davecaz

I do know that my response is considered extreme, but in the summer of 1962, when I used it, the camera was way past its "best by" date. Like so many of the pre-war RFs the viewfinder and rangefinder were pitiful and hardly adequate for scientific field recording. Its ergonomics were only rivaled by some of the corpulent West German cameras from the likes of Balda which fit the human hand like a dodge ball.....

 

Actually, I have got and shot some later Signets (link), and while I'll never love them, my dislike of Signets is mostly limited to the 35 model.

I don't get the dodge ball reference because I always found them to fit my hand perfectly, after about 5th grade.

Personally, I didn't think your response was anywhere close to extreme, if you're referring to the one in Rick's earlier thread. But, it was written in such a way as to inspire a mental image of you growling out the words, with hackles raised, which perfectly captured the frustration you clearly felt. People are entitled to dislike what they dislike and, since you have a solid body of experience to back up your impression, you are more than usually entitled, in my view.

The Chevron was another interesting Kodak camera of the 1950s, and one of the most beautiful I think. I've never used one or seen one in person.

Hmm. I went and searched it out, and didn't see anything I'd call beautiful. But, it's all in the eye... Maybe you saw different photos than I saw.

It was a big, heavy rangefinder camera producing 6x6 cm images on 620 rollfilm, apparently capable of creating excellent images with a 4-element Ektar lens, but lacking the quirky charm of the Medalist with it's brilliant 5-element lens. It was certainly very much in the style of the Signet 35, but doesn't seem to have been a great success in the marketplace. I've hefted one but not shot with one, and it's a very solid camera. Another of Mike Eckman's great reviews, here.

 

http://www.mikeeckman.com/2018/07/kodak-chevron-1953/

Thanks for the link. I take "...very solid camera" to mean suitable as an anchor for up to about a 12 foot skiff. I did find a photo of one with a Signet in front of it, and it did appear to be of the hulking brute persuasion. It did not appeal to me on that basis. My RB67 is hulking enough.

A shot of the 400mm preset that I mentioned earlier in the thread.

[ATTACH=full]1256207[/ATTACH]

For those not familiar with this lens, the preset 400 is long, but lightweight. I usually just stop it down to f 32 and use the open/close ring to continuously vary the aperture until I get what I want. If you want a bit more reach there is also a 500mm f 8 version .

That's a new one on me. If the normal aperture ring opens and closes the aperture in the normal fashion, what does the open/close ring do?

The Franka Solida Record is one of a number of cameras on which the lens must be set to Infinity in order to close it back up.

The manual for it is available here: Franka-Werk Solida 6x6, Solida I, FW Solida II instruction manual, Franka-Werk Solida III instruction manual, Solida Jr. user manual, PDF manual, free instruction manuals Please pay the supplier the $3 he requests, if you download the manual.

And it looks an awful lot like a miniature Kodak Chevron to me....

Is that a good thing? I'm not familiar with the Chevron, either.

Davecaz said:

 

The bug was most likely in the scanner, Dave, and I could remove it with a click of the mouse in Photoshop, but it amused me. Yes, $399 for the bike...Does that seem expensive or cheap?

That the bug was in the scanner is even more surprising. As for the bike, unless it's a rare and highly desirable collector's item, $399 is crazy high in America. I could buy 8 similar bikes for the same price without even working hard at it.

Years ago I posted quite a comprehensive file on the Signet 35, if anyone is curious about the camera:

King of the Kodachrome

I was curious, and I'm glad I was. Just JDM's response, alone, was worth the price of admission. :D But, it was another treat as far as the camera, itself, too. So, thanks for the link. The quality of the images is surprising, even knowing who was wielding the camera. Very enjoyable.

For the 30th. Pentacon Pentina M : 50mm CZJ Tessar f/2.8 : Arista EDU Ultra 100 : PMK Pyro.

 

They never did get all the bugs out of the Pentina.

 

[ATTACH=full]1255948[/ATTACH]

Beautiful shot, aside from the bug. That isn't really on the camera, is it? And, am I reading that right? Are they asking 400NZD for that bike?

For the 31st. Intrepid 8x10, Nikkor 120mm, Fuji HRT Xray film, Rodinal 1+100.

by bc50099

X-Ray film? That's interesting. Why X-Ray film?

First you have to charge them, then hold down the on button until it resets and starts up.

What you describe is what I did as a "hard reset". I charged it overnight, then held down the power button for a looong time (one attempt was more than 30 seconds). Nothing happened, so I'm guessing "it's dead, Jim".

Not sure I want to invest any more money into it, especially since I don't have the software and it apparently is no longer available for download.

They are pretty easy to find for $20 or so.

Hmm. Not on the eBay I shop on. Not if I want a working one.

Ah, as soon as I saw the words "Signet Test" I knew JDM's hackles would rise...Since acquiring a Signet about three years ago I've put only one film through it, and I'm now motivated to try another. Thanks for another interesting edition, Marc.

It looks quite similar in overall design to the Baldas.

Aaaaah! Signet!!!!

The only camera I ever really, really disliked. I had to use it as a field recording camera (Kodachrome, of course), a task for which it was not really intended.

 

Thanks all the same:(

What about the Signet makes it so ill-suited for use in the field?

According to Simon Hawketts' page on this model, "The exposure system is novel. The camera shoots at only one shutter speed and that is set by the speed of the film fitted to the camera. A 12 DIN (12 ISO) film will set the camera to shoot at 1/30 sec and a 24 DIN (200 ISO) will set the shutter speed to 1/500 sec. Once this is set, the aperture is controlled via the selenium cell, with the indication in the viewfinder as mentioned above." Not that you're likely to find any 12 ISO film around, these days.

Selenium cells often deteriorate, leading to incorrect metering. In this camera, that could be very troublesome, as the meter controls the exposure. I'm told that they can be replaced, but I have no idea what that would cost. Someone else may be along with more info.

Documenting the pictures on the battlefield tour

[ATTACH=full]1255338[/ATTACH]

Yorktown

NEVER surrender! NEVER!! ;)

In it's day the Bolsey was one of the most compact non-folding 35's available. It has a 44mm f 3.2 lens made by Wolensak with a shutter of 1/10 to 1/200 second plus B and T. The "set-o-matic" system couples with focusing distance to automatically compute flash exposure as you focus. Not too shabby for 1953.

I found mine in a box of unclaimed repairs from the camera shop. It had been in non-climate controlled storage for about 15 years, After some Ronsonol cleaning I got the shutter to fire (a bit erratic at first). The film advance jams from time to time so I'm still working on it. Although the front of the camera is compact, it is pretty thick. Here's a top view.

[ATTACH=full]1254947[/ATTACH]

Yeah, they're "chunky monkeys". I think I still have one, but it's never worked in the time I've had it, and I don't know much about the cameras. Most sources seem more interested in the company's founder than they are in the cameras.

Thanks for the info! I easily removed the 4 screws but the plate is still held in place by the autowinder coupling point, any advice on how to remove this without a spinner tool?

Just wondering if you got past that roadblock. I may need to do the same thing with my F2. It's always worked flawlessly, but 2 days after the last time I exercised it, it decided to do the same thing you described.

Using 3 out of 4 cameras in the photo below. The Bolsey needs some more work before I put film in it, but HP5+ in the Rollei 35 and Olympus 35RC. The Olympus XA, in a departure from my usual film choices, is loaded with a roll of Rolleipan 25 (one of about five or so reloads I have left from a bulk roll I bought several years back). Not the same film as the current RPX 25. Haven't decided yet if I'll soup in HC110 dilution H or stand develop in Rodinal at 1:100.

[ATTACH=full]1254800[/ATTACH]

Note this is an older photo so ISO dials are not set for the film loaded.

Not to sidetrack the thread too much, but I notice that three of the four are among the most lauded compact 35mm's, so I'm curious about the Bolsey. Is it the equal of the others, when it's working properly?

Olympus XA, TMax 100, Rodinal 1+50.

 

From North Harbor, Helsinki

 

[ATTACH=full]1254869[/ATTACH]

 

From Kruununhaka, Helsinki

 

[ATTACH=full]1254870[/ATTACH]

 

Celebrating American Independence Day, Laajasalo, Helsinki

 

[ATTACH=full]1254872[/ATTACH]

 

From Tammisalo, Helsinki

 

[ATTACH=full]1254873[/ATTACH]

 

From Yliskylä, Helsinki

 

[ATTACH=full]1254874[/ATTACH]

I'm still really impressed with the results you get from that XA. No wonder people squabble over them.

Thanks, Dave. For some quirky reason the shadow in the pic reminded me of a horse, with a tap on it's head, or something...I think I'm spending too much time at this computer...

Okay, now I've got it. It kind of resembles one of these horses; Don Quixote | SPARTAK DERMENDJIEV sculpture