.

Donald; this lens the 44mm Anaston; has high index thorium glass. Sometimes they are abit "tea colored". The thoriated glass makes a fine sharp lens. The higher index for its era a nice tool. In the late 1950's and early 1960's the shoe store in the little town I lived in then had a X ray screen deal to show how shoe fit too. Radiation wasnt that much a concern then; or seat belts; or drinking from garden hoses; or bike helmets. I still use radioative lenses too. See if yours is; it is a chance it is. Just done sleep with it; or keep in your pants pocket. The newest Kodak lens that i have that is radioactive is a 113mm printing ektar; from the mid 1970's. It will move a gieger counter; so will the aero ektars; and 1970's vintage coleman lantern spare mantels too.

Ah, nice, Kelly. I thought my Super Takumar 1.4/50 was the only radioactive lens in my stable. I've got two of these Model C Ponies (the other one has been dropped on the tripod mount and has loose chunks in the bottom of the body, though I might be able to fix it since all the pieces appear to be there). The high index glass is probably responsible for the Pony's Anaston being so much better than the 50/2.8 Baltar on my Jubilette (another triplet, but uncoated). These are, in my experience, simply astoundingly good cameras for what they cost, either new or now.

 

No, as you suggest, I don't keep either lens in a sleeping room -- two are here in my computer room, and one on the counter in the kitchen (by the back door) now. I'd also never use one for a loupe, but other than that, they don't worry me much. If they don't fog film, they're not going to be a major worry when I carry the camera an hour a day, at most. And if they were *really* hazardous, someone would have raised a big enough stink for the government to try to take them all away and send them to Hanford...

Domald; I have used a 44mm Anaston on a Pony that has thorated radioactive glass. I am sure not sure that ALL of the 44mm Anaston's are thorated; or it was a mid design change or drop. Most all of the radioactive Kodak lenses I have are a tad tea colored; radioactive aging. Along term UV exposure will lighten them up alot. Even a element removed and placed on a window sill will bleach way clearer. A kitchen window is not a brick wall filter for UV; a tiny fraction does get thru. I had some aero ektar parts outside; and the squirells and raccoons kept moving them; once many yards.

nice write up and photos....

 

 

<p><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BrPh">an earlier thread on THE PONY</a>

Well, Kelly, these Ponies probably aren't radioactive, then -- The thorium glass in my Super Takumar (which is at least five years newer than this Anaston) was quite yellow (I put it out in the sun for a few days and it's lightened quite a bit) but neither of these Anastons is the least bit yellow, both perfectly water clear. Regardless how they get there, though, the Anaston is one of the best triplets I've ever had the pleasure to use.

 

And thanks, W.J. That other thread was what inspired me to get this Pony cleaned up. :)

The Signet 35 also uses a 44mm F3.5 lens; but it is a non radioactive 4 element 3 group Ektar; with unit foucing; ie the entire lens block moves to focus. The front elment focusing radioactive 44 mm f/3.5 Anaston might be a better type of "non unit focus" type of design; since the optical glass is more trick/special; that the older signet 35. The old WW2 kodak 35 has a Tessar type non-Ektar lens; in which the front cell is used to focus. The added rangefinder later gave it its famed beauty :)

Donald, nice camera. I recently did a CLA for a Pony that belongs to one of the photographers at work. It's similar to yours -- has the collapsible lens. Nice little camera, and from your shots, excellent results.

 

I picked up a Pony two months ago when I bought a Box Tengor (and the Pony and a Bullet 620 camera) for $9.95 on eBay. It's a very comfortable camera to hold, don't you think?

 

Sometimes Kodak really hit the nail on the head with their cameras. The original Signet was another winner, I believe.

Hi Donald; I am not sure if ALL radioactive glass degrades/looks to tea color when older. I do know that my 1940's thru 1970's Kodak radioactive lenses all are abit "tea colored"; plus a the radioactive Pentax; and Olympus OM lenses too. <BR><BR>Maybe Michael Briggs can whether explain; he has some info on radioactive lenses on the net; and hangs out in the LF camera arena here.

The Signet 35 is another one on my short list, though it's got strong competition from a number of other 35 mm RF cameras with much faster lenses (like that Minoltina that was showcased here yesterday). The Pony IV, though, I can probably get for another $10 if I keep my eyes open...

Kodak cameras always had good lenses. Unfortunately, their shutters were horrendously bad. Perhaps the worst shutter ever devised was used on the Signet 35. There is little use in pairing a good lens with a lousy shutter. You need both. My favourite Pony is the Pony II. It at least has a semi-reliable shutter, albeit single speed.

Honestly, the only problems I've ever had with either Ponies (Flash 200 and Flash 300 shutters) or Reflex II (Flash Kodamatic) have been gummed lubricants leading to slow/sticky operation -- common enough in cameras that were made in the 1950s and early 1960s, by any maker. I don't recall ever hearing anything bad about the Retina shutters (unless you count the notorious cocking rack). And if you count the incredible number of rotary shutters Kodak sold in simple cameras, I'd have to say they made a lot more good shutters than bad.

 

That said, the Signet 35 does have a poor reputation on the basis of its shutter, partly due to the fact that this otherwise sophisticated camera was none the less manually cocked (no linkage to the film advance, though every other 35 mm RF of the day cocked on advance). To me, this could be good news or bad news, since it also implies some means of making intentional double exposures if desired (impossible with most 35 mm cameras, barring trickery with the rewind that still doesn't permit precise overlay effects). More speeds would certainly have been welcome in an RF camera with excellent lens, however, and the shutter seems a little on the complex side for its limitations -- the Flash 300 has the same speeds and synch, with half the parts and no mechanical M synch delay.

 

Still, I have a couple very usable cameras with fewer speeds than that. As long as the shutter works, there's no great reason to complain.

These came out really well, Donald. The Pony cameras can be a great deal (read dirt cheap...like $4).

 

I've seen so many comments about the shutters on this and other Kodaks (Signets) being poor, it makes me wonder how many people have ever been into one. Of the dozen or so Signets I've serviced, none of them, -not one-, had anything broken inside the shutter. Like most leaf shutters, they are suseptable to dirt, and simply need to be cleaned every decade or so. Kind of like a lot of other cameras.

Thanks, Dean. I'm pretty pleased with this Pony; I don't know when I've seen a cleaner camera in its age range. As you say, all the shutter needed was cleaning, as most leaf shutters do periodically. And it's damned hard to argue with a competent 35 mm camera for $10 or less. Gotta keep my eye open for a Signet (and/or get at least one of my Bantam RF cameras serviced so I can try 35 mm in them).