I forgot about this lovely camera

[Robert Maxey]

I am considering buying two Yashica Mat cameras for a stereo project. Prices seem quite reasonable and well suited for my current needs. Twinned 500C/Ms are out for now.

Anyone here use one? Anyone experienced with their performance/problems/issues? I tested one when Kodak released 120 Kodachrome and i forgot just how nice they are. Here is a link to a sample image"

https://www.kenrockwell.com/ca/sb7750.htm

Bob

 

[BrianShaw]

I like the idea of your project. Thought of doing same, some day, with Rollei TLRs. Seems to me like the biggest issue is not generic reliability but condition of the two individual cameras you need to acquire. No matter, old camera are likely to need some degree of refurbishment or overhaul.

 

[Kino]

It would seem the winding mechanism on a Yashica Mat would be difficult to access on one of the cameras when they were in proper inter-ocular distance from each other. No?

 

[Donald Qualls]

It would seem the winding mechanism on a Yashica Mat would be difficult to access on one of the cameras when they were in proper inter-ocular distance from each other. No?

Same is probably true of nearly any 6x6 TLR -- common interocular distance is 60-70 mm, and virtually all of these cameras are 70+ mm wide. Add a couple inches to make hyperstereo and shoot only landscapes, and Bob's your uncle.

 

[Kino]

I guess you could do like early motion picture stereo systems and shoot through a cube-type, beam splitter that allows one of the cameras to be rotated 45 degrees and placed to the left or right-forward position of the "main" camera...

 

[MattKing]

You could mount them base to base, but that would leave you with the most amazing Rube Goldberg contraption, as well as upside down viewing image.
Are you confident that if you get two, the focal lengths will be exactly matched?

 

[Kino]

Or you could just buy a Sputnik 120 stereo camera...

 

[Donald Qualls]

Or you could just buy a Sputnik 120 stereo camera...

The lenses on a Sputnik probably aren't as desirable as even the Yashikor, never mind the Yashinon -- but there's something to be said for a single camera that's actually designed for this use...

 

[abruzzi]

Are you confident that if you get two, the focal lengths will be exactly matched?

I wonder how much variance would be needed to notice the result? i.e. if you have two Yashinon 75mm lenses, and manufacturing variances make one a 74.5 and the other 75.5, would our eyes notice a difference in a stereo viewer?

 

[Donald Qualls]

I can tell you this is one of the "big deals" when building a stereo telescope/astrobinocular setup: getting the objectives matched. The claim is that in order to get good image fusion, the focal lengths (which are usually in the 1500 mm range) need to be matched to single-digit millimeters. Making the mirrors or lenses for one of these is far more than twice the work of making a single mirror/lens for the same size telescope.

Now, the smaller your stereo slides or Holmes cards, the less you'll notice a difference in image size, but 1 mm difference, from my understanding, is just about the limit for this application.

 

[jay moussy]

Just curious, how would the display ot the 6x6 pairs work?
Build a viewer styled after the old-school type?

I have two identical Ansco Shur Shots and I want to try to gang them and try a few stereo pictures at some point.

 

[faberryman]

The image is not square. It also appears to have received the full Photoshop treatment.

 

[Robert Maxey]

It would seem the winding mechanism on a Yashica Mat would be difficult to access on one of the cameras when they were in proper inter-ocular distance from each other. No?

I thought of that. Simple solution is a simple bar that connects the two focus knobs. Right now, i am looking at medium format, relatively cheap and pretty good images.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

Just curious, how would the display ot the 6x6 pairs work?
Build a viewer styled after the old-school type?

I have two identical Ansco Shur Shots and I want to try to gang them and try a few stereo pictures at some point.

There are a few active stereo shooters working in medium format. I do believe someone still makes suitable slide mounts.
My goal is prints not slides, so I do not think of slides or projection.

Good luck.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

I can tell you this is one of the "big deals" when building a stereo telescope/astrobinocular setup: getting the objectives matched. The claim is that in order to get good image fusion, the focal lengths (which are usually in the 1500 mm range) need to be matched to single-digit millimeters. Making the mirrors or lenses for one of these is far more than twice the work of making a single mirror/lens for the same size telescope.

Now, the smaller your stereo slides or Holmes cards, the less you'll notice a difference in image size, but 1 mm difference, from my understanding, is just about the limit for this application.

I have discovered that good quality optics are not a show stopping problem unless they are really out of wack. The key is not the lenses as much as mounting the cameras so the film planes are aligned. That said, a David White rep told us one big issue with the hStereo Realist was getting matched optics.

I once kid a co-worker who was going on and on about the matched lenses in the Stereo Realist. I told him by lenses were far better matched. I was using a 35mm camera and a slide bar. Cant get better matched than using the same lens.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

I wonder how much variance would be needed to notice the result? i.e. if you have two Yashinon 75mm lenses, and manufacturing variances make one a 74.5 and the other 75.5, would our eyes notice a difference in a stereo viewer?

I cant state definitively yes or no. All i can do is relate are my experiments. My guess is the lenses in the Mat are likely close.

Some mistakes become quite visible in stereo. I once shot a bunch of minerals specimens using a slide bar. I swear to Seton Rochwite I was careful with my setup. When the Kodachromes came back and I was reverse rolling the strip, i noticed part of my fixture quite clearly.

Twinned cameras seem to work quite well for some. One must dot all T's and cross all I's with stereo.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

The lenses on a Sputnik probably aren't as desirable as even the Yashikor, never mind the Yashinon -- but there's something to be said for a single camera that's actually designed for this use...

I totally agree. My Realist and VM served me quite well.

I once thought about buying a pair of beat to all heck speed graphics, crown graphics or similar and taking them apart and rebuilding from the ashes, a magnificent 4 x 5 stereo camera.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

Or you could just buy a Sputnik 120 stereo camera...

No, not a Sputnik.

 

[Robert Maxey]

This perhaps:

http://www.stereoskopie.com/Stereok...nach_1945/Stereo_Rocca/body_stereo_rocca.html

 

[reddesert]

The lenses on a Stereo Realist are 70mm apart, which is somewhat larger than most people's pupillary distance anyway.

A Yashicamat with the crank folded is about 97mm wide including the focus knob on the left side (I measured it). It's about 105mm wide with the crank unfolded but not including the handle on the crank.

I think it might be easier to do a twinned camera setup with two TLRs that used knob wind and a front focusing mechanism, because the side focus knob will be difficult to access. Front focusing could mean Autocords or two of the inexpensive TLRs that used geared lenses to focus, like a Ricohflex.

You may be able to make small adjustments in focal length by changing the distance between front and rear elements - that is, if you have two lenses and they aren't perfectly matched, unscrewing one of the front element sets by a small amount could change the focal length enough to match them, without having much effect on image quality. (For much larger unscrewing rotation, this is sort of what a front-cell-focusing lens does, like on many folding cameras.)

 

[BrianShaw]

Another option is a stereo sliding mount. Take one image, slide over, take second image. Obviously this restricts one to static scenes primarily.

 

[Kino]

I thought of that. Simple solution is a simple bar that connects the two focus knobs. Right now, i am looking at medium format, relatively cheap and pretty good images.

Bob

OK for focus; now what about film advance?
Depending on model, you might be able to replace the crank/knob with a pulley and go to a common drive shaft located somewhere out of the way...

 

[Robert Maxey]

OK for focus; now what about film advance?
Depending on model, you might be able to replace the crank/knob with a pulley and go to a common drive shaft located somewhere out of the way...

Something like that.

Not insurmountable odds, just a little work. In thinking about it, I was thinking I could mount the cameras on a simple affair that lets me slide either camera to the left or right, advance the film and slide it back and lock in place. Hyperfocal distance is your friend.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

Another option is a stereo sliding mount. Take one image, slide over, take second image. Obviously this restricts one to static scenes primarily.

That's the problem. If something moves, you are in trouble.

Bob

 

[Robert Maxey]

The lenses on a Stereo Realist are 70mm apart, which is somewhat larger than most people's pupillary distance anyway.

A Yashicamat with the crank folded is about 97mm wide including the focus knob on the left side (I measured it). It's about 105mm wide with the crank unfolded but not including the handle on the crank.

I think it might be easier to do a twinned camera setup with two TLRs that used knob wind and a front focusing mechanism, because the side focus knob will be difficult to access. Front focusing could mean Autocords or two of the inexpensive TLRs that used geared lenses to focus, like a Ricohflex.

You may be able to make small adjustments in focal length by changing the distance between front and rear elements - that is, if you have two lenses and they aren't perfectly matched, unscrewing one of the front element sets by a small amount could change the focal length enough to match them, without having much effect on image quality. (For much larger unscrewing rotation, this is sort of what a front-cell-focusing lens does, like on many folding cameras.)

I am not going to muck with the lenses because I am really not qualified and i do not think it matters. As for camera separation, too wide an interocular distance and you start seeing the world through a giant's eyes. Good for increased depth in distant scenes but one gets tired after awhile.

I can deal with the little issues. Maybe.

bob