karel_van_den_fonteyne

<p>I think it was apx 180 €.<br>

But the body was in perfect condition. And after a few weeks of regular use (I must say with greath pleasure) I must revise my review a bit :-)<br>

* The battery system is a shame. One can charge a battery and a week later the battery is dead. But a new battery is OK for 150 pictures. And they are cheap. I charge them the day before the shoot and that is working well.<br>

* The sensor is OK for A3 prints if you dont crop. If I go for A4 prints, a crop is possible.<br>

* I had to buy a new bag (costing >1/2 the price of the body) for the body and the lenses. Heavy stuff.<br>

Succes with finding a good example!</p>

<p>After using the camera a few weeks some + and - point:<br>

* Very good ergonomics and handlig. Buttons are were you expect them, everything is made to take pictures.<br>

* Super build quality<br>

* Super fast, especilly with AF-D lenses. Faster than with EF-S lenses, unless you use pro EF-S. Fast start-up and fast action camera. Faster than most 2014 camera models.<br>

* Mpixel count is ok up to 30x40 cm print<br>

* Bad battery system, 150 x TIFF, 100 x Raw on 1 charge, even with a new battery. But the battery only costs 30 € incl shipping<br>

* No Raw+JPeg save mode<br>

* Only up to 2Gbyte card.<br>

* Cheap but still almost expensive as a Nikon 3000 series.<br>

* Heavy to carry around all day<br>

* Good viewfinder, even with glasses<br>

* Super focus system, even in the dark it works fine</p>

<p>Even with all the - remarks, I love this camera.<br>

* Nice colours</p>

<p>I recently bought a D1x. Great camera. I first had doubts about the 6 Mpixel since I usually print up to A3 (12 x 16 inch). But after a few days testing and now using, I can assure the in-camera processing is super and I can print wihout problems on A3. I did a few macro shots and a portrait session and the results are greath. The speed of the camera combined to the feel and ergonomics is top and not outdated at all. Only the weight is a problem at the end of the day. But that also has something to do with the glass I use. <br>

The D1X has a firewire socket. So, no iPad upload possible to do a quick check on results. I used my Surface tablet and a cheap card reader. Works faster and at full file size. BTW, I never use an on camera display to check results. And with the small display on a D1x, looking at the results is like looking at a stamp.<br>

You certainly need a couple of spare battery packs since the camera speed reduces battery life. The 35 AFD focusses faster on this camera than a 35 AFS. This thing can focus a heavy 35-135 in a blink of an eye. What a tork the in-camera motor can deliver! And you can take 10 pictures (NEF setting) in a few seconds without waiting for a memory to buffer. A spare battey only costs 24 €.<br>

Combines this camera with fast Nikon prime lenses you can make super pictures.<br>

The only thing I want now is a D2x (but I can wait till second hand prices drop).</p>

<p>I recently bought a D1x. I have several cameras but was attracted to the D1x by the reflection of craftmanship that goes with the camera. I will receive the camera next week, looking forward to it. </p>

<p>After only using film for many years, I am trying digital since a few years. To get a compact camera on holliday and to avoid the darkroom.<br>

I used a Nikon P7000 for a few years, a Leica Digilux, and now I use Olympus FT and MFT.<br>

I am pleased with the results of digital and print up to A3 with the Olympus MFT. But that is the limit for the equipment & the small sensor. The main advantage for me is that I can use the digital workflow and print in a spare moment.<br>

I can print bigger with 35 mm and much bigger with 120. Maybe film is better but than I have to use the darkroom and that is time consuming. I often use film and scan the images. But a good scan takes several minutes per image. Direct digital is faster.</p>

<p>I mainly shoot film. Most 35 mm, sometimes 120. I never take 20 rols of film with me for a 1 week trip. Maybe I would take 200 rols for a 1 year trip. Not such a big weight but to be counted on top of the weight for the camera and the lenses.<br>

A year ago, I went on a 3 week trip to Iceland. It was a tour by 4x4 across the country, camping and on occasion a hut. I used a Nikon P7000 and an Olympus E300. Both camera's with an extra battery. In total that was 4 battery loads, more than 300 foto's each, almost 1500 foto's. Enough for me. I tried to safe battery power and on occasion, we could charge the battery in a hut. I never ran out of power. I took apx 1000 pictures in total, I printed max 100 of them. The rest was OK but not good enough to visualise my trip. The main reason I used digital equipment was for the colour printing. I print at home and try to make quality prints on selected paper.<br>

The trip was bad for the equipment and a one year trip would have damaged my Nikon for shore. I took the Nikon for the limited weight, in combination with te extra wide angle it is a fantastic camera.<br>

The Olympus was just for the fun of using an older camera. It proved to be super reliable and gave me some nice shots.<br>

If I would go to Iceland again, I would take a film camera as well. Maybe one 35 mm film a day. Combined film B&W printing with digital colour printing. But I would take better equipment with me than I did last time.<br>

Maybe a digital solution isn't that bad for a one year trip. Battery power is not such an issue.<br>

But stick to trusted quality equipment. </p>

<p>The trioplan 100 mm is super. If you are lucky to find a m42 example.... </p>

<p>The trioplan 100 mm is super. If you are lucky to find a m42 example.... </p>

<p>Practica was part of a merger of several other company's including Exakta, Meyer Optic,... to Pentacon. As Zeiss was split after WW II (in 1948), the East German Zeiss kept producing lenses under theis "Zeiss Jena" label. Zeiss Jena made some fine optics for Pentacon, in M42 or B mount, most of them labeled as "Zeiss Jena". Meyer Optik was a famous company before the merger to Pentacon, after the merger the company made most of the Practica lenses under the Pentacon label. Last production runs for B-mount were even labeled again with "Meyer Optik - Made in Germany". Some of the zoom lenses in B-mount were produced in East Germany (the super f2,7 35-70 being a fine example). Some of the lenses were just relabeled Sigma lenses, some of the lenses were Zeiss or Meyer designed and produced in Japan (like the f3,5 28-70) due to the lack of production resources. Quality differs from good to very good.<br>

I sometimes use a BC1 and BX20 Practica. Results above show the potential of the camera and specially the lenses. At a modest second hand price. Only the special lenses like the Zeiss 35mm f2,4 or the Zeiss 20mm or the Zeiss made 50mm macro lens are expensive, prices up to 300 Euro or more. The common lenses like the 28mm f2,8 , the 50mm f1,8,... are cheap (25 Euro to 50 Euro) and easy to find. The complete set is cheap, handy and light to carry.</p>

<p>Practica was part of a merger of several other company's including Exakta, Meyer Optic,... to Pentacon. As Zeiss was split after WW II (in 1948), the East German Zeiss kept producing lenses under theis "Zeiss Jena" label. Zeiss Jena made some fine optics for Pentacon, in M42 or B mount, most of them labeled as "Zeiss Jena". Meyer Optik was a famous company before the merger to Pentacon, after the merger the company made most of the Practica lenses under the Pentacon label. Last production runs for B-mount were even labeled again with "Meyer Optik - Made in Germany". Some of the zoom lenses in B-mount were produced in East Germany (the super f2,7 35-70 being a fine example). Some of the lenses were just relabeled Sigma lenses, some of the lenses were Zeiss or Meyer designed and produced in Japan (like the f3,5 28-70) due to the lack of production resources. Quality differs from good to very good.<br>

I sometimes use a BC1 and BX20 Practica. Results above show the potential of the camera and specially the lenses. At a modest second hand price. Only the special lenses like the Zeiss 35mm f2,4 or the Zeiss 20mm or the Zeiss made 50mm macro lens are expensive, prices up to 300 Euro or more. The common lenses like the 28mm f2,8 , the 50mm f1,8,... are cheap (25 Euro to 50 Euro) and easy to find. The complete set is cheap, handy and light to carry.</p>

<p>What about a Pentacon FM (or Contax FM - same camera, different labeling) or an Exacta Varex or VX?<br>

All are camera's with charisma. The lens systems from Zeiss, Schneider, Meyer etc were state of the art.<br>

All these camera systems and the matching lenses still are perfect users now a day.</p>

 

<p>If modern is with a battey to operate, you better write electronic instead of modern. <br>

A Leica R6 is more recent than a Leicaflex buth I prefere the Leicaflex. A recent Voigtlaender Vito 6x9 rangefinder works the same as a Zeiss Ikonta but I prefere the Ikonta. <br>

Try one of the list, Zeiss Ikonta, Leicaflex, Nikon F90 and you will feel why.</p>

<p>Cameras are hard to chose for me. I love hem all ;-)<br>

The Leicaflex SL as a winner for the realy classic reflex camera. In combination with the 50mm f2<br>

The Nikon F90 as a AF reflex. Combined with the 35mm f2.<br>

The Ikonta 6x9 is a winner as a medium format rangefinder. Has the lovely Novar Anastigmat 105 f3,5 on top.<br>

The Rolleiflex for the TLR. All lenses are OK.<br>

The Leica M2 realy is a winner for the 35mm rangefinder. Combined with the Summicron 50 f2. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Super to use the Exakta. Look for the an extra body. I recently bought a few body's to keep my Exakta system alive. Not hard to find and not that expensive in Europe.</p>

<p>After collecting all the typical brands, Zeiss Ikon, Leica, Nikon, Canon, ... I finally started collecting and using Exakta cameras. I own a few body's and several lenses and they all are a joy to use. Not as sophisticated as a Leica or a Canon but fun to use. The Exakta system has a flexibility (almost) no other make can give. I went for a walk this afternoon, using a VX1000, put the waist level finder on the camera, 3-ring matte field ground glass, Flektogon 35mm lens on the camera, Biotar 58mm and Trioplan 100 mm in the camera bag. One can change finders, ground glass, lenses etc in a second. Old lenses are not that contrasty and hard compared to Canon and Nikon but with a special timbre. If you put a B&W film such as a Adox CHS100 in the camera, the picture quality is kind of super for landscaping, portait,... .<br>

The quality of most Exakta camera's is OK if you look for a camera with good shutter cloths. A VX1000 and a VX500 dates from almost 40 to 45 years ago. Look for a decent body. A Varex IIa or IIb has a better quality but is harder to find. If you look around, you will find a good user body below 50 Euro. Good lenses are more expensive but not hard to find. Go for the top lenses. A Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm 2,8 is at least 100 Euro but is a super lens. There are top 50mm lenses. I prefer the Biotar, a Tessar is also a good choice. A complete set with a few spare body's will cost you less than a new Nikon lens.</p>

 

<p>I have a collection of Practica camera's and lenses. Some lenses are good, sharp lenses, some are soft in a typical way. Compare a Pancolor 50 / 1,4 with a Canon 50 / 1,4 and you will see a difference. But both lenses are good.<br>

The ergonomics of a Practica BC1 are better than that of an EOS 650. <br>

Overall, the Practica system works and can deliver perfect results.</p>

 

<p>As with all older lenses, you maybe should judge performance with care.<br>

At f5,6 or f8, a Pancolor on an Exacta (or a Pancolor Electric an a M42 body) can deliver good to perfect results. At f1,8 a Pancolor is a good portrait lens. Not tac sharp but with a creamy bokeh.<br>

I only use film (B&W mainly) but after developping and processing the images with a good scanner, prints to size A3 or bigger are no problem with a Pancolor.<br>

To compare, not to judge:<br>

At f1,8 to f2,8, a modern lens (e.g. Nikon AFD f1,8) is sharper. Not as soft as the Pancolor. However, the out of focus of the Pancolor looks better due to its lens construction and semi round diafragma blades.<br>

At f8 or f11, the performance of the Pancolor is often better than the modern compettitors.<br>

And by the way, who uses his lens at 1,8? I mostly use my lenses at f4 to f8. So who cares. I don't, I just enjoy it!</p>

 

<p>I own a few Minolta 7000's and since focussing gets harder for me (wearing glasses), this camera tend to replace my Leicaflex more often. The autofocus and exposure system works very well.<br>

I own several lenses and almost all are good performers. I even use the Sony lenses on my camera. This makes the Minolta system compatible in all of his parts for more than 25 years.<br>

Autofocus is fast enough exept for sports events.<br>

The prices for used film camera's are low. Look for a decent and not abused camera and you will probably find one for 40 Euro or less. Look for a camera with a clean LCD on top because these display's start to get black after 25 years.<br>

You will probably have to replace the internal back-up battery but that gets done in no time with a battery cost of 5 Euro.<br>

As "normal" lens I recommend the 50 f 1,7 Minolta or the Sony 50 f 1,4. The Sony 28 mm is OK, one can find cheap zoom lenses like the 35-70 f 4 of the 28-105,.... .<br>

A real user camera with good ergonomics.</p>

<p>I own a few Minolta 7000's and since focussing gets harder for me (wearing glasses), this camera tend to replace my Leicaflex more often. The autofocus and exposure system works very well.<br>

I own several lenses and almost all are good performers. I even use the Sony lenses on my camera. This makes the Minolta system compatible in all of his parts for more than 25 years.<br>

Autofocus is fast enough exept for sports events.<br>

The prices for used film camera's are low. Look for a decent and not abused camera and you will probably find one for 40 Euro or less. Look for a camera with a clean LCD on top because these display's start to get black after 25 years.<br>

You will probably have to replace the internal back-up battery but that gets done in no time with a battery cost of 5 Euro.<br>

As "normal" lens I recommend the 50 f 1,7 Minolta or the Sony 50 f 1,4. The Sony 28 mm is OK, one can find cheap zoom lenses like the 35-70 f 4 of the 28-105,.... .<br>

A real user camera with good ergonomics.</p>

<p>You can use two lithium battery's of 3V (CR1/3) instead of the mercury. Works perfect with my camera.<br>

Greetings.</p>

The black paint on the lens is to seal the glue and to avoid reflections.

The paint on the tubus is to avoid reflections.

The paint was in the early days of lens production (1850 to 1900) a mixture of carbon black (pure carbon) and a animal-

orrigine varnish (annimal skin can be used to produce glue and varnish).

The German company Dick can still deliver the basic products. The varnish is still used in musical instruments.

I probably will find the formula for the lens paint if I look hard in my archive.

By the way, regular black paint will also do.

Succes!

Happy newyear.

 

I use printing-film (photo-emulsion on a transparent layer) with fairly good results. The

only problem is the sensibillity at longer exposure times (e.g. 10 sec f16 - 2,5 ASA). This

problem can be an advantage when you use barrel mounted lenses.

The film I use comes from ADOX (Berlin). The send it after E-mail (and payment in

advance).

 

Greetings,

 

Karel.

I take my pictures with barrel lenses. It looks difficult buth when you use print-film or low

ASA film (Adox Berlin - Foto Impex - can deliver print 6 ASA film in all sizes) it is not hard

to do the timing. In the winter, 3 sec with f22 is a good combination. Another advantage of

print film is the option to load the film holder in red light. When you use a old barrel lens

- e.g. a Zeiss Tessar 210/4,5 or simmilar - the diafragm can go up to 45 or more. 100

years ago, the films they used had similar ASA numbers.

 

Greetings,

 

Karel.

I recently bought a "new" one (left behind demo-model) and I am pleased about the lens. I

had to pay 250 Euro (325 USD). I use is together with my M2 and Leicaflex. The camera is

well build, good lens, electronics are outdated, ergonomics are OK. The results are very good

(up to 20 x 30 cm prints). I would go for it. Quality has a price.

 

Karel.

I recently bought a Hermagis Anastigmat 460 mm f8 (Model nr 5 from Hermagis). I just dit

a few tests and this lens covers 30 x 40 cm (11 x 16 inch) at first looks. The front and

back elements have a diameter of apx 55 mm (2 inch) on the lens, At first looks, it is a bi-

convex front construction, a reversed plano convex back element and an orrifice type

diafragm. The diafragm plates were not included but I found a few drawings. The lens

gives a fine detail on the ground glass with a special flair on the highlights. The serial nr is

177403. The lens has a black finish.

I found some information considering Hermagis. unfortunatly nothing detailed and

technical. Hermagis produced a few lenses with special soft focus effects. Some were

discribed in a book "Les objectifs d'artiste" - by Pulligny & Puyo - printed in Paris 1906.

 

Greetings,

Karel.