peter_naylor1

<p>Further to that last post of mine, I wrote up a while ago on my 1937 FED-1 and 1955 Zorki-1 Leica 2 copy 'bookends', in my Flickr Pages here:</p> <p> <p>I had been fortunate enough to get the 1955 Zorki-1 complete with all that original 'fruit' we collectors love, like cardboard box, leather case and even owner's manual (in Cyrillic) from a guy in Finland, but the 1937 FED-1 came just 'as is'. It didn't even have a lens cap, but JS came to the rescue on that later in exchange for a Leica one. (Pete In Perth) </p>

<p>Interesting post, John! I've got a slightly earlier FED-1 than yours, acquired here in Australia but which I believe had come via Poland. Felix Djerjinsky was also reputably originally from Poland, but as others have correctly posted, his 'FED' connection with the small factory was purely an administrative one, via the NKVD. Many thanks to <strong>Richard W. </strong>for posting that link to Oscar Fricke's extensive article on the history of the FED-1 camera and its manufacture, because I'd read it some years ago after I acquired my FED-1 but couldn't find it again to post. Thanks also to <strong>James S. </strong>for posting that photo of his more upmarket version of the FED-1, with 1/1,000th sec top speed and F2 lens. My 1937 FED-1 has just the usual 1/500 sec top speed and F3.5 version of the Leitz Elmar.</p> <p>However, I once spend some time looking at it very closely with a 15X magnifier, and I'd recommend anybody with one of these early FEDs to do the same. You'll be amazed that when you look really closely at any of the markings, whether they be the historical spiel on the top-plate, shutter speeds, focussing distances or whatever, that EVERYTHING has been engraved - not stamped! Those characteristic rotary whorls are unmistakable under a 15X magnifier. So the next question is why take such labour-extensive steps, when a stamping machine could have done the same in no time. The answer has to be there surely in Fricke's article. These FED cameras weren't produced on a purely commercial costing basis, but to teach the young former streetkids now employed as 'communards', to learn engineering skills.</p> <p>So any prewar FED is quite a unique animal for a collector! Post WW2 when production of the FED-1 was resumed (and also started on the similar Zorki-1), those former labour-intensive procedures disappeared in favour of standard factory production methods, with costs the main factor and to hell with education and training of former street urchins, and other ethical issues. Now meeting the weekly production quota was the only thing that mattered, Comrades! ................... (Pete In Perth)</p> <p> </p>

<p>James, I agree that it's hard to understand just why a 1955 advert in a Japanese photographic magazine by a Japanese optical company, would feature a drawing of a clearly western-featured woman to help put their sales message over. Perhaps there was a similar advert from Ofuna, but with writing and prices in English, placed in certain US magazines? Somehow I doubt it, though.<br> Several years ago I acquired a 1937-ish Minolta Semi folder on Ebay USA. Amazingly, all the lettering on it was in English with no Japanese characters anywhere - yet according to my McKeown's Classic Camera Guide, the Minolta Semi was never exported out of Japan! So, go figure, eh? What a strange sort of logic, to inscribe a Japanese-made camera sold on the Japanese market, with lettering that probably 98% of its buyers wouldn't have understood. (Pete In Perth)</p>

<p>Hi, Rick great photos, and so nicely presented as always. It's a shame the small Zunow Optical Co didn't get associated with one of the big Japanese conglomerates, which could have helped it get through its bad times. It did apparently have some sort of mutual deal going with the Ofuna Optical Co, which got better known for its binoculars than for its photographic lenses. So some mutual back-scratching saw 6-element F1.9 5cm lenses badged as 'Ofunars' as standard lenses for the Miranda T SLR of c. 1955, but which were almost certainly manufactured by Zunow. In turn, Ofuna produced F3.5 75mm 4-element Tessar-style lenses labelled as 'Zunow', which can sometimes be seen on twin-lens reflexes. The labelling skulduggery seems to have been done in order to meet Japanese Government 'quotas', in order to farm export work out to different companies, especially those ones in new construction areas.</p> <p>I was fortunate to score an Ofuna F3.5 80mm enlarging lens at a photographic swap-meet here in Perth some years ago. It's a very nicely constructed item, in chromed brass. I've never actually spied one of the Miranda-mount F1.9 Ofunas, but a friend in the US has both an Ofunar and Zunow lens and he reckons they're identical apart from the name badge! I've posted a scan from a Japanese photographic magazine c. 1955 of an Ofuna advert, for those curious to know more. A similar enlarging lens to mine is included. (Pete In Perth)</p><div></div>

<p>I guess I should also add that the matter of modifying 120 reel film to 620, has been brought up before in the Yahoo Duo 620 Group's files. Basically, it's not as easy to do for the Duo 620 as it is for some other cameras designed for 620 film, due to cramped space. So even that easiest normal solution of 'nibbling' away at the wider flanges on 120 reels with nail cutters to get them down to 620 flange dimensions, is difficult and requires a fair bit of post-surgery careful filing to get the now-reduced diameter flanges to rotate smoothly without binding or jamming.</p> <p>Some of our Group members reckon it's easier to go another route, and just rewind the 120 film inside a 620 reel's backing paper in a darkroom - but for that, you first need that precious strip of backing paper in good condition, not to mention a darkroom, plus a 620 spool.</p> <p>Others have suggested that one of those cameras that were both 120 and 620 compatable, such as several British-made folders from the 50s, can be used to wind on a 120 full reel onto an empty 620 blank reel, and then just reverse things onto another blank 620 reel. Sorry, but that doesn't always work because the precious internal film strip is now facing the wrong direction so its loose trailing edge is now the leading edge, and can go its own uncontrolled way. 'Life Wasn't Meant To Be Easy', to quote former OZ PM Malcolm Fraser! (Pete In Perth)</p>

<p>Hi, Tony Please consider joining the 'Yahoo Duo 620 Group', where you'll find all sorts of interesting stuff including scans of IBs for your Series 11 Duo and others. We also have Databases to help Duo owners date their cameras.</p> <p> https://au.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/duo620/database/2/edit</p> <p>Unfortunately, because of spammers and other such pests, you'll have first to apply to join the Group, but it's a mere formality seeing I'm the Moderator! I think you'll be agreeably surprised to find just how much relevant stuff we have in our 'Files', 'Photos' and 'Databases', for Group members to access. (Pete N In Perth)</p>

<p>Hi, Andrew the trusty old Sangamo Weston Master V has been mentioned several times by the previous postees, and I endorse their recommendations. I got my first one new back in 1967 along with a Yashicamat TLR, and it always gave reliable readings even down at low light situations. Later on in the 70s/80s, I acquired several 35mm SLRs with inbuilt CDS metering so when somebody made me 'an offer I couldn't refuse' for the Master V, I reluctantly parted company with it. However, even later, I found I missed having such an accurate handheld meter not so much for exposure settings, but more for checking the readings on more of those CDS-equipped SLR's! So when an identical working Master V (along with an Invacone) came my way in a package of stuff in the early 90s, I jumped at the opportunity to nab it. It's still my favourite device for checking exposure settings.</p> <p>Over the years, I'd got to believe that selenium meters weren't as reliable or as accurate as CDS-powered ones, especially at low light situations. However, the two Master Vs I've owned always gave correct and reliable readings. So given that these were not exactly compact items, and were quite expensive too, was it maybe that the poor reputation for longevity of selenium meters in general was more due to cost-cutting production methods, rather than intrinsic faults? (Pete In Perth)</p>

<p>Good point you raise, Bill. Many of those 1950s 35mm cams especially, had shockingly miniscule VF's. John S. has mentioned a good example in the Agimatic, but early Diax models were shockers too. The problem appear to be even worse with these, when fitted with a Voss-made accessory rangefinder from the same Ulm factory - because the viewfinder window in those is slightly bigger than the one on the Diax camera! Thankfully later Diax cameras such as the 1a, 11a, 1b and 11b, went overboard with VF profusion. It was almost as if the Diaxwerk was trying to apologise for those earlier tiny VFs. (Pete In Perth)</p>

<p>Congrats, Rick, on acquiring what is a rare camera in itself, but even more so with a lens wearing those magic words 'Zunow'. I've got an earlier Neoca - a 35 2S - but it only has the cooking F3.5 45mm Neokar lens. It's similar to Jim Styles' Neoca (apart from the Zunow!) but is finished mainly in matt chrome rather than black. What attracted me to it when I saw it in a junk/antique shop here in Perth some 14 years ago, was that it still had all the original bits and bobs such as 2-piece box, case and instruction booklet. Being an avid collector, to find a c. 1955 camera complete with all that stuff convinced me it was worth the $90 I got them down to.</p> <p>When I got it home and had finished the usual playing with the shutter and CRF etc, I had a good look through the quite comprehensive 12-page instruction booklet. Page 5 turned out to be a 'Real Crassic' of 1950s Japanese mastery of the English language! I won't point anything specific out, but see if you can spot a certain glaring SNAFU anywhere ...............</p> <p>(Pete In A Sunny But Chilly Perth)</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks, JDM, for bringing up one of my all-time favourite movies in 'Rear Window'. I can vouch for the improved quality of the digitally remastered edition (especially in Blu-Ray format), because I've just bought one of these DVDs and the difference over the 'old' version is amazing. (Pete In Perth)</p>

<p>Hi, Radim in my experience the camera body had to be designed with auto aperture capability, to accept auto aperture lenses. For example, keeping things in context with your KMZ Helios 44 F2 lens in M42 mount, I used a Zenit B with one of those lenses back in the late 60s/early 70s. It had a 'preset aperture ring', meaning it had to be manually closed down or inevitable over-exposure would occur. </p> <p>I sold the Zenit way back when, probably around 1978, and moved onto other cameras. However, I always had fond memories of it, and wondered just how much better it would have been had it had auto aperture feature via that pin you mentioned. Well, a few years ago I acquired a KMZ Photosniper outfit complete with ammunition box carry-case, and guess what - the outfit included an accessory Helios 44 F2 lens with the elusive pin feature! I sold the outfit a few years later because it proved too damn heavy to cart around for walks in the bush, and the buyer only wanted the outfit to use with the Tair F4.5 300mm lens. So I kept the Helios 44.</p> <p>Move on a few years, and I managed to score an identical Zenit B to the one I'd owned back in the 60s/70s, even down to the same Helios 44 with preset aperture ring. I didn't intend to use it, only wanting to add it to my collection of stuff I'd once owned. Some time later I was messing around with swapping lenses and such, and it occurred to me that just maybe - my Helios 44 with the automatic pin might work with the Zenit B, and justify trying out with a couple of rolls of film. Great idea, but although it fitted fine and focussed perfectly, the 'pin' clearly had nothing to actuate against inside the camera body, so the lens remained at F2 max aperture irrespective of the selected aperture. Hope this helps to answer your question! (Pete In Perth)</p>

<p>Hi, Marc much appreciated, my friend. Diax adverts aren't all that common here in Oz either, although the cameras sold quite well probably due more to word of mouth. One of the old guys in our WA Camera Collectors Society recalls that he started work as a junior salesman at a Perth camera shop in 1954, and the very first new camera he sold was a Diax 1b. He also recalled that the Oz importer of Diax cameras was a Sydney company called Salmon and Gardner, and they were most helpful whenever he had to phone them about an order or whatever. He also recalls that the Oz importer of Leicas was the total opposite, being most unhelpful and giving the impression that they couldn't care less.</p> <p>Regarding my recently acquired Diax 1b, I've emailed Diax Guru Peter Geisler in Germany with my camera's details for his database. He came back with the interesting news that the 'cooking' F3.5 ISCO Westar lens is actually quite rare, and he's only got one himself. He reckons most customers preferred to shell out more money and get a Schneider Xenar or Xenon. PETE IN PERTH</p>

<p>Hi, Marc thanks for posting all those scans, mate. Just by coincidence, last week I scored a 1954-ish Diax 1b at a charity store, in amazingly minty condition. Unfortunately, seems the days of picking up old classic cameras at these places for ten or fifteen bucks are long gone (sigh!). This Diax had a $120 sticker on it, but I managed to get the manageress of the store down to $80. Still a lot to fork out, seeing it's only got a very bottom-line ISCO F3.5 Westar triplet lens - but it's in such such good nick, I thought 'What The Hell!"<br> If you should chance to find an ad for the Diax 1b/11b range in any of your 1954 photo magazines, I'd greatly appreciate if you could scan and post it. (PETE IN PERTH)</p>

<p>The Frilon 50mm F1.5 lens was the fastest (and most expensive) of all the standard FL lenses available for Futura 35mm cameras, during the small Freiburg factory's short period of production in the 50s. These fast lenses were made 'in-house' and like all Futura lenses, have a unique M34 mount with the focussing mechanism part of the camera body, not on the lens.<br> Frilon lenses fetch high prices, witness a nice example sold on Ebay Germany for E.387. However, an occasional lens shows up with a Leitz M39 mount, like this one going on Ebay Japan for a small fortune:<br> http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/JP-Ex-Futura-Frilon-50-1-5-Leica-L39-mount-50-F1-5-Made-in-Germany-jp11746-/280978889421?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item416ba59acd<br> There are two others going on Ebay USA, at similar astronomical prices. I've picked the Ebay Japan Frilon because it has a nice sideways-view photo with clever enlargement capability, so you can see the additional metalwork added so as to include focussing, and with an M39 screw mount.<br> Being an avid Futura collector - and Moderator of the Yahoo Futura Collectors Group - I'd dearly love to know just where these M39 modified Frilons are coming from. Poland, Ukraine and Russia have all been mooted as possible (but so far unsubstantiated) sources. There have been suggestions that the lenses could have been made by the Futurawerk itself, but I doubt this for two reasons. One - the script around the front of the lens is identical to that on a Futura-mount Frilon, with no mention of 'Leitz M39' or similar. Two - the s/nos of the three lenses are so varied that it's hard to believe they could have been done as a small 'in-house' production run. It's far more likely that these Frilons have been acquired fairly recently, perhaps even complete with camera bodies to be disposed of separately, for the Leitz M39 mount metalwork to be fitted. <br> The modification appears to have been very professionally done, and the end result is visually in keeping with the original Frilon parts. I hasten to add that I have no connection with any of the 3 sellers offering these lenses. It's pure curiousity on my part that has triggered this post, on behalf of the Futura Collectors Group. (Pete In Perth)</p>