gary green

@John Seaman Thanks John. It would be interesting to know how/why Kodak got away with violating Ansco's roll film patent so cheaply? Maybe they were bleeding Ansco dry in legal fees? Kodak didn't fare so well when they violated Polaroid's instant photography patents however.

In the vintage camera collecting world, the Ansco brand usually evokes images of cheap, mass-produced “point-and-shoot” film cameras with fixed-focus, fixed aperture meniscus lenses and single or limited shutter speeds such as the Panda, Anscoflex, and Clipper series of cameras. With the exception of the excellent but over-ambitious Automatic Reflex TLR, any well-equipped camera from the mid-20th century with an Ansco nameplate is likely a simple re-badge of an identical camera from the German Agfa company who purchased Ansco in 1928. What is less well-known is that, prior to joining with Agfa, and particularly in the 1910s and early 1920s, Ansco was a major manufacturer of quality cameras and photographic supplies in the American market. It is from this earlier era, 1916 specifically, that the Ansco VP Speedex No. 3 was introduced. Here is my particular example that was manufactured in 1918. The Ansco Vest Pocket Speedex No. 3 is a mouthful when spoken but not a handful in use. In fact, in its initial version, it is one of the smallest 120 roll film folding 6x9 cameras I have ever held … on par with the reduced-size 620 folders introduced by Kodak. Ansco sold 4 different models of VP cameras oddly numbered 0 through 3. Unlike Kodak, whose VP cameras only used size 127 film, only the No. 0 (original) Ansco VP camera used the smaller film format. The Ansco VPs No. 1 through 3 all used size 120 film while still retaining the “vest pocket” nomenclature. To Ansco’s credit, all versions except the No. 1 included the option of being equipped with a focusing anastigmat lens which was state-of-the-art at the time. The No. 3 model was the top-tier offering, was the only model that could be equipped with a lens faster than f6.3, and was the only model with the “Speedex” moniker. It was also the only “folding bed” model; the other models being of the extended strut design. Here is a September 1916 advertisement showing all the Ansco VP models. As alluded to earlier, the VP Speedex No. 3 was produced in two successive versions. The first version (1916 – 1918) was the smaller and simpler of the two versions consisting of a fold-down bed, slide-out lens panel, Ilex Acme No. 0 shutter with seven speeds from 1 to 1/300 sec plus T & B, and a choice of five unit-focusing anastigmat lenses: Modico f7.5, Ansco f6.3, Ansco f5, Goerz Celor f4.8, or Bausch & Lomb (Zeiss) Tessar f4.5. 1st Version Advertisement The second version of the VP Speedex No. 3 (1918 – 1922) was released with several enhancements: Swing-out film spool holders Film transport rollers Rising front standard adjustment Focusing scale in feet and meters DOF scale Carrying strap Ansco f4.5 anastigmat lens option (replacing Ansco f5) Here's a side-by-side comparison of the film chambers of the 1st and 2nd versions of the VP No. 3. 1st version left, 2nd version right The addition of the spool holders, film rollers, and carrying strap increased the size of the camera but not appreciably. The spool holders and film rollers also appear to have increased the rigidity of the body which likely helps with maintaining film flatness and keeping the film plane parallel to the lens. 2nd Version Advertisement The list of lens offerings seemed to change dynamically based on market supply/demand conditions. Also, this post-WW1 Goerz advertisement seemed to indicate that owners/buyers could have a Goerz Dagor lens retrofitted to the VP Speedex. I’m not sure if Goerz partnered with Ansco or if this was strictly a third-party modification. I suspect the latter because I have not seen any Ansco advertisements listing the Dagor lens option. I found my particular first-version example on the Goodwill auction website. When I noticed the Ansco name on the shutter with a f4.5 Tessar lens, I knew this was a camera I had not seen before, and I snatched it up. In the auction listing, the only issues I could see were a worn-out and loose body covering and a cloudy lens. Upon arrival, I was pleased to see that the bellows were largely intact, with a few pinholes in the top corners, and that the shutter fired, albeit slowly, at all speeds. I began my overhaul of the shutter in the usual way. I removed the front and rear lens groups and cleaned the external surfaces. The air-spaced front group had a strong haze on the internal surfaces, but I was able to unscrew the front element and it cleaned up nicely. After cleaning the lenses, I then flushed the shutter with Ronsonol (naptha) while exercising the shutter speeds and aperture. To my horror, when I adjusted the aperture, I saw the blades crumble into tiny pieces. This was my first experience cleaning an Ilex shutter and I was not aware that the aperture blades were made of some kind of paper/plastic/synthetic material that seemed to swell slightly when the naptha was applied and then disintegrated when I moved the aperture lever. I had never seen this type of aperture blade material before. Needless to say, I was bummed-out but I decided my best solution was to look for a compatible replacement shutter. I eventually found a beat up, “for parts” second version VP Speedex No. 3 for sale on eBay with what appeared to be the identical shutter but with the f7.5 Modico anastigmat lens. The seller indicated the shutter and aperture were working so I decided to purchase it with the intent of carefully cleaning the shutter (i.e., no flooding with naptha) and swapping the lens groups. When the parts camera arrived, I removed the Modico lens and noticed immediately that the aperture blades on this otherwise identical Ilex shutter were made of metal! Evidently, this was another improvement to the second version camera. I was able to clean and lube the new shutter in my usual way and successfully swapped in the freshly cleaned f4.5 Tessar. After the initial CLA, I loaded up some Arista 100 film and tossed the camera in my bag as an extra to take on a trip to a friend’s cabin in Canada. In use, the camera was quick to open, set exposure, and adjust focus. The focusing lever is convenient with click stops at 4, 6, 10, 25, and 100 feet. Setting the focus in between any of these stops is tricky however due to the limited swing arc of the lever. The 90mm Tessar lens is a little wider than usual for a 6x9 camera and the viewfinder exhibits some barrel distortion when attempting to frame subjects, but really no worse than competitor’s offerings. The Ilex shutter has an excellent range of speeds and worked flawlessly. Also, the shutter release is smooth and easy to trip without shaking the camera. I expected good results from the Tessar lens and I wasn’t disappointed. I’ve included some sample images below. All was not smooth sailing; it took a couple of test rolls for me to get all the pinhole leaks patched and the focus adjusted to meet my satisfaction. I am pleased with the final results, however. Safe Harbor Upstairs Apartment Hosed Not Quite Off-The-Grid Abandoned Dock Until Summer Arrives Ansco called the VP Speedex No. 3 model “The Master Camera”. That’s a bit of hyperbole but I do agree it is a very convenient pocketable folder with an excellent, fast lens and a respectable range of shutter speeds and features for its time. I believe it holds up well against the similar No. 1 “Special” Kodaks of the same time period. All things considered, I think the second version of this camera would be slightly more desirable from a user standpoint so it’s on my watch list now along with working examples of VP models No. 0 through 2 to complete the series. As always, I hope you’ve enjoyed this short review and found some of the information useful and/or interesting. Happy collecting! Gary

Yet another shot from the Franka Rolfix II with Rodenstock Trinar 105mm f3.5. Arista 100, HC-110, Epson V600.

@bruce_z._li2 Those are nice results from the Semflex, Bruce! The OOF areas have a dreamy quality.

For June 5th, Franka Rolfix II, Rodenstock Trinar 105mm f3.5, Arista 100, HC-110, Epson V600.

Thanks Chuck @chuck_foreman1. Yes, the Trinar is a triplet but I usually don't shoot it any wider than f5.6. The second shot was 1/50 @ f8 and it took a couple of attempts to frame it correctly because the camera doesn't have parallax correction in the viewfinder.

A couple more from the Franka Rolfix II with 105mm f3.5 Rodenstock Trinar. Arista 100, HC-110, Epson V600. Lighting The Way Bleached & Beached

Sunset near Gore Bay, Ontario, Canada. The sky was hazy all day due to wildfires in western Canada. LG G6

Amen! And that goes for most vintage cameras with top deck viewfinders. Especially for those of us who wear eyeglasses.

Great shot of B-47 refueling, James! My dad was a mechanic in the Air Force and worked on KC-135 tankers.

Some rocky shoreline pics from a Franka Rolfix II 6x9 with Rodenstock Trinar 105 f3.5. Arista 100, HC-110, Epson V600.

@bruce_z._li2 Nice write-up, Bruce! The Franka's seem like the Toyota Corolla of the camera world. Simple, easy to use, inexpensive, well-built, and they get the job done.

I recently acquired this Franka Rolfix II via an online auction. It was one of a trio of cameras being auctioned as a group. The other cameras were a Universal Meteor and a Traid Fotron. The auction listing photos only showed the Rolfix with the front door closed. I think this explains why I won the auction with a bid of $17 plus change. Sometimes you just get lucky. All three cameras arrived in excellent condition. The Fotron went into the trash immediately. The Rollfix appeared barely used and only required a little wiping down and shutter cleaning to get the speeds up to spec. Unfortunately, the 6x6 mask was not included but I also have a Franka Solida III 6x6 folder with essentially the same Trinar lens and both cameras accept the same size slip-on filters. I've posted a couple of test pics from the Rolfix on the 365-day thread but hope to do much more in the coming week(s).

For May 24th, Franka Rolfix II, Arista 100, HC-110

For May 22nd, Franka Rolfix II, Arista 100, HC-110.

For May 20th, Franka Solida III, Arista 400, Caffenol-C, Epson V600. Image cropped to 3:2 aspect ratio.

Thanks Rick & Bruce! Using the Meteor is a labor of love. The ergonomics are truly awful and I can understand why this camera probably didn't sell well. However, the images seem to have a certain pleasing character to them that I think is due to the combination of a coated, glass meniscus lens, focus control and variable aperture which is unusual in this class of camera.

A couple of shots from the Universal Meteor featured in the "What camera ..." thread. Arista 100, HC-110, Epson V600.

For the 14th, Universal Meteor, Arista 400, HC-110.

@bruce_z._li2 The photos from that Superb are a step above Brillant/Brilliant!

Very nice, Rick. It looks like you've hit on a winning combination of film, developer, and process. I'll definitely keep Adox in mind when I finally deplete my HC-110 stock. Regarding your observation with negative scans, I have seen the same with my Epson V600. That is, negatives that appear less dense and contrasty tend to have better scans. Thanks for sharing your insights and experiences.

@rick_drawbridge The AL-1 was my 2nd SLR. I traded in my Canon T-50 for it after I quickly tired of the lack of manual controls. I found the focus assist to be helpful. I also had the 50 f1.4 S.S.C. lens which I liked very much. I shot alot of Kodachrome slides with that camera. Its Achilles heel was the battery door which is often missing/broken.

If conditions are right, I plan to put a roll through this handsome Universal Meteor 6x6 camera. Introduced in April 1947, the Meteor has a single shutter speed (1/30 - 1/50 sec) plus B, four aperture settings from f11 to f32, a coated glass lens that focuses from 5ft to infinity, and an extinction meter adjacent to the viewfinder. I'm not sure if the lens is a simple meniscus or a cemented doublet. The camera natively accepts 620 film but 120 spools can easily be modified to fit in the supply side. It's a little more sophisticated than my Kodak Duex but I think I prefer the 6x4.5 format and ergonomics of the Duex. Both cameras have curved film planes and you would expect the focusing lens on the Meteor to give it a slight advantage. However, due to the construction of the Meteor, I haven't figured out how to check/calibrate the focus so we'll see what happens.

@rick_drawbridge The Adox-developed shots are very nice, Rick. I'm a sucker for abandoned properties such as "Engulfed". Are you choosing between Adox and PMK based on subject matter, lighting, or some other factor? Or, like me, just using up what you've got on hand?

@Rick_van_Nooij Your second shot reminded me of the famous pic of the flag raising on Iwo Jima. Did you see that as well?