Dustin McAmera

(oops: sorry: senior moment. Thought we were discussing the FD lenses that I know)

Ensign Special Reflex, 6-inch Aldis-Butcher anastigmat ... and with 11-inch Ross Telecentric.

I was able to save changes on the Account page after logging out, deleting the site's cookies, and logging back in. I also noticed that the site URL now has a www in it. I'm not sure how cookie exceptions are handled in my browser, so I've set it to allow them on both photo.net and www.photo.net; no idea if that makes any difference.

Some of my settings didn't update until I logged out, deleted the site cookies and then logged back in.

I think it's important that there's one forum dedicated to older cameras.

If I remember right, Modern Film Cameras was started in order to reduce the amount of time spent arguing about what belonged in Classic Manual Cameras. In the old format of the site, there was a rubric for Modern Film Cameras which IIRC acknowledged that the two fora had some overlap, and said something along the lines that 'if you cannot be flexible about which forum your post appears in, it would be better not to post'. If we recombined the two fora, there would probably be more threads like this one, talking about classification instead of talking about cameras: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/lines-in-the-sand-a-forum-definition-that-works.435433/

<p>... or just take the closest portrait you can with the camera as it is, i.e. from about a metre away, and crop the picture when you print or scan.</p>

<p>If you get a proper close-up pair, the attachment for the taking lens is just a lens. The one for the viewing lens has a prism mounted with it, so you get an approximate parallax error correction built in. I have a bayonet set like that for my Yashica 44s. It's good; you use the camera quite normally and quickly. On the other hand I guess it's bound to be less of an exact correction than (say) winding the camera up a couple of inches on the tripod after framing and focusing.<br> I don't think 34mm screw-in accessories are that rare; the size has been used on some modern stuff. I doubt you'll find a TLR close-up pair easily, but if you can handle the parallax yourself, you only need two lenses the same. I just looked at the 'bay (.co.uk here) and found one seller offering +1 and +2 close-up lenses in 34mm screw-in fitting pretty quickly, for 8 uk pounds each. There's another seller offering a set (+1, +2 and +4). These are single lenses, so you'd need to buy one for each of your camera's lenses, but it seems to me if you are prepared to watch for a week or two, you'll find what you need. Just be sure your viewing and taking lenses have the same fitting, and it really is 34mm, before buying.</p>

<p>I have to agree with Jochen (on page 1); if you're serious about landscape, and you're working on a tripod anyway, you don't want to be limited to a little viewfinder. You can get a folding press/view camera and have ground-glass focusing and even some camera movements; most of a LF experience, without the size or expense. Mine is a Graflex, a Century Graphic, made in the early 1960s. You could get a Horseman or Linhof if you wanted it newer.<br> You have a wide choice of lenses, and you can get 6x9, 6x7 and square backs for it. It even has a rangefinder (though only calibrated for one of your lenses).</p>

<p>All those Speed Graphic pressmen can't have been wrong.</p>

<p>I don't cover my red windows, and have never had a problem, though as others have said above, it's a good idea to avoid letting the sun fall directly on it, or to leave it sitting in daylight for days or weeks at a time.<br> I have read recommendations from a couple of retailers of 127 film (the old Efke stuff) that you should cover the window. However, I believe this was a reaction to a quality problem they had with one or two batches. People could see frame numbers in their pictures, but it wasn't because of the red window. Ink from the backing paper offset onto the film, maybe because the ink wasn't dry, or the whole thing was exposed to damp. So the number visible in each frame wasn't the number of that frame, but the next one. There was a long discussion of it in the 127 group at Flickr:see for example <a href="https://www.flickr.com/groups/127/discuss/72157594471325550/">'Efke 127 problems'</a>, <a href="https://www.flickr.com/groups/127/discuss/72157600139603953/">'Backing paper data imprinted on Baby Rollei negs'</a> (the little Rollei doesn't have a red window!), and <a href="https://www.flickr.com/groups/127/discuss/72157600233306856/">'Thin backing paper: Myth Busted'</a>. I think some people sent their film back and got a refund.</p>

<p>I don't expect that anything I have suggested is going to help; it's just what I would do before deciding I had a serious problem.<br> If the camera were in my hands, I'd try switching it off and back on (which I guess you've done, if you changed the battery). If possible, I'd fit a silver oxide battery instead of an ordinary alkaline one; the silver batteries (at least as labelled by some makers) are nominally 6.2 V instead of 6 V, and the Mamiya manuals specify them. I'm not sure it makes a difference.</p> <p>(Aside, I just got my own Pro out to see if it prompted any thoughts. I'd left a battery in it (for a couple of weeks since I last had it out). The shutter ran four times and then stopped! My battery check now glows, then immediately goes out. I think I just caught the battery in the act of dying.)</p> <p>I would certainly take off the VF and back, and clean their contacts before putting them back. Maybe clean the terminals of the battery compartment too.<br> I'd check I hadn't knocked the shutter release collar away from the 'white-square' position. I'd fiddle with the mirror-up switch and the multi-exposure switch, to be sure I hadn't set either one by accident. I'd check the lens aperture pin is in its yoke, though I can't see how it's relevant. Finally, I would take the lens off, if you can, and check the little plastic mirror-rest part hasn't broken off (a tiny plastic block, loose inside the camera). I don't know why that would leave your shutter stuck open, but it seems to be a fairly common way for the camera to fail.<br> Otherwise, I'd suspect a proper fault with the shutter; maybe the solenoid that releases the second curtain, but now I'm well outside what I know to talk about. Good luck!</p> <p> </p>

<p>Have a look at this:<br> http://www.libraryweb.org/~digitized/tradecats/kodak/Cine_Kodaks_1940.pdf<br> It seems the button presses in, and can be locked down so the camera keeps running while you get in the picture. I wonder if your camera's stuck in the locked-down position. My impression is that the button in the big picture of the Model 60 in the brochure is taller than yours, so yours is pressed in a bit.<br> There's this one about the Cine-Special - a much more complex camera, but maybe the exposure button may work the same.<br> http://www.apecity.com/manuals/pdf/kodak_cine_special_manual.pdf<br> This says two things that may be relevant. The first is to wind anti-clockwise, <em>after making sure the button is out</em>. I can't think Kodak would have designed a camera where winding with the button down would risk damage though; I guess all that would happen is the shutter would run straight away.<br> The other thing is more helpful. On the Cine-Special you lock the shutter button down by pressing it in, then sliding it down; and to release it, you slide it up and release it. That must be why your camera leather has that smooth patch.<br> Good luck!</p>

<p>I have now looked at Thomosy (Book 1: Page 40 and page 98. Thoroughly recommended). He talks about the Canon AE-1. On this, the shutter is held closed by a combination magnet. This is a permanent magnet core, with a coil round it. The camera applies a short pulse of current to the coil to momentarily <em>de</em>magnetise the core, and so let go of another, spring-loaded part that releases the shutter. Timing doesn't begin until the shutter moves, I think; so our exposure should be correct, even though it's late.<br> On the AE1, the magnet is just under the bottom cover, with its own plastic cover. Thomosy says you can clean magnetised particles or dirt (it's just possible I've read this page before!) from it with sticky tape, then with solvent on a tissue.<br> If that doesn't help, he talks about scoring the surface of the core so there's a little less surface contact, or bending the spring that helps pull the other part away, to make it pull harder. These sound like you could easily break something. <br> Not sure if that will help you with the RZ. I have no idea how you would get to the relevant parts, or even if they're the same. </p>

I have something similar on a Canon A1. I understand the shutter uses two electromagnets. The first one has to be released to let the first shutter blind move, opening the shutter, then the second one releases to let the second blind go, closing it. I think my problem is that the first magnet is nt letting go when it's switched off. This could be because it's contaminated with magnetic metal particles, our even just sticky dirt. However, the delay for me is only ever a second or two, and goes away after a couple of exposures, so I live with it. I'm away for Christmas, or I'd look in Tomosy's book. It may be we could both clean our magnets by ourselves!

<p>Freestyle has some Tetenal stuff:<br> http://www.freestylephoto.biz/102230-Tetenal-Colortec-C-41-Rapid-2-Bath-Color-Negative-Developing-Kit-2.5<br> This one is a kit of liquid concentrates, with combined bleach/fix; they also do a powder kit. I used to use the one-litre version of this kit, and I liked it. Like Euan, I found it not as hard to control temperature as people say. I use a kitchen sink plastic bowl as my water bath. The instructions gave times for 30 deg C as an alternative, and I used those. I reasoned that with the lower temperature and longer stage times, one or two seconds inaccuracy on my part would matter a bit less.<br> B+H also has some Tetenal chemicals, but won't ship them.</p>

<p>A page at the Large Format Photography Forum about bellows compensation:<br> <a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/bellows-factor.html">http://www.largeformatphotography.info/bellows-factor.html</a></p>

<p>There's a brochure for the Schneider Symmar at CameraEccentric: the lens is described as 210/<em>370</em>, but I think it's the same as what you have.<br /> <a href="http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/schneider_7.html">http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/schneider_7.html</a><br /> (and it's on the 3rd page)<br /> The tables gives the back-focus for the whole lens and for the rear group used alone. According to this, you focus at infinity with 450 mm, or 17.7 inches. Your full extension of 22 inches is 558 mm, a touch short of what you need to focus down to 2 metres.<br> The same site has several Calumet brochures. In this one, the Symmar is one of the recommended lenses, and it says about using the lens converted; 'Focal lengths above 150mm should be used on a 22" bellows for conversion'.<br /> <a href="http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/calumet_1.html">http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/calumet_1.html</a><br> So yes, the CC401 should suit your lens well, I think.</p>

<p>You know the shutter won't release until a roll of film is loaded and has been advanced? To overcome that and fire the shutter without film, set the multi-exposure lever (by the hub of the advance lever on the back). Hope that helps.<br> You can get the manual for the Pro S from Mamiya leaf:<br> <a href="http://www.mamiyaleaf.com/assets/files/documentation/RB67_Pro-S_v7.pdf">http://www.mamiyaleaf.com/assets/files/documentation/RB67_Pro-S_v7.pdf</a></p>

<p>.. and yet McKeown has the top speed of the early model as 1/2500, which we know this one doesn't have. I suspect reality is more complicated than just two models.</p>

<p>If I got it right, here's the version with the later shutter, at <em>Camera-wiki</em>:<br> http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Ernemann_Klapp#Ernemann_Miniatur-Klapp_4.5x6<br> CW gives 1920-25 for this version, but says an earlier version with a different shutter was made 1913-20. However, it says that early model has a top speed of 1/2500, which yours doesn't, according to that speed table.<br> <em>Collection Appareils</em> shows one with your style of shutter controls, and says it appears in a catalogue dated 1922. The tech notes confirm the shutter speeds are up to 1/1000. So I'd go with 'early 1920s', as Charles says.<br> <a href="http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/camera-20220-Ernemann_Miniature%20Klapp.html">http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/camera-20220-Ernemann_Miniature%20Klapp.html</a><br> Here's one with your style of shutter controls, for sale at <em>Leica-Shop</em> (they're asking 280 Euro, with a lesser lens, and the shutter not working):<br> http://www.leicashop.com/vintage_en/ernemann-miniature-klapp-sku21606-11.html<br> It looks like your camera is missing a bright nickel-plated knob from the bottom of the shutter controls.</p>

<p>...but they say they don't do repairs now:<br> http://kohscamera.com/repair.htm</p>

<p>I believe it's an Ernemann Miniatur-Klapp Camera. The part on the top (which does look a bit like a folding hood) is in fact just a Newton finder (i.e. a simple negative lens), with two metal flaps covering it. This is used with a swivelling arm on the lens-board as the front 'sight'.<br /> The pictures I can find to compare it with all show different shutter controls though, with two knurled knobs, one of which is usually engraved for Ernemann. This one seems to be fitted with an earlier model of the shutter.<br /> Here's a good picture of one in the same size (4.5x6 cm plates, with the 7.5 cm lens): it has the other shutter, but the same shutter-speed table on the front. It's pretty small, isn't it?<br /> <a href="

<p>I assumed the OP meant a 'meniscus achromat', i.e. a cemented doublet as often fitted to box cameras. I would certainly agree that before going to any expense it's worth checking if the shutter you have will synchronise with your electronic flash, even if it's supposed to be for bulb flash.<br> If not, I can think of three ways to go:<br> 1. If your shutter has synch at all, there must be a pair of contacts which close when the shutter is fired. If you open the shutter up, you might find you can bend the contacts so they are further apart, giving the shutter more time to open before firing the flash. Adjust it until it passes John's look-through-the-lens test.<br> 2. For a lot more money, buy yourself a camera with interchangeable lenses and an X-synched focal-plane shutter, and mount your achromat on a body cap. I guess you might use a Pentacon Six. A bit of care is needed to get the lens at the right distance to focus: maybe you can leave it adjustable.<br> Now I'm eyeing my Lubitel: that has a supposedly X-synched leaf shutter, and a fairly small-diameter lens. I wouldn't be surprised if you could replace the lens on one of these (it's a coated triplet) with one from a Brownie. You'd have shutter speeds, focusing and flash synch! It seems a shame to damage the camera to fit an inferior lens though; with the Pentacon (or Kiev 60, or a Mamiya 645, or indeed a Hasselblad) you could still use the camera body with its own lenses.<br> 3. Make a circuit to add the extra delay, turning M synch into X synch. Here's a link:<br> <a href="http://www.rmm3d.com/3d.encyclopedia/repairs/flash.delay/flash.delay.html">http://www.rmm3d.com/3d.encyclopedia/repairs/flash.delay/flash.delay.html</a><br> You can judge best whether this is your kind of project: I don't think I would attempt it myself; I know no electronics at all. I do see that the guy seems to have designed this to apply a voltage pulse to trigger the flash, whereas the flashes I have used need only a closure of contacts. </p>

<p>john robinson said:<br> <em>The front lens components probably would have been a little cheaper to make than the fully interchangeable auto aperture & meter coupled FD mount but not by much.</em></p> <p>Perhaps quite a lot cheaper: remember the front groups don't even contain a focus mechanism. I looked this up for the <a href="http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Canon_EXEE">Camera-wiki page about the EXEE</a>. The Canon Camera Museum site gives prices of some of the lenses. The 35mm f/3.5 front group for the EXEE cost 8,000 Yen, and the 95mm f/3.5 cost 11,000 Yen. For comparison, the FD 35mm f/3.5 cost 19500 Yen (a bit later, in 1973) and the FD 100mm f/2.8 cost 27,000 Yen (in 1971). The 125mm f/3.5, only available from 1972, wasn't so cheap: 18,900 Yen, which might be compared to 19,900 Yen for an FD 135mm f/3.5 (in 1971).<em><br /></em><br> A more elegant way to give the same functions would be a fixed standard-range zoom. However, the FD 35-70mm f/2.8-3.5 (available from 1973) cost 100,000 Yen. The earlier FL series only had the FL 55-135mm f/3.5, costing 49,000 in 1964.</p>