Black Kodak Medalist II

[John Wiegerink]

Just a possibility that none of the servicemen who used the camera made any complaints about the covering. Also, the US engagement in war with Japan was only 4 years. Modifications could have been planned but never introduced. It’s also possible, ignoring the Kodak photo of sailor using Medalist, that in actual application sailors found it easier to hold cased camera steady.
As I understand, Medalist was used to photograph enemy’s shores, so flash would serve no purpose.
What is fascinating is that so many of these cameras, made in 1940s, are still going strong.

Yes, I think you are right and the military has strict guidelines when it comes to the use of equipment and weapons. I know as I spent a couple of years in the Marines. They probably made it a rule that the camera remained in its case or at least half-case and only was removed to load and unload film. Like you I had read that most of the Medalist I's were used by the Navy on ships to photograph shore batteries before Marines were sent ashore. Those ships had to stay far enough away from shore to not get blasted out of the water. That means the Medalist had to have a very high resolving lens in order to make out shore batteries from that distance. I certainly have no complaints about the lenses on any of my Medalist cameras. Yes, they are a little clunky compared to my Hasselblad, but they are the Timex watch of the camera world, "It takes a licking and keeps on ticking".

 

[Dan Daniel]

they are the Timex watch of the camera world

Medalists are the Rube Goldbergs of the camera world

Seriously, internally there are things going on that are unlike any other camera that I have seen. Voigtlander seemed to jump through hoops to stay away from Rollei patents- look at the Superb TLR- but Kodak seemed to be drunk off their butts and huffing nitorus oxide on the rangefinder and wind system designs.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Medalists are the Rube Goldbergs of the camera world

Seriously, internally there are things going on that are unlike any other camera that I have seen. Voigtlander seemed to jump through hoops to stay away from Rollei patents- look at the Superb TLR- but Kodak seemed to be drunk off their butts and huffing nitorus oxide on the rangefinder and wind system designs.

I agree, the wind system is the pitfall for the Medalist. Users that don't follow the instructions can and will screw the wind timing up and wonder why the camera isn't working right. It's not that hard to set the camera straight again, but you have to know how. I also hear complaints about the range/viewfinder on the Medalist, but I think it is one of the cleverest setups there is and I love using it. The only problem I see with the finder is they are often cracked in the front glass or somebody has tinkered with those small internal wedge prisms. Oh, and if you screw around and crack one of those wedge prisms there are no replacement parts. But if you find a prime example and treat it right you have as a professional camera as one can get. Just love the way the lens renders colors and sharpness on transparency film or even TMY400/HP5+.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Yep, once you catch on to its methods, it is at the least a camera that grows on you and develops its own very nice functions. But in my weaker moments, I'll admit- if that lens was mounted on a Fuji GW690 body, I'd snatch one up in a second. The lens is what makes it worth dealing with all the unique elements.

One of the nice things about the rangefinder setup is that there are no mirrors. All prisms. Well, they did silver the back side of a couple of prisms for a while but then gave that up. Any problems in the silver lead to ghost areas but no real damage in use. The later Chevron simplified this, but the Chevron sis add a small overlapping image section along the center split. This gives both matching lines and superimposing images for focusing.

Once you catch on to how it works, it has its own well-done logic. One of the problems is that since the mechanics are so sui generis, not many people work on them. Not because they are difficult but because you need to throw out what you know about other cameras and deal with its own logic.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Yep, once you catch on to its methods, it is at the least a camera that grows on you and develops its own very nice functions. But in my weaker moments, I'll admit- if that lens was mounted on a Fuji GW690 body, I'd snatch one up in a second. The lens is what makes it worth dealing with all the unique elements.

One of the nice things about the rangefinder setup is that there are no mirrors. All prisms. Well, they did silver the back side of a couple of prisms for a while but then gave that up. Any problems in the silver lead to ghost areas but no real damage in use. The later Chevron simplified this, but the Chevron sis add a small overlapping image section along the center split. This gives both matching lines and superimposing images for focusing.

Once you catch on to how it works, it has its own well-done logic. One of the problems is that since the mechanics are so sui generis, not many people work on them. Not because they are difficult but because you need to throw out what you know about other cameras and deal with its own logic.

Exactly Dan! The Chevron is not much different in size, but it's lighter weight. Kodak cut some corners on the Chevron, but it's still a great camera and its lens is no slouch either. I still like the bigger negative of the Medalist. I have a 100mm f3.5 (L) Ektar Medalist lens in a different shutter and will try it on my 4X5 with my 6X7 roll film back one of these days.

 

[Hunter_Compton]

The later Chevron simplified this, but the Chevron sis add a small overlapping image section along the center split. This gives both matching lines and superimposing images for focusing.

Dan, I don't know if you've been inside a Chevron or not yet, but the Chevron uses a completely different rangefinder setup. Though in use the two give the same effect, the Chevron uses four mirrors rather than any prisms, and it's actually much closer in design to that found on the Kodak 35 RF than the Medalist, or the Signet 35 which it cosmetically resembles.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Dan, I don't know if you've been inside a Chevron or not yet, but the Chevron uses a completely different rangefinder setup. Though in use the two give the same effect, the Chevron uses four mirrors rather than any prisms, and it's actually much closer in design to that found on the Kodak 35 RF than the Medalist, or the Signet 35 which it cosmetically resembles.

I have been inside Chevron! I think what I meant by similar was the main viewfinder with the rangefinder window just below it. And the split-image, but with the addition of the small area of coincident image around the center split line. It's a funny amalgam that I find very easy to use. the Chevron is also rather easily converted to 120 spools, especially compared to the Medalist. So much spare room in the spool chambers.

Now that piece of junk shutter in the Chevron is another story...

For some reason, I find the Chevron a bit goofy. Like it belongs in PeeWee's Playhouse. Might be the floppy shutter release lever that puts over the edge in this direction

 

[GaryFlorida]

Wow, that's a rock solid camera with cool looks! Can also be used as self defense against mountain lions or brown bear.

brown bear lol.

 

[Mr Flibble]

On a small side note, in US Army documentary on Combat Cameraman there is short scene of a combat photographer, spliced in with footage of the war in the Pacific (Tarawa?), holding a black-paint Medalist I.
Presumably a field modification.

The scene starts at around 2:39

 

[Dan Daniel]

On a small side note, in US Army documentary on Combat Cameraman there is short scene of a combat photographer, spliced in with footage of the war in the Pacific (Tarawa?), holding a black-paint Medalist I.
Presumably a field modification.

The scene starts at around 2:39

Interesting! At first I thought it might be aged and dirty chrome. But the window frames on the two rangefinder windows appear to be original aluminum. And the main body color is very close to the lens helical and focus rings black.

I've never seen nor heard of this before. Thanks. I wonder if it was done in the field by the craziest of combat photographers and none of them ever made it out.

 

[Mr Flibble]

Interesting! At first I thought it might be aged and dirty chrome. But the window frames on the two rangefinder windows appear to be original aluminum. And the main body color is very close to the lens helical and focus rings black.

I've never seen nor heard of this before. Thanks. I wonder if it was done in the field by the craziest of combat photographers and none of them ever made it out.

It would definitely be camouflage related. There are photos of members of the 165th US Signal Photographic Company who have black friction tape covering the chromed parts of their Speed Graphic cameras in France in 1944.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Nice job! Still kicking myself for not picking one up when they were cheap...

 

[Paul Howell]

In the 60s while in high school I worked part time for a local photographer who was a retired Navy photomate. He shot weddings with a pair of Metalist along with a Bushman 4X5 with a wide angle lens. He used both flash bulbs and later with electronic flash, I think a Honeywell. I could not tell the difference between shots made with a 4X5 negative vs the 6X9 at 8X10 and 11X14, but if there was an order for a 16X20 he always used a 4X5. Last time I saw him in the mid 70s he had finely traded in the Metalists for a Mamiya Press for the interchangeable lenses and 220 film. I should have bought one of his Metalist when I had the chance.

 

[GaryFlorida]

In the 60s while in high school I worked part time for a local photographer who was a retired Navy photomate. He shot weddings with a pair of Metalist along with a Bushman 4X5 with a wide angle lens. He used both flash bulbs and later with electronic flash, I think a Honeywell. I could not tell the difference between shots made with a 4X5 negative vs the 6X9 at 8X10 and 11X14, but if there was an order for a 16X20 he always used a 4X5. Last time I saw him in the mid 70s he had finely traded in the Metalists for a Mamiya Press for the interchangeable lenses and 220 film. I should have bought one of his Metalist when I had the chance.

bitter regrets.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I bought my first medium format (Bronica S2A) wedding camera from an old guy who was a very well known wedding photographer, and he also shot with a Kodak Medalist and a Grown Graphic 4X5. Of course, that was almost 40 years ago. Of all the cameras in my collection, now and in the past, the Medalist is my all-time favorite camera. The problem with buying one now is that it's getting harder and harder to find one that some monkey has tampered with. I have worked on them long enough and have all the repair manuals, both Military and civilian, which lets me fix most things on the cameras. Of course, there is always the difficulty in the finding of replacement parts. I would have no problem buying one that didn't have broken or cracked viewfinder glass or prism glass.

 

[GaryFlorida]

I bought my first medium format (Bronica S2A) wedding camera from an old guy who was a very well known wedding photographer, and he also shot with a Kodak Medalist and a Grown Graphic 4X5. Of course, that was almost 40 years ago. Of all the cameras in my collection, now and in the past, the Medalist is my all-time favorite camera. The problem with buying one now is that it's getting harder and harder to find one that some monkey has tampered with. I have worked on them long enough and have all the repair manuals, both Military and civilian, which lets me fix most things on the cameras. Of course, there is always the difficulty in the finding of replacement parts. I would have no problem buying one that didn't have broken or cracked viewfinder glass or prism glass.

mine has the automatic shutter cocking mechanism disabled and the double exposure prevention feature. Its red window only but I dont mind. I would like to calibrate the rangefinder though, its not accurate. I think the paralax correction is missing too. I have a bunch of parts for it in a bag. This was many years ago. I would like to get it in top shape again and start taking some interesting photos.

 

[John Wiegerink]

mine has the automatic shutter cocking mechanism disabled and the double exposure prevention feature. Its red window only but I dont mind. I would like to calibrate the rangefinder though, its not accurate. I think the paralax correction is missing too. I have a bunch of parts for it in a bag. This was many years ago. I would like to get it in top shape again and start taking some interesting photos.

Gary,
My advice is just get a repair manual copy and you'll be all set. There is a good section on how to calibrate the range finder and if you are patient you will have no problem doing it. Setting the shutter cocking is set from the back of the camera and the frame counter timing is done through the left top plate cover. If nothing is broken on your camera you should be able to get it to run like it was new. There are no special tolls needed either.

 

[GaryFlorida]

Gary,
My advice is just get a repair manual copy and you'll be all set. There is a good section on how to calibrate the range finder and if you are patient you will have no problem doing it. Setting the shutter cocking is set from the back of the camera and the frame counter timing is done through the left top plate cover. If nothing is broken on your camera you should be able to get it to run like it was new. There are no special tolls needed either.

Thanks for the encouragement John!

 

[Mr Flibble]

mine has the automatic shutter cocking mechanism disabled and the double exposure prevention feature. Its red window only but I dont mind. I would like to calibrate the rangefinder though, its not accurate. I think the paralax correction is missing too. I have a bunch of parts for it in a bag. This was many years ago. I would like to get it in top shape again and start taking some interesting photos.

Mine is the same, the linkage between the winding knob and the frame counter and shutter has been removed. I have to use the red window.
I think it was a custom fix to the design flaw in the Medalist I, where it would jam if you wound the film before the shutter release button hadn't fully extended.

 

[GaryFlorida]

Mine is the same, the linkage between the winding knob and the frame counter and shutter has been removed. I have to use the red window.
I think it was a custom fix to the design flaw in the Medalist I, where it would jam if you wound the film before the shutter release button hadn't fully extended.

That sounds right. I have an extra back. I thought about putting a red window in the 6x7 location and making some kind of mask so i can shoot 6x7 also, if it works make one for 6x6. 3 backs and 2 masks can shoot all three MF formats. Not sure if it would work but not having the automatic shutter cocking mechanism would allow this afaik.

 

[Donald Qualls]

a red window in the 6x7 location

There is no 6x7 number track on 120 film.

 

[Chuck1]

The accessory(ground glass) back would work with plaubel roll backs? Like for a makina ii

 

[GaryFlorida]

There is no 6x7 number track on 120 film.

I did not know that, never looked that closely just assumed it had all three. Well I have to re roll it anyway onto the 620 spools. I could just mark the paper for 6x7 and reuse it. Would that work?

 

[Dan Daniel]

the frame counter timing is done through the left top plate cover.

John, can you explain this? I am not certain what you mean by frame counter timing. I've never used the left cover for an adjustment but maybe I am missing a neat trick.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I did not know that, never looked that closely just assumed it had all three. Well I have to re roll it anyway onto the 620 spools. I could just mark the paper for 6x7 and reuse it. Would that work?

For respooling, people usually use the original paper. The film is taped to the leading end. Roll it backwards, then forward again using the same paper. Going to be hard to mark those 6x7 frames in the dark

For painting a Medalist, there are a few places where the top parts intersect and sit one on top of the other where paint would need to be kept off. The two biggest problems I had with the Cerakote was the back hinges (what an utter disaster of a mechanism!!) and the back itself fitting in the groove.

Most any Medalist can be made 'whole' again, working frame counter and frame spacing, etc. with the right parts. I understand people simply ripping that part out and going to the red window, but just wanted to say that it can be made to work. Once set up it is pretty stable.