Musing about weird camera equipment

[walter_degroot]

<p>there are many diferet approacges<br>

to camera design. some really not strange<br>

the B&H Foton a motorized 35mm<br>

rf or the Kodak Motormatic- sort of as<br>

Kodak signet with a motor.<br>

an excuse excuse to use more film.<br>

the Canon Dial really strange., or the<br>

yashica samuri, which resembled<br>

a movie camera but is a half frame 35<br>

gralflex made the grafmatic , looked like a std holder but held 8<br>

shots , but works like the ols Shich<br>

razor.<br>

click click 8 shots.<br>

there was a camera-radio so you<br>

did not need to lug two Items to<br>

the beach. this was a TUBE radio.</p>

<p>the prims for the old waist level<br>

practicas set on top og the W L finder.</p>

<p>My old 6 x 9 folding camera <br>

had a poor Viewdinder, but there<br>

was a 35mm "kodachrome" kit<br>

for the 620 camera.<br>

a perfect way to take photos without<br>

heads. or at all.<br>

many of the semi-wierd cameras<br>

were basic box cameras<br>

made in bright colors.<br>

the Beacon with a built in<br>

" heasdlight" style flash<br>

and no features.<br>

Kodak and others had oddly styled<br>

cameras. Market research may have<br>

reported these cameras would sell.</p>

<p>were we ( the usa )_ so kind to<br>

Nazi Germany that we made<br>

Leica clones but they did not<br>

have a 39mm lens mount.<br>

is that weird or just stupid?<br>

The japanese made 35mm cameras<br>

with a 24 x 32 frame. meaning How<br>

do you mound a Kodachrome slide?<br>

Kodachome asa 10 was the leading<br>

35mm film at that time.<br>

it is more short-sighted than<br>

weird.</p>

<p>sometimes different is not weird.<br>

the argus c-3 was different but<br>

practical and very usable.<br>

an off-ball film loader that clipped<br>

on a film real ( I have the 127<br>

version somewhere)<br>

you clipped the spookl on the</p>

<p>device yanked on the paper and supposedly the film slid easily on the reel.<br>

actually it was easier to hand load<br>

the film.<br>

I have a lens hood with two<br>

overlapping doors so you can take<br>

photos of your friend as twins. <br>

some things never change. I still use<br>

the same film tan as in 1948 or so<br>

the FR special. even two rolls of<br>

ektachome at once and then two<br>

more.. i really edited this </p>

 

[donald_miller5]

Spencer, thread filled up fast. I was talking about the first case, but the second case is something I would have suggested also. I do not know why I did

not think of that at the same time.

[donald_miller5]

<p>Regarding the Kodak thing. I just think that while many companies were competing for the professional with innovations with diminishing returns kodak saw a huge ignored market where people just wanted to point and shoot conveniently and they would buy a lot of film. These people did not want the complicated aspect and would spend a lot of money on film. Kodak said you can have your market and we will gladly take this niche. You can look down your nose at Kodak but they knew what they wanted and did a good job. Today these same people today say I just use my cell phone, what else do I need and it works for them It is just reality.</p>

[Sandy Vongries]

<p>Spencer, an interesting thread. Part nostalgia, and considerable new (old) weird photo trivia. Thanks!</p>

[polka]

<p>I adapted a TTL prism from a broken Kiev60 on my Rolleiflex T . The meter can be used<br>

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

[tom_rittenhouse1]

<p>At least 2 35mm cameras with interchangeable backs.<br>

1. The old Zeiss Contaflex, had a leaf shutter too.<br>

2. The rolleiflex 2002/3003, sort of a shrunken 6x6.<br>

There were all kinds of backs for the Nikon f. Polaroid, pin register, vacuum, and who know what else?<br>

Back in the old days there were all kinds of weird and wonderful cameras around. Panaramic cameras with rotating lens and a curved film plane, a sub 35mm TLR...</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Tom, if you are referring to the 35mm Contaflex, I once had the early 45mm f2.8 Tessar model (excellent B&W rendition and tonality from its lens), which I think had an aerial view through its prism and only central groundglass donut and cental split image RF. The Leicaflex standard SLR also had an aerial viewfinder that distinguished it from the later (1970s?) groundglass and prism Leicaflex and Leicaflex II cameras.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>we are in two groups. most here are the second part.<br>

the first JUST wanted pictured - prints.<br>

the second group- most of us- were interested in equipment..<br>

and in at least my case tried to work around the limitations inposed on us by old film and camera limitations.<br>

as couple of examples, my ultrablitz monojet had weak ni-cad cells, a few years before I could easily buy better ones.<br>

recycling was slow and the VIBRATOR, made it slower<br>

the flash was weak and asa 10 or even 25 or 32 film limited my options.<br>

:later newer flashes used ni-caDS AND i CARRIED A CHARGER AND METER TO TEST CELLS AS <br>

reclycling was slow. MY b-i-l has a honneywell with a HV battery favored by wedding photographers. sorry no it ws exp[ensive to replace.<br>

nd so i struggled on working harder to make things work.<br>

as film got faster and cameras had built-in meters things gradually beceme easier.<br>

al or at least some of the "inovations" were an attempt to make things go better..<br>

<br />in 2002, I finally was given a canon ae-1 with auto exposure and auto flash.<br>

only 20 years after it's introduction!<br>

I missed or bypassed many of the weird and wonderful things that others bough and uded or trid to us.<br>

I m now, with poor vision and at age 80 able to do things with film cameras I only dreamed about 20-25 years ago.<br>

I moved and semi-retired in 1995 and no longe have the old home with a basement darkroom.<br>

and It is hard to read thjose little numbers on cameras or a thhermometer.<br>

but I have not given up.<br>

I have gradually lost onterest in many of the old odd things and narrowed my interests to simpler things.<br>

there is great satisfaction in walking around with a simple or less sim,ple camera and looking for things to shoot. and then, at night, developing the film.</p>

<p>I love to read these musings about thje ways things were, and never will be again.</p>

 

[Sandy Vongries]

<p>Walter -- as regards flash, I had an early Metz with a wet cell shoulder pack battery. My recollection is that it had plenty or power (for its time) and reasonable recycle time, but you had to add distilled water occasionally. It would amuse me if I still had it.</p>

[Tony Parsons]

<p>One item I feel would have great appeal would be a hot-shoe mounted laser, to remove the inconvenient people who step into a shot just when you are ready to take the picture. Then again, they'd just lie around in ungainly attitudes, making the place look untidy. I dare say it could be used to remove other inconvenient people as well, and would add a new dimension to photographing politicians . . . .</p>

<p>Tony (tongue firmly in cheek !)</p>