Focomat 1c questions.

[Tina Kino]

Thank you as well @Ron789 - that's very helpful!

 

[choiliefan]

This may have already been answered but does your baseboard have a long lever on the side and a recessed T-nut in the center of the base?
The locking easel has long T-slots milled on the underside which slip over the T-nut on the baseboard. Positioning the easel when composing the print, it can be locked down with the side lever. Its a terrific feature on these wonderful enlargers.
Another nice thing to have is the anti-newton rings attachment under the condenser.

 

[Tina Kino]

the modification of the Omega holder for both enlargers. Left for the Focomat Ic, right for the Valoy II.
This holder is not rare and they come up now and then at okay prices. The open design at the front, and the lower flaps, make it easier to use.


View attachment 390295

I was looking for these Omega holders, only seeing one at (German) eBay right now, in very bad condition, and it's the equivalent of $58 - which I'm finding a bit steep

The "modification" you mentioned is cutting (filing away?) the right corner, as with the Focomat Ic there's that silver rod in the way otherwise, yes?





I see the Ilford multigrade filter set can be bought including a kind of holder that mounds to the lens with three "arms".

Would that be an option with the Focomat Ic, or does this also not have enough clearance for the silver rod, just as with the Omega holder above?





Thanks in advance!



Ps: ..just found out that the Omega holder is still available new, in the US, via B&H - for a mere $299.95

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/39320-REG/Omega_429029_Filter_Holder_for_Red.html

 

[Don_ih]

I see the Ilford multigrade filter set can be bought including a kind of holder that mounds to the lens with three "arms".

That's not a good option for anything. If you're stuck, punch the red plastic out of the red filter under the lens and use that circular frame as a place to set your filters upon. Otherwise, I've done what @Hilo suggested, which works well. There's no reason one of the holders should cost much. If I had another one, I'd just send it to you.

 

[Tina Kino]

Thank you @Don_ih - I appreciate the sentiment!
I will try to find a used Omega one or maybe build one myself.. actually it would be amazing if somebody would 3D-print some of those things!

Circling back to the easels - If I understand correctly the ones with the nice, broad blades and the white paint-on-wood are the ones where it's fiddly to get the paper into?
They do look nice, but they also command high prices where I'm at - plus, if they're annoying to use I'd rather get something else..




What do you guys think of this kind of Leitz easels -
they don't look as solidly built as the others (that's perhaps why they're a bit cheaper), seem to have the proper height (looks like 1" at least),
is anybody using one of those, and what are your thoughts?




Another one I'm looking at is this Kindermann one..
..can't seem to find any info on it at all on the net, but it looks nice (grey hammertone paint kinda matching the late, grey focomat : )
Would probably need to add some kind of base board or at least a sheet of leather to the bottom..

 

[Don_ih]

What do you guys think of this kind of Leitz easels -
they don't look as solidly built as the others

That second easel you posted is small (notice where the cm scale stops) and is actually very very well-built - much better than the bigger one you posted first. The first one has a problem of falling apart (poor fastener choice), tends to rust a bit, sliding the blades can be stiff, and the paper is ridiculously irritating to line up. But it is good for 8x10 and it does clamp to the baseboard. But, no, it's not worth the high prices people want.

The small easel is about as good as it could be. But it's just too small. I have no idea why they made it.

 

[Logical1]

I built a custom plate to hold the filter under the lens. It allows standard Kodak filters to rest on it. It was made with a small aluminum plate, a hole saw to cut the opening and mounted with a 6x1x20 metric bolt. Painted with flat black paint, I do not have issues with reflections. I can post pictures if desired.

 

[Lachlan Young]

But it's just too small. I have no idea why they made it.

Look into what the market for the Leitz IIC was originally envisaged as (and some of the more automated solutions from Leitz) and you'll find your answer. In many ways, the bigger Focomats (initially) essentially occupied the same market sector as the Fuji Frontier would.

 

[Don_ih]

Look into what the market for the Leitz IIC was originally envisaged as (and some of the more automated solutions from Leitz) and you'll find your answer. In many ways, the bigger Focomats (initially) essentially occupied the same market sector as the Fuji Frontier would.

That wouldn't require the easel to be so small. A larger, properly designed easel would make more sense - in any case. The annoying thing about the small easel is how good it is - it's a very well-made practically useless thing. The next size up is borderline garbage. The 16x20 is the same idiotic design. If any of that is geared toward automation, they were clearly deluded. It's about as much like a Fuji Frontier as a bicycle is like a train.

This thread is about the Ic - not the "professional" IIc (which can handle medium format). The IIc manual recommends the larger easel.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I use one part of an old Kodak Polymax filter holder that has adjustment built in then lay the Ilford filters on top of that. Works fine.

The 8x10 easel is both good and bad like others have said. The locking mechanism is fantastic and the blades are very accurate. On the other hand, the tabs that hold the paper are a complete design failure. There just isn't enough overhang to hold the paper reliably. It is very fiddly. I have two of the normal Leica easels, one wood and one metal. The metal one is pretty solid as you can imagine.

The autofocus doesn't work with every 50mm lens. It does work with most though. Just depends on the actual focal length of the lens. You can of course use whatever lens you want and just manually focus it. Sometimes I use my 1c for Minox with a 30mm lens and sometimes I use a 60mm for 35mm. Both work fine, just manually focused.

 

[Tina Kino]

Thanks for sharing that disassembled view @Matthew Tapson - so cool to see that, and it's great you were able to restore your enlarger to perfect working order

I picked up my Focomat Ic in the meantime.
Such a beautiful machine

Was a bit confused at first, as it was sold as a regular (meaning not a "color") Focomat, and it is also not labeled as such - yet I now realised it does have the option to use that filter tray just like yours / as shown in the post by @Hilo upthread..

I do not have the tray though, and suspect it might be very difficult to find one.
And frankly, I think finding / making a under-the-lens filter holder, which takes the mounted Ilford Multigrade filters, would be easier than finding the tray - and more importantly it might be less of a hassle to use I suppose? While having the filters above the condenser / lens seems like the best way to do it, but changing frameless filters / using that tray seems a bit awkward.

My version of the Focomat does have a white (about 53x61cm) base board, without the locking mechanism - and the wiring is done a bit differently underneath (and luckily it still seems to be in good condition considering it's age - well, the whole enlarger is still in great condition, for what it's worth : ).

Attaching some pics below..

 

[Tina Kino]

Speaking of the under-the-lens filter holders -

while google image searching I stumbled over a picture of a prototype by a user called "Guest" on the Leica User Forums - https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topi...ral-questions/?do=findComment&comment=3277358

Unfortunately, while they were thinking of testing those out and eventually making proper (metal) ones there have been no further updates to the thread in the last nine years
It's a shame, as their design looked pretty promising I think..

I was wondering -
do any of you actually have one of those rare Leitz USA filter holders, and could you provide measurements (or even a 3D scan) of it, so people could 3D-print their own?

 

[Tina Kino]

I built a custom plate to hold the filter under the lens. It allows standard Kodak filters to rest on it. It was made with a small aluminum plate, a hole saw to cut the opening and mounted with a 6x1x20 metric bolt. Painted with flat black paint, I do not have issues with reflections. I can post pictures if desired.

..would love to see it!

 

[Tina Kino]

Following up on the subject of Leitz easels - found this on (German) eBay, can't really figure it out to be frank

Anybody familiar with these?
What do the knobs at the top do? It doesn't really look like there's adjustable blades

 

[Don_ih]

@Tina Kino see https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/leitz-part-id-what-is-it.165616/

 

[Tina Kino]

Thanks @Don_ih for the prompt reply!

 

[Logical1]

The attached pictures show the holder I made for the 1c. It mounts below the lens and is made of 1/8" (3mm) aluminum and painted flat black. It does not swing out, but the Kodak Variable Contrast filters slide on with the lip of the filter holding it in place. If desired I can provide dimensions. The hole was cut with a standard metal hole saw. Above the mounting hole is a smaller hole to match the indexing pin on the enlarger.

 

[Don_ih]

the holder I made for the 1c

That's very nice.

It might be noteworthy to anyone wanting to make one that they could also use 1/8 hardboard (Masonite) or even 2mm plastic.

 

[Tina Kino]

Hey @Logical1 - thank you for sharing the pictures! Yes, dimensions / measurements would be appreciated!
Does it work well in practice without any "lips" / edges to hold the filter?
You're definitely inspiring me to just build my own in case the 3D-printed design won't be happening

@Don_ih - you're right, I would probably opt for something a little bit thicker than 2mm but plastic would work indeed.
Though I would love one made out of metal, painted in the matching dark grey hammertone finish, haha

 

[Logical1]

I was unable to upload the jpg file. Please take a look at the .pdf with the dimensions.

Mark J.

 

[Tina Kino]

Please take a look at the .pdf with the dimensions.

Thanks, Mark - I appreciate it!

 

[weasel]

Love my 1c. I found that my under the lens filter holder didn't fit, so what I do instead is carefully pop the lamp house off and put the filter on top of the condenser. Have to be gentle to not move the enlarger, but it works. Would be simple to make a holder, as others have shown.
As to the auto focus, there are instructions around how to calibrate. When I first got mine, I had all sorts of experts say it would not, and could not work with anything other than a Leica lens. Well, I calibrated mine to a nikkor 2.8, and it tracked just fine. My guess is you won't know until you try with your lens.
I need second enlarger in my darkroom like I need hemorrhoids, but it is just too nice to not use.

 

[Tina Kino]

Not strictly a Focomat Ic question, but related - as it concearns the late (large front element) version of the 50mm Focotar - hope that's ok in here!
..I've searched on here, googled, and tried my luck with AI, which I think sent me on the right path, but wanted to double check with you guys:

I noticed that the aperture numbers on the outer lens barrel are not aligning with the index mark -
- if the aperture is fully opened it's not straight at 4.5 where it should be, but close to 5.6 instead.
- when the aperture is fully closed the index dot is way beyond 16.
- also there's quite a bit of play / wiggle room at both ends (the aperture ring goes past the detent - and the aperture also further opens / closes a bit




So basically my question is: can this be resolved (as AI is telling me), by loosening the one (very) small screw which is on the outside of the lens barrel -



..and then turning the whole lens barrel (while holding the lens by the aperture ring) and re-align the lens barrel (and thus the index dot) with the aperture numbers?

Does fixing this involve further disassembly of the lens?


Thank you very much in advance for any help!

 

[spookyphoto]

I actually have an original Leitz negative carrier for the 1c for Minox format film. Very rare

 

[Lachlan Young]

That wouldn't require the easel to be so small. A larger, properly designed easel would make more sense - in any case. The annoying thing about the small easel is how good it is - it's a very well-made practically useless thing. The next size up is borderline garbage. The 16x20 is the same idiotic design. If any of that is geared toward automation, they were clearly deluded. It's about as much like a Fuji Frontier as a bicycle is like a train.

This thread is about the Ic - not the "professional" IIc (which can handle medium format). The IIc manual recommends the larger easel.

The point that you are missing is that the images within many 1c manuals tend to show the 18x24cm easel that Leitz repeatedly refer to as an 'amateur' easel and the IIc shows the 4-blade 'professional' 18x24cm easel. The older wood based 18x24cm/ 8x10" easel was clearly the standard reference for the 1" easel height setup, and equally clearly inadequate for structural strength in a 12x16" size once the locking slots were milled out, hence the the clearly rather extemporised thicker base & provision of the height adjuster ring. You also have to remember that the market they were appealing to at the point these machines were designed was very much one where an 8x10 was a big print, and only a tiny minority of the ownership of either device was likely to be routinely making many bigger prints, for different reasons - while the 1c created the idea of the 'professional' grade 35mm enlarger capable of much bigger enlargements, it wasn't conceived as such (especially in a world ruled by the 8x10 glossy) - rather to show that 35mm was a competitive format for the well heeled amateur, and the IIa/ IIc was meant for the same sort of segment that the Agfa Varioscop 60 was aimed at competing with the already successful Leitz for - in-house labs for neigbourhood photographers/ pharmacies and the like where small-ish enprints (and the occasional somewhat bigger print) had to be turned out from 135 and 120 negs (and were then displaced by the minilabs that eventually became Agfa dLabs or Fuji Frontiers or Noritsu). Agfa's Variomat device could also be used with the IIc, to the point that there was an official Leitz height compensation ring listed in the IIc catalogue. There was also an easel available that was for all the standard enprint sizes with either fixed 3mm margins or borderless at A6.