Found: Zeiss (edit) scientific camera

[jay moussy]

I got a local free item and it is what may have been parts of a Zeiss Jena vertical enlarger(?)

1- a very long bellows with front standard, back holding a crosshaired glass plate
2- Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 165 f 4.5 lens
3- documents:
* Zeiss factory chart, showing various "distance focussed"/f values, with hand-written calculations for reduction "3", "4", "5"
* handwritten note saying "for enlarging, reverse lens"
* another note: "9 May '45 Photograph of the caption (slightly reduced)

This may have come from the Woods hole Institute research lab, in Mass.

The question is, with some work can I turrn this into a LF camera, probably akin of the early designs?

 

[ic-racer]

Sounds like a process camera, but many process cameras can be converted to enlargers by constructing a light source and negative holder. Ansel Adams made his enlarger from a process camera. Post pictures when able.

 

[jay moussy]

Yes, I will illustrate.

The back is clearly of 8x10 size, but this no provision for film holder that I can see.
Actually, the framed clear glass seems movable, but i did not figure it out yet.

 

[jay moussy]

the lens

 

[jay moussy]

The bellows and standards

 

[jay moussy]

Forgot the scale:

 

[jay moussy]

Reading more about process and repro cameras, lenses were typically built for "flat" accurate reproduction (maps, science. etc.), if I am reading ti right.
Correct?

It may take me a long while to work the body (film back GG combo), but I may do something interesting with the lens?

 

[JPD]

Reading more about process and repro cameras, lenses were typically built for "flat" accurate reproduction (maps, science. etc.), if I am reading ti right.
Correct?

It may take me a long while to work the body (film back GG combo), but I may do something interesting with the lens?

Yes, but the lens is a normal Tessar, so it's not a special repro-lens. 165 mm was standard for 10x15 cm.

 

[jay moussy]

Found what it is: Carl Zeiss scientific camera - image I found on the web matches (minus the parts I do not have), style and finish:

 

[ic-racer]

Ok that will make a better camera than an enlarger. The issue will be getting a film holder of standard size to fit the back. If you have never used a view camera before, the film holder has to move the ground glass out of the way and place the film at the exact same plane.

One consideration is to get a 4x5" back (that will match the lens coverage) and adapt that to the back of the camera.

A shutter will be nice, but not essential to take your first picture with it.

 

[jay moussy]

Yes, 4x5, or less common 5x7.

Ground glass/film plane issue, hard to build, not so cheap unless one finds wrecked Graflex to be mounted on sub-plate?

Guillotine shutter?

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

To use it as a process camera: The lights are on a timer to control exposure, always f22, figure ortho film ASA ~1, camera is used in a red-lit darkroom. The glass & frame should come off the camera, it would be replaced by a film holder. Once set up for an application the camera is left alone, so no need to focus for each shot - ground glass used to be an optional accessory on a process camera.

But, it doesn't really look like a process camera. A process camera is on a big long rail/bed that mounts the film holder, lens holder and copy holder. The bed has markings or tapes of the position of the copy board and lens board for various magnifications. If you have ever tried to use a view camera as a process camera you will soon find yourself bald after you have torn all your hair out trying to get the film, lens and copy parallel - you really need something with a cast iron bed.

 

[abruzzi]

Guillotine shutter?

or hat--just be sure to use slow film or very small apertures, otherwise the hat technique can be difficult. A step up would be a packard shutter which aren't too expensive.