Houghton Butcher Autorange Lens Movements

[wideopeniris]

<p>Partly out of curiosity and because I like to tinker with cameras as well as use them, I bought a Houghton Butcher Ensign Autorange 20. This is a 120 roll film camera with coupled rangefinder from the 1930's - its a bit warty and it had shutter troubles (another matter - the 'mulchro' is just worn out really).<br>

strange thing is it has rise and cross slide movements. Now the lens is a triplet 100mm F4.5 Ensar Anastigmat. It must have a coverage barely capable of covering the 6x9 film area even stopped down. So why does it have movements too? Any ideas? How are you meant to know (there being no ground glass) where to set them to?<br>

I cant see why you would want them on a camera with this lens! But they went to a fair amount of mechanical trouble to provide them.<br>

Grateful for any insights....<br>

Kevin.</p>

[Dustin McAmera]

<p>I have an Ernemann Bob I for 6.5 x 4 cm on 127 roll film that has movements (it's <a href=" ) . I haven't done anything like a rigorous test, but I have taken a couple of pictures with a bit of rise, and the lens seemed to cover ok (it's a Detektiv Aplanat 8 cm f/6.3; like a Rapid Rectilinear - no idea what that ought to do to coverage, but the RR is a predecessor of triplets, so I would expect the edges of the image circle might be a bit questionable). I wonder if your camera was also available with classier Ross lenses?<br>

Using the movements other than by guesswork is another matter. My camera has only a little 'brilliant' reflex finder, that's hard enough to use for framing, without any allowance for movements.<br>

The hinged back looks permanently attached on this one. There were bigger Bobs though, and I suspect the whole family of cameras were simply made to the same design, and some of the others could accept a plate back and ground glass.<br>

On the other hand, I wouldn't put it past our forefathers to have had wisdom we have lost; maybe the camera came with some little tables about how to use the rise.</p>

<p> </p>

[wideopeniris]

<p>Thats a pretty machine. Much tidier than mine. As I said its a bit warty- there are alot of 'zeiss bumps' under the leather and several worn corners. The paint is chipped and the camera has the air of many years hard labour. The shutter is really worn out. There is more and some photos here:<br>

<a href="http://wideopeniris.blogspot.com/">http://wideopeniris.blogspot.com/</a><br>

This camera is from before the ross era. I have yet to acquire an ensign with a ross lens. My autorange 220 also has the ensar. When stopped down to f8 or smaller its indistinguishable from a tessar - quite sharp to the corners and similar contrast (same number of air- glass interfaces). I'm expecting this one to be less contrasty as it has no coatings.<br>

Kingslake gives the field of a rapid rectilinear as about 50 degrees - and the cooke lens at around 45 degrees although its all a bit subjective depending on how soft you can tolerate the edges. So likely to be similar.<br>

Kevin.</p>