connealy

Maizenberg

I cleaned the lenses and adjusted focus twice on the Reflex II. The second time was needed because I accidentally unscrewed the lenses trying to focus when I couldn't feel my hands on a snowy mountainside. Servicing the camera is a bit fussy, but probably still easier than a lot of others like the Yashicamat.

I only have experience with the Reflex II. The best guides I found on line for that camera are Rick Oleson's exploded view drawing:

Kodak Reflex TLR Shutter Access

and Markus Berndt's tutorials:

Camera Repair

<p>Sandeha Lynch makes bellows for the Ansco Speedex.<br>

<a href="http://www.sandehalynch.com/isolette.htm">http://www.sandehalynch.com/isolette.htm</a></p>

<p>The suggested fix will work, but it seems a shame to do any kind of damage to a classic camera in fine shape. Perhaps the windows could be polished clean with some fine abrasive compound like Flitz or even toothpaste.</p>

<p>Might be worth contacting the Center for Creative Photography in Tucson which has all of Smith's work and papers.</p>

<p>I have the same lens. The front silver part does unscrew. The rubber pads idea sounds like it is worth a try. Another source for those is the type that are used to unscrew jar lids.</p>

<p>There is a <strong><a href="http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/bauschlomb_8.html">B&L catalog</a></strong> at the Camera Eccentric site. If you scroll down the left column you will find an illustration and description of the Compound Shutter. Further along is a list of Kodak cameras on which the shutter could be used.</p>

<p>The shutter was used on Kodak's Premo line of folding plate cameras as illustrated in <strong><a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33034/33034-h/33034-h.htm">a catalog</a></strong> from the Project Gutenberg site.</p>

<p>Could it have been a <a href="http://store.valueweb.com/servlet/vintagepaperads/-strse-6716/1959-Fuji-Fujica-35-dsh-SE/Detail">Fujica 35 SE</a>?</p>

<p>There should be two standard tripod sockets; one is on the front door, and the other is on the body of the camera. Pretty much all the Kodak folders are the same in that regard. Some of the older models do better with a cable release that was made specifically for the Kodaks that has a short, stright-sided threaded section rather than the conical threaded end that is on newer releases. </p>

<p>There is a manual for the No.2 Folding Autographic at my site which is very similar to your camera.</p>

<p>All of the No.2 Kodaks produce 6x9 images on 120 film, and every one is capable of making very nice images. I haven't done a lot with this camera, but I do have <a href="http://mconnealy.com/vintagecameras/modelb/index.html">a page about it</a> at my web site. You have a much better chance of realizing the potential of the Kodak folders if you use a tripod and a cable realease, though they can be hand-held with care. I took a folding frame type viewfinder off a slightly newer model which I now use with all my old folders with the non-brilliant viewfinders ( I just tape it to the top). The older Kodaks use the Universal System aperture settings which is explained on my page.</p>

<p>I have a good Bessamatic that makes very nice photos with both the normal and 35mm lenses.<br>

The other one is pretty much a basket case, though the prism is good. <br>

The Retina Reflex is very nice except for the desilvered prism; it has the quietest shutter of any of my slr cameras and it weighs a lot less than the B'matic.</p>

<p>If the Minolta prism doesn't fit in your camera, I would be happy to trade my Bessamatic prism for the Minolta. In fact, If you would like more spare parts, I would send along the body too. </p>

<p>- Mike</p>

<p>I think Peter was responding to my query about the Retina Reflex regarding a replacement prism from a Minolta. </p>

<p>I just took a look at my non-working Bessamatic. It seems very unlikely that I'll ever do anything with it. The prism in it is ok. I'll send it to you for the cost of postage if you like. <br>

Send me an email with your address.</p>

<p>Thanks for those links; some nice images, indeed.<br>

Hope this thread is encouraging to David rather than frustrating. I'm reluctant to give up my non-shooter because having a spare parts camera always seems like a good idea. On the other hand, I'm not real attached to the camera because the weight and size of the B'matic doesn't really fit my style.</p>

<p>The resilvering sounds like it would be a nice option. I've got a Retina Reflex I'd probably use if it had a good prism. I've been told that Minolta prisms fit, but I've yet to find a junker at a reasonable price.</p>

<p>I have a couple Bessamatics; one works pretty well, but has a slow to return winder and the meter coupling is off. I've had it apart numerous times, but haven't made any real progress with those two issues even though its an easier camera to work on than my Contaflex. Wish I could get it working a bit better as they are interesting cameras and the Skopar and Skoparex lenses are super.</p>

<p>Bessamatics on ebay in good shape bring a pretty good price, but I haven't seen many photos from them, and there doesn't seem to be a lot of info about their innards on the web. </p>

<p>Eddie Adams was a guy who liked it both ways.<br>

<img src="http://media.npr.org/programs/watc/adams/eddie_adams_540.jpg" alt="" width="385" height="540" /><br>

I'm not sure about the bottom camera; it looks like a Nikon S2, but it seems to have a self-timer on the front.</p>

<p>The story is at <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102112403&sc=emaf"><b>NPR</b></a>.</p>

<p>Hi, Bill.</p>

<p>Actually, there was a museum lady looking over my shoulder at the time. She didn't actually say anything, but I did sense some disapproval. Then, I went home and wrote something rather critical about the place on my blog. On my next visit I'll wear a fake beard, carry a Kodak and talk about baseball.</p>

<p>That's really interesting info on the prices. I can't see a great difference in the build quality between the early FED/Zorki cameras and the early Kievs, but I also can't claim any expertise on the subject. I suppose scarcity had something to do with the price as well.</p>

<p>Another thing I neglected in my review of the two blood lines was the shutter sound. My FED/Zorki cameras are noisier than the Kiev IIa. Plus, when you select 1/50 or below on the Kiev, it sounds like Eartha Kitt -- very hard to resist.</p>

<p>"<em>...they were in the different price segments.</em> "</p>

<p>That's the first time I've heard that, and have to admit the thought never crossed my mind. Can you recall some actual prices?</p>

<p>I meant to say 1956. When Photonet gets around to allowing message edits, I'll become a paying member again.</p>

<p>Russ, my Kiev IIa is from 1955. You're right about the film-loading advantage of the Kiev over the bottom loading Barnack-style cameras. Not quite as much of an advantage in the early ones like mine though since it still has the open-the-back-and-let-the-spool-drop-on-the-floor feature. I should try to find a real take-up cartridge for it. I also forgot to mention that part of my early interest in the Kiev was motivated by wanting to have something similar to my old Nikon rf which I let slip away in the 1960's. I've been tempted to lay out the bucks to have a Nikon again, but I really, really don't need any more 35mm cameras.</p>

<p>Hi Gene,<br>

<a href="http://westfordcomp.com/classics/52kiev/">Your results</a> from the Kiev are a lot more impressive than anything I got around to with mine. Thanks for the reminder to look at them. I started this thread mostly as a way to get some inspiration to get myself going again with my Kiev IIa, which really deserves more than I've given it.</p>

<p>My feelings about the two big classic rangefinders have undergone a complete evolution over the past five years. When this forum got started, I was happy to see it as an alternative to the Leica forum which just had way too much attitude for my taste. I also thought Leica prices were just silly. Around that time, I picked up a very nice <a href="../photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=235347">Kiev IIa</a>, and I was very impressed with the design, construction and the quality images it could make. However, I only put a few rolls of film through it, and never did anything I liked very much with the camera.<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2060300-lg.jpg" alt="" width="547" height="400" /><br>

A short time ago, I picked up a <a href="http://mconnealy.com/vintagecameras/fed1g/index.html">FED 1g</a>, and I've already put more film through the camera than the Kiev IIa has seen in five years. The important feature for me is elegant design that fits in my pocket. No great images yet from the FED either, but I do like what I've gotten from it. Both of my Soviet copy cameras are excellent in their own way, and I think it is rather pointless to compare their superlative lens designs. In the end I guess it just comes down to personal preferences and the fit to my own style.<br>

<img src="http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a9/connealy/fed1g/1190b.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="338" /><br>

I've put a few more thoughts about the Leica/Zeiss competion on <a href="http://connealy.blogspot.com/">my blog</a>, along with a little poll which people are welcome to visit and vote on. Mostly, though, I'd be interested in seeing here what people are thinking these days about the two styles of cameras, be they German or Soviet models, along with any results results you care to share.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Found <a href="http://blog.flickr.net/en/2009/03/12/nantucket-historical-association/">a nice collection</a> of old New England pictures via the Flickr blog this morning. It was assembled by the Nantucket Historical Association.<br>

<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3417/3349276176_cdc7066a4a.jpg" alt="" width="274" height="500" /></p>