john_shaeffer1

Never follow kodak instructions when using polaroid film??

Get some mailers from Mpix.com. They will provide scans online and you can get prints of what you want. They aren't the cheapest, but reasonable, seem to do the best job for the price and they are fast by mail.

I like the 400 speed VX Super more than consumer Fuji or Kodak films. Haven't used the 200 film, but shouldn't be much different.

Kevin:

 

Thanks for posting that--I tried your link and I didn't have to register. I only regret that there were just a few pics. I tried to go to the Library of Congress site that was referenced below the article, but no slide show option--too bad.

 

Puts an interesting spin on life back then, when you see it in color--don't ask me why that should be so, but it seems more real.

Didn't he sing:

 

Everything gives you cancer--

There's no cure,

There's no answer,

Everything gives you cancer!

 

He's still living and singing despite that, last I heard.

That looks like that creepy Max Gold 800 film that was on the market a few years back. That stuff was about as nasty as it gets. Wonder if you got hold of some of that? B&H sold it as import Max 800--I think it was made in Australia. It was possibly the worst film ever made.

Many of the Rollei 35 line of lenses made in the early 80's in Singapore used an HFT coating with that same red coating of the external element. I haven't seen an East German lens like you describe--but hey you have :). Jena could have been experimenting with coatings.

 

I like the HFT Planar standard lens that came on the Singapore made Rolleis. I THINK those were the only Singapore made components of the Rollei line along with the cameras. Most of the other Rollei lenses were made in Germany, or Japan by Mamiya or Sigma. Some of the Japanese lenses were HFT coated. It doesn't take much imagination to think that some of these found their way as rebadged Zeiss Jena lenses. I know the East Germans where buying telephoto lenses from Sigma and reselling them as Pentacon, Hanimex, etc. lenses as part of a set with the Praktica cameras.

Make sure it takes the Rollei QBM mount. There were some transition cameras, that West German Zeiss made before they went belly up and Rollei took over the line. The SL 350 may be one--be careful about the mount. I think the SL 350 was also actually made in M42 mount also.

Fernando:

 

The SL35M is probably the way to go if you want a Rolleiflex with fully open aperture metering--assuming the meter works :). With the original SL 35, there is a button on top that you stop down the lens for metering like the Praktica cameras have the lever just above the shutter release on the front.

 

I have mixed feelings about the Rolleiflex cameras--they are the price ya gotta pay for using the nice lenses and the Rolleinars; contrary to the garbage you read online are excellent bargains for the price, even though they are not true Rollei made lenses.

http://www.geocities.com/mjtolan/Rollei35Stuff.htm

 

The above is the definitive source on Rolleiflex 35mm cameras on the web. Mike Tolan will also be able to answer any questions about Rollei QBM to Canon adapters as he uses Canon equipment too. Visit that site and I am sure you can contact him through the e-mail address there.

 

I've found that the Rolleiflex line after the original SL 35 are not the most reliable cameras in the world. I had a SL 35 ME that jammed after about a year and a half of use. I got a SL 35 E to replace it, but the meter doesn't work, making the slow speeds useless. It still works OK, without the meter, but the speeds under 1/30th depend on the meter. Some owners who have taken their cameras (Singapore made) apart have complained of plastic film advance gears contributing to the film advance jamming. These seem to wear out easily.

 

In my opinion the best lens is the HFT Planar 50mm f1.8. This is probably the most common lens as most of the cameras were sold with this one, and also the cheapest--it is an outstanding bargain in the camera world--and there really aren't that many left than to the e-casino. Mamiya made a line of Rolleinar lenses that are the equivalent of the SX lenses that they made for their M42 mount cameras and are great and very economical. The 35 mm Flektogon is also a fairly reasonabley price Rollei QBM made lens that is a good performer. The other Rollei lenses tend to be off the charts, in terms of cost as opposed to performance. For the performance..you might be better to check out the Zeiss or Pentacon East German glass.

Rich makes a good point--some of the older Biotar lenses do not fit on later screw mount cameras because the lense juts out too far at the back. This is true,for example, when trying to mount an 50's version of the M42 Biotar on a Praktica L series, Ricoh Singlex TLS, and Hanimex 35 SL.

If you look at the specs of the Pentacon 50mm f1.8 lens vs. the Pancolar 50mm f1.8, I think there is really little difference. Wonder if the comrade workers made more on the Pancolar line?

 

http://www.praktica-users.com/lens/mlenses/czjpan1.8_50.html

 

http://www.praktica-users.com/lens/mlenses/morp1.8_50.html

Put this in your browser:

 

http://www.praktica-collector.de/Pentacon_Prakticar_AF_55_200.htm

 

Looks like the lens was made in Japan for Praktica by Sigma. I'm thinking this was made for the Praktica B mount cameras. Notice the batteries that fit inside the lens--wonder how fast it focused?

Diogo:

 

Some of the later Praktica cameras, like the MTL 5 are much lighter than the LTL you mentioned. The reason for this is that they used more plastic in the cameras than the original Practica L cameras that started production around 1971. Copy this into you browser for details:

 

http://www.praktica-collector.de/209_Praktica_MTL5.htm

 

I don't think the MTL 5 is any smaller than the LTL, though. Most screw mount cameras are not light, or particularly small. Compared to some other cameras from the same time period, the Topcon Super D comes to mind, they are not particularly heavy, either.

I bought a Minister D (IV) at the PX just before going to Vietnam in 1969. First Kodachrome I had developed, blew me away--looked like 3D pics. Fun camera--I think I paid about $70 in 1969 US dollars.

 

I bought a Minolta SRT 101 while in Japan on R&R--used them both for several years. Unlike a lot of Japanese rangefinders, the D worked fine without a battery, only needed for the meter.

 

Good luck with the "new" toy!

Olympus just went another route in AF with the IS series of ZLRs. No way they were going to beat Nikon and Canon anyway, so they carved another niche and made cameras that allowed amateurs to take great photos for a fraction of the price of pro cameras. What's so bad about that?

Good ID job, Dai!

"The last time I checked I was told no they don't expire. Also if you have a 24 exp. mailer you can add a couple of bucks and use it for 36exp. roll.

 

Check with

 

Qualtex, Inc. 16-31 Route 208 Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 (201) 797-0600 (800) 345-6973"

 

When was the last time you checked?--I believe the Fair Lawn, NJ plant has been closed for about a year now. Last I heard, Kodak processing was being outsourced to District/Clark Photo in Beltsville, MD. It is possible that Kodak maintains the same number for customer service, though.

 

Keith, I wouldn't send anything real important until you see if the mailers still work. Living near the Beltsville District plant, I found that their processing for C41 35mm was not as good, generally speaking , as the processing at the Fair Lawn Qualex lab had been.

http://www.mgroleau.ca/photo/daiichi/

 

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/zenobia.html

 

Links above give some detail about the transformation of the Japanese Zeiss clones from Waltax to Zenobia. The Zenobia folder I have is well made with a great lens.

 

Some of the early Waltax cameras were blantant copies of the German ones including the same sort of script used to identify the manufacturer and the exact embellishments on the struts of the camera.

"I'll chime in with another recommendation for the not-yet-a-classic Minox 35 GT series.

I've got a 35GT, and had no problems with it in 7 years. It's great for low light, and the shutter is so quiet that for long exposures on a tripod you have to stand with your ear next to it to hear the shutter trip."

 

Yeah same here with the Minox 35 MB--hope mine avoids the "well known" problems, I didn't know about :); now I'm worried!

Michael: I can just hear those comrades singing now:

 

Hi hipety he, a paperweight for thee!

I'd second the Minox 35 suggestion that the previous poster wrote, but would also suggest an older model like the Minox ML or MB for economy's sake. You should be able to get one in good working order for less than $100 US.

 

Another nice folder that is a copy of the Minox copies, is the Ricoh FF-1. Possibly a better lense than the original German cameras they imitated and possibly had for less money.

 

These cameras, all folders, are likely more compact than the 35LED and much more quiet. The other poster mentioned leicas--you did say inexpensive, correct?

Good luck! It is nice to see an alternative, without fees, sniping, etc. Might it be better to reveal the reserve price on the items, or start the bidding at that price? Only thing I don't like about it--just like on ebay, lots of times its a fishing expedition to see what the market will bear, without a realistic price being set.

 

Of course there is no real incentive to do deals off the auction site to avoid fees here, so why the reserve in the first place on this new site. Should just say that is the minimum bid!

Cosina hasn't "saved" anything. They have managed to maintain or increase their profit margins on the same camera they have been producing for 40 years (note that the TWIN TL-42 is basically the same camera as the Bessaflex, and all the others they've cranked out as you so aptly demonstrated in the pics in your post to Mark). That is my point. I am not saying any camera is a piece of junk, especially the ones you are using. I see YOU the photographer, make nice photos. My original point is that you can get the same PICs with a $50 or < screw mount camera. But hey, if everybody realized that, Cosina would be making MP-3 players, Stephen Gandy would be flogging t-shirts on ebay AND WE WOULD STILL BE MAKING GREAT PHOTOS--because there are still great ORIGINAL cameras out there that do the same thing as the COSINA rip offs. RIPOFFS, RIPOFFS, RIPOFFS :).

Frank:

Zeiss Ikon cameras were made before the 1970's by Zeiss. The new Zeiss Ikon line, introduced at the 2004 Photokina show, is a rangefinder camera compatible with Leica M-mount, and built by Cosina in Japan :).

 

The rip offs are getting more lucrative, as attested by the pricing of the new Ikon. Kudos to Cosina--just think how long they struggled with all that Vivitar stuff--some of it was suprisingly good--so we knew there was hope :).