ph.

A nerdy comment from an occasional collector of such ancient devices: In my occasional inspection of this treasure trove of ancient posts i have reached nuber 330-something and noted this description of KW products In some descriptions of the FX vintage it is stated that Zeiss made prisms to be inserted in the "lichtschacht". I, however have such a removable prism fitting well atop the camera the prism is numbered and marked KW (and with "s" in a triangle ). No idea whether they bought it in and relabelled, but Neusiedlitz near Dresden is not reputed to have had any optical production, so Jena may have been the origin even if those prisms are usually said to be labelled Zeiss. The small diameter thread lens I have for an older body-version is a "Victar" probaly also a triplet like Ludwigs "Meritar" p.

I agree that Heinz Waaske might have used plastics if avaiiable, but disagree that the MInox was preferable. I had three MInoxes in succession where the shutter stopped working (repaired by the importers and then died again). My Rollei still is functional after xx years. The Minox ease of closing certainly was preferrable to having to cock the Rollei before collapsing the lens. Being careful not to empty the light meter battery by not keeping it exposed to light and out of its pouch was a spot of bother and Minox autoexposure certainly beat that light meter arrangenent. Also the Minox "tessar" type lens was excellent. However, the fact that the Rollei works while the Minoxes are dead disqualifies them. p.

I started to review old posts here some time ago and found the Indian gentlemans experiments with developing B&W and commenting on the growth of Bangalore quite interesting. Nowadays I examine posts about cameras I have sitting on shelves and sometimes take out to use as they were intended. I find gthat the posts beyond 2-300 contain intersting snippets of useful info, In the case of Voigtländer versus Zeiss I wished to confirm my belief that the Ultron was as good as the 35-135. C-41 film makes the camera more important in its role as a black container than as provider of well dosaged flashes of light. I do absolutely not regret reviving antiquities, whether in immaterial form or otherwise. And trust that the original compaliner will reailize the irrationality of opposing the use of this trasure-trove of information. p.

Quite a while since this discussion of the Cx RTS but some of them may still be alive and in use. I recently fed my Contax ST with a C41fim and compared snaps made on the same roll of film by a more ancient Voigtländer VitomaticIIa (the Ultron lens variety) with the CX native Zeiss 35-135 on the ST. I did put new batteries in so as not to have trouble with film transport (AND removed them when putting the ST back in storage) No discernible difference in sharpness or colour. although not having strong light against the lens (since the Ultron ahd no sunshade and the Zeiss just an insignificant small one) BUT focussing in a hurry on the same subjects was easier wtith the IIa supeimposed dot than with the ST split image. p

I have both bought and sold at Westlicht in Vienna, Most recently at the Leica auctions. Their comission charges are quite stiff, but their catalogues are excellent distributed both on paper and online (take a look), and appeal to a wide audience. Quite a number of years ago I sold some duplicates at Christies but they did not follow my minimum bid requirement, so I never used them again. Peter Coeln at Westlight preferred not to receive a whole series of items, rather single, valuable objects p.

Interesting historical stuff about millitary cameras on page 300 or so, I presume that the green Nikonos V ones might also qualify if only as tools for war reporters, as according to rumour they were popular for jungke use during the Vietnam wars. p.

most interesting piece about ancient instruments used to set exposure before automation made them superfluous. Some of these instruments ,like the zeiss, are worth having just for their aesthethical appeal. Batteries die in a matter of months or years while photocells die in a matter of decades, but design remains to be enjoyed for centuries. p.

my memory of the shutters may indeed be wrong, but I do recall worrying about the metal ones and in spite of the C7 having a larger view the adjustable bit was attractive. p.

In my inspection of ancient posts to learn about experiences with classic film apparati I have arrived at page 383 and discover that the venerable Canon rangefinder that preceded the C-7 is mentioned. I recall that one as sturdy with a selectable rangefinder view, and its LTM mount would take leica lenses as well as Canons- And as pointed out above, also the ecellent new "Voigtländer" ones. I preferred the VI-T to the C7 because the cloth shutter curtain was not so sensitive to being touched as the metal one was when changing films. But eventually the M3 won. p

SPs many illusttrated and insightsful descripptions of change in India ought to be assembled in a book. The changes he describes can be seen in many different countries. p.

if you are willing to wait for perfection, Master mechanic Andrea Schønfelder at Olbrich's repair shop in Göttingen will fix any old east German camera, I recently had my Exacta "vest pocket" from the late 1930es expertly revived by her team there. p.

Sirs, I do occasionally explore this site, and find your ancient posts ad cameras at bygone times interesting, However, on recent visits, Forum access is almosty impossible without conquering the long text obstacle where one has to agree to sell ones soul - at least in order to get out of that textual trap one has to agree to something (probably unenforceable in Europe). I appreciate the intentions of your site revamp : presumably well meaning , traffic-generating and the obstacle course probalbly demanded by some unreasonable legal entity , but please reinstate a quick way to access the forum. p.

I very much doubt that KW would have succumbed to the more recent temptation of selling their cameras via superfluous bling appaling to less serious collectors. At gthe time when that camera was built there were absolutely no potential collectors of Kw peoducts. But do keep it, Technologically it was a predecessor of the Asahi Pentax even if its thread mount was narrower and the Zeiss Contax SLR pioneered M42 and hence a piece of phototechnohistory. p.

this was apparently the unfocussed version

since it seems to be useful to illustrate points, I enclose a snap of a praktica with the prism fitting inside its hood. (several versions of this exists as well) p.

Another camtech point further back in this treasure trove of info merits an addendum. The CZ prism might well at one time have been stuck on top with a pointed roof, but the prism I have for one of the ancient KW devices fits inside the collapsible hood, has a flat top and is marked KW , "made in Germany"plus a trianglular S mark and a number 03570, No mention of DDR or Jena. p.

In case anyone like me trawls through ancient post here in order to get info on camera technology use and change, I should perhaps provide some additional info to the remark above that "technicians were required to provide designs to fit a certain volume. " If you read the piece on professor Heinz Waaske in the real camerapedia "camera-wiki.org" (not the pirated commercial one) You will find that professor Waaske designed the tiny 35mm and offered the design to his employers Gebrüder Wigin (the makers of the Edixa reflex that he designed), but they declined, so he went to Rollei. The same info is also offered in a book on mr Waaskes designs. I might add that despite its advanced age, my Rollei 35 still works especially if the slow shutter speed atre excersised a bit p.

My peregrinations among old threads have reached this interesting discourse ad prices. Presumably as interesting over a decade later. Real worth and usefulness changes as society changes over time. As does perception of monetary equivalence and value. Ancient photo gear is slowly turning from tools to collectables, and interesting examples of technological history while illustrating social change. The recent Barnack sale provides a good example, not only of price rise, but of many able to afford bidding. p.

according to the Meyer catalogue (apparently this forum program doesnot like to upload PDFs, so no attatchment) the 100mm has the second and third element bonded together. And according to another reliable source, the special and expensive glass types went to Zeiss and not to Meyer. p.

the advice ad lamps is sound. As to projectors I use a Leitz which has larger sprocket wheels than the Bolex and so is gentler towards old and brittle film material. Its optics are decent. p.

I have reached page 417 or so and found this exchange ad small frame movie equipment. Today it seems as remote as horse-drawn carriages. But I still regret Kodachromes` demise and have kept my Bolexes, Beaulieus and Leicinas and their optics together with suitable projectors , so if double8 and S-8 fim becomes available I am ready, I do not collect, but then I do not sell , which amounts to a similar situation once one has used plenty of gear. p.

on page 404 I found another one of Subbarayans masterpieces of recording and commenting on life in Karnataka. Viewing the enire collection thoughout the years is highly recommended. p.

still inpecting this info trove. One might add that before Jaques Bogopolsky designed Bolexes he made a "BOL" a combined camera and projector. Paillard was takenover by Eumig while the successor to Pignons was Capaul&Weber. p,

In my occasional inspection of old posts I found this on page 370- and for anyone who uses this site for its lexically useful conent, I would like to add that my version of the japanese mount for the MSW is mechanically excellent but aethetically different. It lacks the Kern way of showiing depth of field rather like the early non macro versions and the very narrow non auto aperture early ones. However when i used it on my Canon 5d , the rear of the lens stuck so far back focussed at infinity that the mirror jammed. On a mirri\orless it perfoms perfectly. But I presume that with its extreme rarity and already steep Kern prices for the mor common versions , no one would get it for ordinary use. p.

Best= robust and reliable & with excellent optics (not necessarily the one with most features.) I would nominate M3 over the OM1 since boith were once submitted to the same intense rain and only the M3 survived. Otherwise the Alpas certainly had some optics that could compete with Leitz. And the Nikonos type V is more or less indestructible. I found the SP less useful than the M6 I traded it for , mainly because I alrady had several Mlenses and none except the standard for the SP . Although the SL2 (with its plastic lens release knob subtituted with the proper metal one) is an impressive piece of machinery with an excellent viewfinder (reportedly costing more to produce than they sold it for) I have not used it long enouigh to judge its solidity, neither have I used my R9 enough, but its optics are first class. So with a number of caveats I will nominate M3, SL2, Alpa9f and NikonosV plus Nikon F based on its mechanical reputation although I have only used some of ithe lenses of it and its successors p.