The Kodak Signet 80 - The End of the Line

[craigd]

<p>Nice work! As you say, it's not a visually appealing camera (which to me is just about a deal-killer; the camera itself is part of the aesthetic experience of photography), but the results are very good. The bowl of green pears is superb, and I like the portrait as well.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p><strong>JDM</strong>, I haven't tried the Signet 35 yet. The prices seem too high for what it is and forget the ones military ones colored black or green. While no show pony, the Signet 80, I think is a hidden gem that costs next to nothing.</p>

<p><br /> <strong>Craig</strong>, Thanks, I hear you about a cameras appearance, though I tend to go by what feels good in my hands.</p>

[photo5]

<p>I bought a Kodak Signet 35 years ago at a flea market for $12. Never shot film through it, but what a great looking camera! Bought the Kodak 35 recently on ebay for $31, and is also a great looking camera, don't plan to shoot film through it either.</p>

[ralf_j.]

<p>Wonderful results Louis, i love all your photos, especially the flower pot at the Kauffman gardens. Well done and thanks for sharing with us.</p>

[rdm]

<p>Thank you Louis for presenting those photos. I have always wanted this camera, currently i have 3 signet 40's and use one all the time , I love the photos i get with it. I fear now that all who see this thread might now want a Signet 80 also and drive the eBay prices up .. I will wait some months til i look again for one. I seldom see them for sale with the extra lenses. And when i do they never have the viewfinder. Those are usually sold separately, going for allot more money to people using them on other cameras.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>As I recall, our Signet 35 may have been a military model.<br>

Certainly, our 4x5 Graphics were the Combat Model from the Marine Corps (the head of the Missouri Basin Project of the River Basin Surveys of the Smithsonian was an old Marine, not a <em>former</em> Marine, please note).</p>

<p>Here's the Combat Graphic in use in the summer of 1962.</p><div></div>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p><strong>Dave</strong>, I hope you continue to enjoy your Kodak collection.</p>

<p><strong>Ralf</strong>, Thanks for stopping and taking a look and sending some feedback. Much appreciated.</p>

<p><strong>Dan</strong>, Good luck in your search, I found the camera and lenses quite cheaply on the Bay. I'm talking lunch money here. The viewfinder is quite difficult to find but I did find one in Canada but the guy wanted more than I paid for the whole outfit shown above so I passed. I really don't <em>need</em> it but if anyone had one laying around and wanted to part with it, for a reasonable sum, I would gladly take it off your hands :o). Hard to find that one for sure.</p>

<p><strong>JDM</strong>, If it was one of those black or green ones, it would have been nice to have since they seem to be going for over $500 each. I'm sure there are some collectors willing to foot that bill. Neat, green Combat Graphic and ever lovable Tiltall! Is that you shooting?</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Yes, that's a much younger me. I was then First Mate on the good ship Sully Site 39SL4, doing archaeological salvage work on a site soon to be covered by the Oahe Reservoir.</p>

[chuck_foreman1]

Excellent Presentation! I knew there were multiple Signets, but I don'T have the over view.. maybe I need to get one ! If it's readily available I would love to have one and a least one alternate lens just to show it off as possible. The results are great, but as one mentioned the old adage..it's not in the camera, but the photogrpaher. I have a 101mm Ektar "L"umenized .. Is that different than the lens for the Medalist? I guess the Medalist pre-dates this a bit and may not be "lumnized" but it is an Ektar of the same or similar focal length!

I too loved the Pear bowl and the Flower pot shots. The roots were great too!

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Thanks Chuck and Les!</p>

[jason_withers]

<p>Hi Louis.<br>

I recently picked up the Signet 80, but the 50mm lens it came supplied with doesn't have the red index mark like it states in the manual. Instead, it has these brackets on the index ring like in the pictures of your camera you posted. Once you set the shutter speed on the speed dial, do you need to set the same speed in the bracket on the lens itself? <br>

The manual states you would then get your exposure value (EV) from the meter and then turn the ring on the lens to set that same EV; if you cannot turn to the appropriate EV, you need to presumably change to a different shutter speed to allow you to obtain the correct EV. If you have to lower the shutter speed on the lens ring, I am guessing you also have to lower to the same shutter speed on the speed dial?<br>

Maybe it is just me, but I think this is a bit of a complicated camera to use initially with these different settings. I wonder what potential customers thought in 1958 about these settings. This is my first rangefinder camera though, so I don't have too much to compare this to. The rest of the camera controls are really cool like the film injection loading system and the very bright viewfinder. Mine did not come supplied with a case and there are no eyelets on the camera itself to attach a strap, so I had to just carry the camera around in my hand. I've never seen a Kodak camera (other than some folders) that do not have eyelets on the camera body. </p>

[william_degoey]

<p>Beautiful results. I just picked one of these up at an antique mall nearby. $22! Cant wait to use it, after seeing this thread I just had to have one. Very excited for my results. Sadly, mine only came with the 50mm kit lens, but is should perform well.</p><div></div>